Jump to content

Scopes trial: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Undid revision 213161208 by 69.138.157.7 (talk)Grammar
←Replaced content with 'jack squat'
Line 1: Line 1:
jack squat
{{Infobox Court Case
| name = Scopes v. State
| image =
| court = Criminal Court of Tennessee
| full_name = The State of Tennessee v. John Thomas Scopes
| date_decided = [[July 21]], [[1925]]
| citations = None
| judges = [[John T. Raulston]]
| prior_actions =
| subsequent_actions = ''[[Scopes Trial#Appeal to Supreme Court of Tennessee|Scopes v. State (1926)]]''
| opinions = The Butler Act does not violate church and state or state religion laws but instead, merely prohibits the teaching of evolution on the grounds of intellectual disagreement, and leaves the only non-religion specific option as (the latter representing [[teacher]] [[John T. Scopes|John Thomas Scopes]]) in an [[United States|American]] [[legal case]] that tested a [[law]] passed on [[March 13]], [[1925]], which forbade the teaching, in any state-funded educational establishment in [[Tennessee]], of "any theory that denies the story of the [[Creation (theology)|Divine Creation]] of man as taught in the [[Bible]], and to teach instead that man has descended from a lower order of animals." This is often interpreted as meaning that the law forbade the teaching of any aspect of the theory of [[evolution]].}}

The "'''Scopes Trial'''" (''Scopes v. State, 152 Tenn. 424, 278 S.W. 57 (Tenn. 1925)'', often called the "'''Scopes Monkey Trial'''") was an [[United States|American]] [[legal case]] that tested a [[law]] passed on [[March 13]], [[1925]], which forbade the teaching, in any state-funded educational establishment in [[Tennessee]], of "any theory that denies the story of the [[Creation (theology)|Divine Creation]] of man as taught in the [[Bible]], and to teach instead that man has descended from a lower order of animals." The case was a watershed in the [[history of the creation-evolution controversy|creation-evolution controversy]].

[[John Scopes]], a high school teacher, was charged on [[May 5]], 1925 with teaching evolution from a chapter in a textbook which showed ideas developed from those set out in [[Charles Darwin's]] book ''[[On the Origin of Species]]''. The trial pitted two of the preeminent legal minds of the time against one another. Three time presidential candidate and former Secretary of State [[William Jennings Bryan]] headed up the prosecution, while prominent trial attorney [[Clarence Darrow]] spoke for the defense.<ref>{{cite book | last = Hakim | first = Joy | authorlink = | coauthors = | title = War, Peace, and All That Jazz | publisher = Oxford University Press | date = 1995 | location = New York, New York | pages = 44-45 | url = | doi = | id = | isbn = 0-19-509514-6 }}</ref> The famous trial was made infamous by the fictionalized accounts given in the 1955 play ''[[Inherit the Wind]]'', the 1960 [[Hollywood, Los Angeles, California|Hollywood]] [[film|motion picture]] and the 1965, 1988 and 1999 television films of the same name.

==Butler Act==
The Tennessee anti-evolution law, which had been proposed by state legislator [[John Washington Butler]], declared:

<blockquote>"... that it shall be unlawful for any teacher in any of the Universities, Normals and all other public schools of the State which are supported in whole or in part by the public school funds of the State, to teach any theory that denies the story of the Divine Creation of man as taught in the Bible, and to teach instead that man has descended from a lower order of animals."<ref>[http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/scopes/tennstat.htm Tennessee Anti-evolution Statute] UMKC Law School. Retrieved 15 April 2007.</ref></blockquote>
On January 28, 1925 the lower house of the Tennessee legislature passed Butler's bill 71 to 5; the vote in the Senate on March 13 was 24 to 6 in favor. Dismayed that the legislature had passed the bill, but needing the support of rural legislators like Butler for educational reforms, Governor [[Austin Peay]] signed the [[Butler Act]] into law on March 21, 1925 with the hopeful observation that, "Probably the law will never be applied."<ref>Palo E. Coletta, ''William Jennings Bryan: Political Puritan, 1915-1925''; Vol. III (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1969): 199-200.</ref> Butler later declared: "I never had any idea my bill would make a fuss. I just thought it would become law, and that everybody would abide by it and that we wouldn't hear any more of evolution in Tennessee."<ref>''New York Times'' July 18, 1925: 2.</ref> Scopes was later found guilty and was fined.

