Linder 1
The Scopes Story: Excerpts of articles by Doug Linder
THE TRIAL: THE PROSECUTION PRESENTS ITS CASE
The entire prosecution case in the trial of John Scopes occupies less than two hours of a Wednesday afternoon session of court. The state calls only four witnesses. School Superintendent Walter White and Fred Robinson both testify that Scopes, in a conversation at Robinson’s drug store-soda fountain-book dispensary, admitted having taught evolution. Howard Morgan, age 14, and Harry “Bud” Shelton, age 17, appear as two eyewitnesses to the crime.
Prosecutor Thomas Stewart calls Morgan, the son of the owner of the Dayton Bank and Trust company (and also owner of the home Clarence Darrow occupies during the trial), as his second witness. Spectators smile as Morgan, a clean-cut boy wearing white pants and a white shirt, with a tie pulled down and to the side, nervously takes his seat in the witness chair.
A few days earlier, Morgan, having been tracked down by visiting members of the press anxious to know what effect the teaching of evolution might be having on Dayton’s young people, eagerly offered his views on the subject.“I lapped it up,” he told one reporter, “all about monkeys and things.”
Stewart asks Morgan if “Professor Scopes” ever taught him “anything about evolution.”“Yes sir,” the boy replies in a barely audible voice.“Just state in your own words, Howard, what he taught you and when it was,” Stewart requests.“It was along about the second of April. He said that the earth was once a hot molten mass, too hot for plant or animal life to exist upon it. In the sea, the earth cooled off; there was a little germ of one cell organism formed, and this organism kept evolving until it got to be a pretty good-sized animal, and then it came on to be a land animal, and it kept on evolving, and from this was man.” From the defense table, Arthur Garfield Hays offers his congratulations on Morgan’s history of life on earth: “Go to the head of the class.” Stewart asks Morgan if Scopes classified “man with reference to other animals.” He had, Morgan says, called humans “mammals.”
In his cross-examination, Clarence Darrow focuses his attention on the question of what it meant to be classified a mammal: “Dogs and horses, monkeys, cows, man, whales: he said all of those were mammals?”“Yes sir,” Morgan answers, “but I don’t know about the whales.” Apart from calling man a mammal, Darrow wants to know, “Did he tell you anything else that was wicked?” Morgan looks at his teacher and smiles.“No, not that I remember of,” he finally answers.“It has not hurt you any, has it?” Darrow asks, concluding his cross-examination.“No sir,” Morgan answers. As the courtroom erupts in laughter, Darrow turns to Mrs. Rappalyea, seated behind him, and asks, “Would you believe this is the twentieth century?”
Harry Shelton takes the stand next. Three years older than Howard, Harry studied evolution in Biology in mid-April, when Scopes substituted for an ill teacher.Shelton testifies that Scopes reviewed the chapter on evolution in George Hunter’s Civic Biology. He offers little elaboration: “He taught all forms of life begin with a cell.” Darrow questions Shelton only briefly. He asks, “You didn’t leave church when he told you all forms of life begin with a single cell?”“No sir,”Shelton answers.
His brief part in the drama having been played, Shelton leaves the courtroom with Morgan. A reporter overhears Shelton asking his friend, “Don’t you think Bryan is a little narrow-minded?”
Later that day, a visiting reporter interviews mothers of the teenagers. Howard’s mother tells the reporter, “The teaching of evolution hasn’t hurt me or my boy. I don’t think any of us here in the mountains have studied evolution enough. I wish I knew more about it.” Harry’s mother expresses a similar view.“As far as I’m concerned,” she says, “they can teach my boy evolution every day of the year.” She adds that the subject threatened little harm because “he had forgotten most of his lessons” and “had to get the book out and study it up” for trial.
BRYAN ON THE STAND
On the lawn outside the Rhea County Courthouse, Darrow continues his harsh examination of William Jennings Bryan. He identifies one miracle after another in the Bible, and demands to know whether Bryan believed each miracle actually happened. Did Joshua make the sun stand still? Did a whale really swallow Jonah? Did God really confuse the tongues of those arrogant enough to build the Tower of Babel? Was Eve “literally made out of Adam’s rib”?
The exchanges become increasingly testy.Bryan accuses Darrow of calling the spectators in the bleachers “yokels.” Darrow angrily replies, “I have never called them yokels.”Bryan insists, “Those are the people you insult” with your charges of ignorance and bigotry. Darrow responds, “You insult every man of science and learning in the world because he does not believe in your fool religion.” Judge Raulston jumps in, “I will not stand for that!”
Minutes later, Attorney General Stewart rises to object to the merciless examination. “What is the purpose of this examination?” Bryan offers his opinion: “The purpose is to cast ridicule on every body who believes in the Bible.” Darrow follows with his answer to Stewart’s question: “We have the purpose of preventing bigots and ignoramuses from controlling the education of the United States—and you know it.”
Bryan decides to explain his decision to take the stand. “I am simply trying to protect the word of God against the greatest atheist or agnostic in the United States.” The crowd erupts in loud applause, before Bryan can continue. “I am not afraid to get on the stand in front of him and let him do his worst. I want the world to know.” The crowd responds again with prolonged applause. Darrow turns to the crowd and says, “I wish I could get a picture of these clackers.”
The face-off in the hot sun of the courtyard continues.Bryan repeatedly takes a handkerchief to wipe the sweat off his brow. Darrow asks Bryan whether the reason snakes crawl on their belly was because a snake in the Garden of Eden tempted Eve with an apple.Bryan says, “I believe that.” Darrow asks how snakes walked before the apple incident: “Do you know whether he walked on his tail or not?”Bryan, to laughter in the audience, replies, “No, sir. I have no way to know.”
As Darrow moves on to his next miracle, relating to the ending of the Great Flood, Bryan blasts back at Darrow. “I want the world to know that this man, who does not believe in a God, is trying to use a court in Tennessee to slur at [the Bible].” Darrow breaks in, “I object to that.” He tries to shout down his adversary by saying, “I object to your statement. I am exempting you on your fool ideas that no intelligent Christian on earth believes.”
Judge Raulston has had enough. He adjourns court.
THE LAST DAY
Shortly after eleven o’clock on the morning of the last day of the Scopes trial, the jury deliberates its verdict. There is no question what they will decide. Defense attorney Clarence Darrow has asked the jury to come back with a verdict of “Guilty” so that the case might be taken to a higher court. After nine minutes, the jury completes its discussion on the courthouse lawn and returns inside to announce its verdict.
The foreman, at the request of John Raulston stands.“Mr. Foreman, will you tell us whether you have agreed on a verdict?” The foreman says the jury had reached a verdict.“What did you find?” Raulston asks.“We have found for the state, found the defendant guilty,” the foreman answers.
Judge Raulston asks John Scopes to come before him. He proceeds to pronounce his sentence, fixing his fine at one hundred dollars. Then, almost as an afterthought, Raulston asks if Scopes wished to say anything “as to why the court should not impose punishment upon you.” The defendant, coatless and looking rather tired, moves away from his lawyers and looks directly into the eyes of the judge.“Your Honor,” the young teacher says, “I feel that I have been convicted of violating an unjust statute. I will continue in the future, as I have in the past, to oppose this law in any way I can. Any other action would be in violation of my ideal of academic freedom—that is, to teach the truth as guaranteed in our Constitution of personal and religious freedom. I think the fine is unjust.”