==Testing the Butler Act==
The [[American Civil Liberties Union]] (ACLU) had offered to defend anyone accused of teaching the theory of evolution in defiance of the Butler Act. [[George Rappleyea]], who managed several local mines, convinced a group of businessmen in [[Dayton, Tennessee]], then a town of 1,756, that the controversy of such a trial would give Dayton much needed publicity. With their agreement, he called in his friend, 24-year-old John Scopes, who was Clark County High School's football coach and had substituted for Principal Ferguson in a science class. Rappleyea asked Scopes to teach the theory of evolution.<ref name="Linder Introduction">[http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/scopes/evolut.htm An introduction to the John Scopes (Monkey) Trial] by Douglas Linder. UMKC Law. Retrieved 15 April 2007.</ref>

Rappleyea pointed out that while the Butler Act prohibited the teaching of the theory of evolution, the state required teachers to use a textbook&mdash;George Hunter's ''[[Civic Biology]]'' (1914)&mdash;which explicitly described and endorsed the theory of evolution, and that teachers were therefore effectively required to break the law.<ref name="Linder Introduction" /> Scopes could not actually remember having covered the section on evolution in Hunter's textbook, but he told the group "If you can prove that I've taught evolution and that I can qualify as a defendant, then I'll be willing to stand trial."{{citequote|date=December 2007}}

Scopes became an increasingly willing participant, even incriminating himself and urging students to testify against him.<ref>{{harvnb|Larson|1997|p=108}} "Scopes had urged the students to testify against him, and coached them in their answers."</ref> He was indicted on [[April 24]], after three students testified against him at the grand jury, at Scopes' behest.<ref>{{harvnb|Larson|1997|p=89,107}}</ref> According to [[Edward J. Larson]], Judge John T. Raulston accelerated the convening of the grand jury and "...all but instructed the grand jury to indict Scopes, despite the meager evidence against him and the widely reported stories questioning whether the willing defendant had ever taught evolution in the classroom."<ref>{{harvnb|Larson|1997|p=108}}</ref> Scopes was charged with having taught from the chapter on evolution to a [[May 7]], [[1925]], high school class in violation of the Butler Act (and nominally arrested, though never detained). His bail of $500 was paid by Paul Patterson, owner of the ''Baltimore Sun''.<ref>''New York Times'' 26 May 1925: 1, 16; de Camp, ''Great Monkey Trial'' 81-86.</ref>

==Prosecution and defense teams==
The original [[prosecutor]]s were Scopes' friends, [[Herbert E. Hicks|Herbert E.]] and [[Sue K. Hicks]], two brothers who were local attorneys.

Hoping to attract major press coverage, George Rappleyea went so far as to write to the [[United Kingdom|British]] [[novel]]ist [[H. G. Wells]] asking him to join the defense team. Wells replied that he had no legal training in Britain, let alone in America, and declined the offer. However, John R. Neal, a [[law school]] [[professor]] from [[Knoxville, Tennessee|Knoxville]], announced that he would act as Scopes' attorney — whether Scopes liked it or not — and became the nominal head of the defense team.

[[Baptist]] pastor [[William Bell Riley]], the founder and president of the [[World Christian Fundamentals Association]], was instrumental in calling lawyer and three-time [[Democratic Party of the United States|Democratic]] [[President of the United States|presidential]] candidate and lifelong [[Presbyterianism|Presbyterian]] William Jennings Bryan to act as that organization's counsel. Bryan had originally been invited by Sue Hicks to become an associate of the prosecution and Bryan had readily accepted, despite the fact he had not tried a case in thirty-six years. As Scopes pointed out: "After [Bryan] was accepted by the state as a special prosecutor in the case, there was never any hope of containing the controversy within the bounds of constitutionality."<ref>de Camp, ''Great Monkey Trial'' 72-74, 79; Scopes and Presley, ''Center of the Storm'' 66-67.</ref>

In response, [[Clarence Darrow]], a staunch [[agnosticism|agnostic]], volunteered his services to the defense. After many changes back and forth, the defense team consisted of Darrow, ACLU attorney [[Arthur Garfield Hays]], and [[Dudley Field Malone]], an international [[divorce]] lawyer who had worked at the [[United States Department of State|State Department]] while Bryan was [[United States Secretary of State|Secretary of State]].

The prosecution team was led by [[Tom Stewart]], [[district attorney]] for the 18th Circuit (and future [[United States Senate|United States Senator]]), and included, in addition to Herbert and Sue Hicks, [[Ben B. McKenzie]] and [[William Jennings Bryan]]. The trial was covered by journalists from around the world, including [[H. L. Mencken]] for ''[[The Baltimore Sun]]'', which was also paying part of the defense's expenses. It was Mencken who provided the trial with its most colorful labels such as the "Monkey trial" of "the infidel Scopes." It was also the first U.S. trial to be broadcast on national [[Old time radio|radio]].

==Trial==
{{copypaste}}
[[Image:scopes trial.jpg|right|thumb|230px|[[Clarence Darrow]] and [[William Jennings Bryan]] chat in court during the Scopes Trial.]]
The ACLU had originally intended to oppose the Butler Act on the grounds that it violated the teacher's individual rights, and was therefore unconstitutional. Mainly because of Clarence Darrow, this strategy changed as the trial progressed, and the earliest argument proposed by the defense once the trial had began was that there was actually no conflict between evolution and the creation account in the Bible. In support of this claim, they brought in eight experts on evolution. Other than Dr. Maynard Metcalf, a zoologist from [[Johns Hopkins University]], the judge would not allow these experts to testify in person. Instead, they were allowed to submit written statements so that their evidence could be used at the appeal. In response to this decision, Darrow made a sarcastic comment to Judge Raulston, for which he apologized the next day keeping himself from being found in [[contempt of court]].

By the later stages of the trial, Clarence Darrow had largely abandoned the ACLU's original strategy and attacked the literal interpretation of the Bible as well as Bryan's limited knowledge of other religions and science.
Only when the case went to appeal did the defense return to the original claim that the prosecution was invalid because the law was essentially designed to benefit a particular [[religion|religious]] group, which would be [[Constitutionality|unconstitutional]].

In what proved to be his only extensive speech of the trial, Bryan responded to this theory on behalf of the state. Following Stewart's strategy, Bryan argued that the proposed scientific testimony was neither competent nor proper, given the legal issue in the case, which he insisted was simply whether Scopes had taught evolution in the Rhea County High School. To support his contention that evolution was morally pernicious, Bryan cited the famous [[Leopold-Loeb]] trial involving Darrow the year before the Scopes Trial. Darrow had saved two rich young child [[murder]]ers from the death sentence, and Bryan cited Darrow's own words:

<blockquote>This terrible crime was inherent in his organism, and it came from some ancestor … Is any blame attached because somebody took [[Nietzsche|Nietzsche's]] philosophy seriously and fashioned his life upon it? … It is hardly fair to hang a 19–year–old boy for the philosophy that was taught him at the university.</blockquote>

<!-- Plagiarized text -->
Bryan chastised evolution for teaching children that humans were but one of (precisely) 35,000 types of mammals and bemoaned the fact that human beings were descended "Not even from American monkeys, but from old world monkeys" (''World's Most Famous Court Trial'', 174-78).

Malone responded for the defense in a speech that was universally considered the oratorical triumph of the trial.<ref>de Camp 335.</ref> Arousing fears of "inquisitions," Malone argued that the Bible should be preserved in the realm of theology and morality and not put into a course of science. In his gale-force conclusion, Malone declared that Bryan's "duel to the death" against evolution should not be made one-sided by a court ruling that took away the chief witnesses for the defense. Malone promised that there would be no duel because "There is never a duel with the truth." The courtroom went wild when Malone finished, and Scopes declared Malone's speech to be the dramatic highpoint of the entire trial and insisted that part of the reason Bryan wanted to go on the stand was to regain some of his tarnished glory.<ref>Scopes and Presley, ''Center of the Storm,'' 154-56.</ref>

On the sixth day of the trial the defense ran out of witnesses. The judge declared that all of the defense testimony on the Bible was irrelevant and should not be presented to the jury (which had been excluded during the defense). One of the defense attorneys, probably Darrow, asked "Where are we to find an expert on the Bible who is acceptable to the court?"{{citequote|date=March 2008}} Bryan interjected "I am an expert on the Bible."{{citequote|date=March 2008}} Thus Bryan volunteered to be a defense witness.

==Examination of Bryan==
On the seventh day of the trial, Clarence Darrow took the unorthodox step of calling William Jennings Bryan, counsel for the prosecution, to the stand as a witness in an effort to demonstrate that belief in the historicity of the Bible and its many accounts of [[miracle]]s was unreasonable. Bryan accepted, on the understanding that Darrow would in turn submit to questioning by Bryan. Although Hays would claim in his autobiography that the cross-examination of Bryan was unplanned, Darrow spent the night before in preparation. The scientists the defense had brought to Dayton and [[Charles Francis Potter]], a modernist minister who had lost a public debate on evolution with the fundamentalist preacher [[John Roach Straton]], prepared topics and questions for Darrow to address to Bryan on the witness stand.<ref>Arthur Garfield Hays, ''Let Freedom Ring'' (New York: Liveright, 1937), 71-72; Charles Francis Potter, ''The Preacher and I'' (New York: Crown, 1951), 275-76.</ref> [[Kirtley Mather]], chairman of the geology department at [[Harvard]] and also a devout Baptist played Bryan and answered questions as he believed Bryan would.<ref>de Camp, ''The Great Monkey Trial'', 364-65; Kirtley F. Mather, "Creation and Evolution," in ''Science Ponders Religion'', ed. Harlow Shapley (New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1960), 32-45.</ref> Raulston had adjourned court to the stand on the courthouse lawn, ostensibly because he was "afraid of the building" with so many spectators crammed into the courtroom, but probably because of the stifling heat (227; Scopes and Presley 164).



===Adam and Eve===
Another area of questioning involved the book of Genesis and if [[Eve (Bible)|Eve]] was actually [[Eve (Bible)#The Creation of Eve|created from Adam's rib]], where [[Cain and Abel|Cain]] got his wife, and how many people lived in [[Ancient Egypt]]. Darrow used these examples to show that the stories of the Bible could not be scientific and should not be used in teaching science with Darrow telling Bryan, "You insult every man of science and learning in the world because he does not believe in your fool religion."<ref>{{Cite book | author=Moran, Jeffrey P. | authorlink= | coauthors= | title=The Scopes trial: a brief history with documents | date=2002 | publisher=Palgrave | location=New York | isbn=0-312-29426-3 | pages=150}}</ref> Bryan's declaration in response was "The reason I am answering is not for the benefit of the superior court. It is to keep these gentlemen from saying I was afraid to meet them and let them question me, and I want the Christian world to know that any atheist, agnostic, unbeliever, can question me anytime as to my belief in God, and I will answer him."<ref>{{Cite book | author=Moran, Jeffrey P. | authorlink= | coauthors= | title=The Scopes trial: a brief history with documents | date=2002 | publisher=Palgrave | location=New York | isbn=0-312-29426-3 | pages=157}}</ref>

<!-- Plagiarized text -->
Stewart objected, demanding to know the legal purpose of Darrow's questioning. Bryan, gauging the effect the session was having, snapped that its purpose was "to cast ridicule on everybody who believes in the Bible." Darrow, with equal vehemence, retorted, "We have the purpose of preventing bigots and ignoramuses from controlling the education of the United States." (299)

<!-- Plagiarized text -->
A few more questions followed in the charged open-air courtroom. Darrow asked where Cain got his wife; Bryan answered that he would "leave the agnostics to hunt for her" (302-03). When Darrow addressed the issue of the [[Eve (Bible)#The Temptation, Fall, and Expulsion from the Garden|temptation]] of Eve by the [[Serpent (symbolism)#Judaic and christian mythology|serpent]], Bryan insisted that the Bible be quoted verbatim rather than allowing Darrow to paraphrase it in his own terms. However, after another angry exchange, Judge Raulston banged his [[gavel]], adjourning court and bringing the drama to a sudden close (303-04).

==End of the trial==
The confrontation between Bryan and Darrow lasted approximately two hours on the afternoon of the seventh day of the trial. It is likely that it would have continued the following morning but for Judge Raulston's announcement that he considered the whole examination irrelevant to the case and his decision that it should be "expunged" from the record. Thus Bryan was denied the chance to cross-examine the defense lawyers in return, although after the trial Bryan would distribute nine questions to the press to bring out Darrow's "religious attitude." The questions and Darrow's short answers were published in newspapers the day after the trial ended, with the ''New York Times'' characterizing Darrow as answering Bryan's questions "with his agnostic's creed, 'I don't know,' except where he could deny them with his belief in natural, immutable law." <ref>''New York Times'', July 22, 1925: 2.</ref>

After the defense's final attempt to present evidence was denied, Darrow asked the judge to bring in the [[jury]] only to have them come to a guilty verdict:

<blockquote>We claim that the defendant is not guilty, but as the court has excluded any testimony, except as to the one issue as to whether he taught that man descended from a lower order of animals, and we cannot contradict that testimony, there is no logical thing to come except that the jury find a verdict that we may carry to the higher court, purely as a matter of proper procedure. We do not think it is fair to the court or counsel on the other side to waste a lot of time when we know this is the inevitable result and probably the best result for the case.</blockquote>

After they were brought in, Darrow then addressed the jury, telling them that:

<blockquote>We came down here to offer evidence in this case and the court has held under the law that the evidence we had is not admissible, so all we can do is to take an exception and carry it to a higher court to see whether the evidence is admissible or not. . . . we cannot even explain to you that we think you should return a verdict of not guilty. We do not see how you could. We do not ask it.</blockquote>

Darrow closed the case for the defense without a final summation. Under Tennessee law, when the defense waived its right to make a closing speech, the prosecution was also barred from summing up its case.

Scopes never testified since there was never a legal issue as to whether he had taught evolution. Scopes later admitted that, in reality, he was unsure of whether he had taught evolution (another reason the defense did not want him to testify), but the point was not contested at the trial (Scopes 1967:59-60).

After eight days of trial, it took the jury only nine minutes to deliberate. Scopes was found guilty on [[July 21]] and ordered to pay a [[US$]]100.00 [[fine]] (approximately $1,165 when adjusted for inflation). Raulston imposed the fine before Scopes was given an opportunity to say anything about why the court should not impose punishment upon him and after Neal brought the error to the judge's attention the defendant spoke for the first and only time in court:<blockquote>
Your honor, 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 (''World's Most Famous Court Trial'' 313).
</blockquote>

==Appeal to Supreme Court of Tennessee==<!-- This section is linked from [[Scopes Trial]] -->
Scopes' lawyers appealed, challenging the conviction on several grounds.

First, they argued that the statute was overly vague because it prohibited the teaching of "evolution," a very broad term. The court rejected that argument, holding:

<blockquote>Evolution, like [[prohibition]], is a broad term. In recent bickering, however, evolution has been understood to mean the theory which holds that man has developed from some pre-existing lower type. This is the popular significance of evolution, just as the popular significance of prohibition is prohibition of the traffic in intoxicating liquors. It was in that sense that evolution was used in this act. It is in this sense that the word will be used in this opinion, unless the context otherwise indicates. It is only to the theory of the evolution of man from a lower type that the act before us was intended to apply, and much of the discussion we have heard is beside this case.</blockquote>

Second, the lawyers argued that the statute violated Scopes' [[constitutional right]] to [[due process]] because it prohibited him from teaching evolution. The court rejected this argument, holding that the state was permitted to regulate his speech as an employee of the state:

<blockquote>He was an employee of the state of Tennessee or of a municipal agency of the state. He was under contract with the state to work in an institution of the state. He had no right or privilege to serve the state except upon such terms as the state prescribed. His liberty, his privilege, his immunity to teach and proclaim the theory of evolution, elsewhere than in the service of the state, was in no wise touched by this law.</blockquote>

Third, it was argued that the terms of the Butler Act violated the [[Tennessee State Constitution]] which provided that "It shall be the duty of the [[Tennessee General Assembly|General Assembly]] in all future periods of this government, to cherish literature and science." The argument was that the theory of the descent of man from a lower order of animals was now established by the preponderance of scientific thought, and that the prohibition of the teaching of such theory was a violation of the legislative duty to cherish science.

The court rejected this argument (''Scopes v. State'', 154 Tenn. 105, 1927), holding that the determination of what laws cherished science was an issue for the legislature, not the judiciary:

<blockquote>The courts cannot sit in judgment on such acts of the Legislature or its agents and determine whether or not the omission or addition of a particular course of study tends "to cherish science."</blockquote>

Fourth, the defense lawyers argued that the statute violated the [[Establishment Clause of the First Amendment|Establishment Clause]], unconstitutionally establishing a state religion.

Writing for the court, Chief Justice [[Grafton Green]] rejected this argument, holding that the Establishment Clause was designed to prevent the establishment of a state religion as had been the experience in [[Church of England|England]] and [[Church of Scotland|Scotland]] at the writing of the Constitution, and held:

<blockquote>We are not able to see how the prohibition of teaching the theory that man has descended from a lower order of animals gives preference to any religious establishment or mode of worship. So far as we know, there is no religious establishment or organized body that has in its creed or confession of faith any article denying or affirming such a theory. So far as we know, the denial or affirmation of such a theory does not enter into any recognized mode of worship. Since this cause has been pending in this court, we have been favored, in addition to briefs of counsel and various amici curiae, with a multitude of resolutions, addresses, and communications from scientific bodies, religious factions, and individuals giving us the benefit of their views upon the theory of evolution. Examination of these contributions indicates that Protestants, Catholics, and Jews are divided among themselves in their beliefs, and that there is no unanimity among the members of any religious establishment as to this subject. Belief or unbelief in the theory of evolution is no more a characteristic of any religious establishment or mode of worship than is belief or unbelief in the wisdom of the prohibition laws. It would appear that members of the same churches quite generally disagree as to these things.</blockquote>

Further, the court held that while the statute ''forbade'' the teaching of evolution (as the court had defined it), it did not ''require'' the teaching of any other doctrine, so that it did not benefit any doctrine over the others.

Nevertheless, having found the statute to be constitutional, the court set aside the conviction on appeal because of a [[legal technicality]]: the jury should have decided the fine, not the judge, since Tennessee judges could not at that time set fines above $50. Green added a totally unexpected recommendation:<blockquote>
The court is informed that the plaintiff in error is no longer in the service of the state. We see nothing to be gained by prolonging the life of this bizarre case. On the contrary, we think that the peace and dignity of the state, which all criminal prosecutions are brought to redress, will be the better conserved by the entry of a [[nolle prosequi]] herein. Such a course is suggested to the Attorney General.
</blockquote>Attorney General L.D. Smith immediately announced that he would not seek a [[retrial]], while Scopes' lawyers offered angry comments on the stunning decision.<ref>''New York Times'' 16 Jan. 1927: 1, 28.</ref>

In 1968, the [[Supreme Court of the United States]] ruled in ''[[Epperson v. Arkansas]]'' [[Case citation|393 U.S. 97]] (1968) that such bans contravene the Establishment Clause because their primary purpose is religious.<ref name="Linder Introduction" /> Tennessee had repealed the Butler Act the previous year.

==Publicity and drama==
===Publicity===
[[Edward J. Larson]], a historian who won the [[Pulitzer Prize for History]] for his book ''Summer for the Gods: The Scopes Trial and America's Continuing Debate Over Science and Religion'', notes "Like so many archetypal American events, the trial itself began as a [[publicity stunt]]."<ref>{{harvnb|Larson|2004|p=211}}</ref> The press coverage of the "monkey" Trial was overwhelming.<ref name="Larson_2004_p_212_213">{{harvnb|Larson|2004|p=212-213}}</ref> The front pages of newspapers like the ''[[The New York Times|New York Times]]'' were dominated by the case for days. More than 200 newspaper reporters from all parts of the country and two from [[London]] were in Dayton.<ref name="Larson_2004_p213">{{harvnb|Larson|2004|p=213}}</ref> Twenty-two [[Telegraphy|telegraphers]] sent out 165,000 words per day on the trial over thousands of miles of telegraph wires hung for the purpose;<ref name="Larson_2004_p213"/> more words were transmitted to Britain about the Scopes trial than for any previous American event.<ref name="Larson_2004_p213"/> [[Animal training|Trained]] [[chimpanzee]]s performed on the courthouse lawn.<ref name="Larson_2004_p213"/> Chicago's [[WGN (AM)|WGN]] radio station broadcast the trial with announcer Quin Ryan via [[clear channel]] broadcasts for the first on-the-scene coverage of a criminal trial. Two movie cameramen had their film flown out daily in a small plane from a specially-prepared [[airstrip]]. [[H.L. Mencken|H.L. Mencken's]] trial reports were heavily slanted against the prosecution and the jury which was "unanimously hot for [[Genesis]]." He mocked the town's inhabitants as "yokels" and "morons." He called Bryan a "buffoon" and his speeches "theologic bilge." In contrast, he called the defense "eloquent" and "magnificent." Some [[creationism|creationists]] have claimed that Mencken's trial reports turned public opinion against creationism, though few people seem to have actually noticed this at the time.

The media's portrayal of Darrow's cross-examination of Bryan, and the play and movie ''Inherit the Wind'', caused millions of Americans to ridicule religious-based opposition to the theory of evolution.<ref>{{harvnb|Larson|2004|p=217}}</ref>

The trial also brought publicity to the town of Dayton, Tennessee, and was hatched as a publicity stunt<ref name="Larson_2004_p_212_213"/> From ''The Salem Republican,'' June 11, 1925:

<blockquote>"The whole matter has assumed the portion of Dayton and her merchants endeavoring to secure a large amount of notoriety and publicity with an open question as whether Scopes is a party to the plot or not."</blockquote>

The trial did not stop the anti-evolution movement. Before Dayton only the [[South Carolina]], [[Oklahoma]], and [[Kentucky]] legislatures had dealt with anti-evolution laws or riders to educational appropriations bills. In 1927, there were 13 states, both in the [[Northern United States|North]] and [[Southern United States|South]], that considered some form of anti-evolution law. At least 41 bills, [[rider (legislation)|rider]]s, or resolutions were introduced into the state legislatures, with some states facing the issue repeatedly. While most of these efforts were rejected, both [[Mississippi]] and [[Arkansas]] put anti-evolution laws on the books after the Scopes trial that would outlive the Butler Act.<ref>R. Halliburton, Jr., "The Adoption of Arkansas' Anti-Evolution Law," ''Arkansas Historical Quarterly'' 23 (Autumn 1964): 280; Ginger, ''Six Days or Forever?'', 212.</ref> The Butler Act ended up serving as a model for the anti-evolution crusade, and the ACLU could not find a teacher to volunteer for another test case.

===Court house===
At the site of the trial, the [[Rhea County Courthouse (Tennessee)|Rhea County Courthouse]] in Dayton, a $1-million project which restored the second-floor courtroom to as it looked during the Scopes trial was completed in 1979. A museum of trial events in its basement contains such memorabilia as the microphone used to broadcast the trial, trial records, photographs, and an audiovisual history. Every July local people re-enact key moments in the courtroom.<ref>[http://www.tnhistoryforkids.org/places/scopes_museum Scopes Trial Museum - Tennessee History for Kids<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref> In front of the courthouse stands a commemorative plaque erected by the Tennessee Historical Commission:<blockquote>
<center>2B 23 <BR>THE SCOPES TRIAL<p>
Here, from July 10 to 21, 1925 John<Br>Thomas Scopes, a County High School<BR> teacher, was tried for teaching that<BR> a man descended from a lower order<BR> of animals in violation of a lately<BR> passed state law. William Jennings<BR> Bryan assisted the prosecution;<BR> Clarence Darrow, Arthur Garfield<BR> Hays, and Dudley Field Malone the<BR> defense. Scopes was convicted.
</blockquote>

Rhea County Courthouse was designated a [[National Historic Landmark]] by the [[National Park Service]] in 1976.<ref name = NHLlist>[[National Park Service]] (April 2007). "National Historic Landmarks Survey: List of National Historic Landmarks by State".</ref> It was placed on the [[National Register of Historic Places]] in 1972.<ref name = NRIS>{{cite web | last = National Park Service | first = | authorlink = National Park Service | coauthors = | title = ? | work = National Register Information System | publisher = | date = | url = http://www.cr.nps.gov/nr/research/index.htm | format = | doi = | accessdate = 2007-05-15 }}</ref>

===Humor===
Anticipating that Scopes would be found guilty, the press fitted the defendant for martyrdom and created an onslaught of ridicule. ''Time'''s initial coverage of the trial focused on Dayton as "the fantastic cross between a circus and a holy war." ''Life'' adorned its masthead with monkeys reading books and proclaimed, "the whole matter is something to laugh about."<ref>E.S. Martin, ''Life'' 86 (16 July 1925): 16..</ref> Hosts of cartoonists added their own portrayals to the attack (the greatest collection of cartoons available would be the 14 reprinted in [[L. Sprague de Camp]]'s ''[[The Great Monkey Trial]]''). Both ''[[Literary Digest]]'' and the popular humor magazine ''Life'' (1890–1930) ran compilations of jokes and humorous observations garnered from newspapers around the country.<ref>"Life Lines," ''Life'' 85 (18 June 1925): 10; 85 (25 June 1925): 6, 86 (2 July 1925): 8; 86 (9 July 1925): 6; 86 (30 July 1925): 6; "Life's Encyclopedia," ''Life'' 85 (25 July 1925): 23; Kile Croak, "My School in Tennessee," ''Life'' 86 (2 July 1925); 4; Arthur Guiterman, "Notes for a Tennessee Primer," ''Life'' 86 (16 July 1925): 5; "Topics in Brief," ''Literary Digest,'' for 86 (4 July 1925): 18; 86 (11 July 1925): 15; 86 (18 July 1925): 15; 86 (25 July 1925): 15, 86 (1 August 1925): 17; 86 (8 August 1925): 13.</ref>

Overwhelmingly, the butt of these jokes was the prosecution and those aligned with it: Bryan, the city of Dayton, the state of Tennessee, and the entire South, as well as fundamentalist Christians and anti-evolutionists. Rare exceptions were found in the Southern press, where the fact that Darrow had saved [[Leopold and Loeb]] from the death penalty continued to be a source of ugly humor. The most widespread form of this ridicule was directed at the inhabitants of Tennessee.<ref>"Tennessee Goes Fundamentalist," ''New Republic'' 42 (29 April 1925): 258-60; Howard K. Hollister, "In Dayton, Tennessee," ''Nation'' 121 (8 July 1925): 61-62; Dixon Merritt, "Smoldering Fires," ''Outlook'' 140 (22 July 1925): 421-22.</ref> ''Life'' described Tennessee as "not up to date in its attitude to such things as evolution."<ref>Martin, ''Life'' 86 (16 July 1925: 16.</ref> ''Time'' related Bryan's arrival in town with the disparaging comment, "The populace, Bryan's to a moron, yowled a welcome."<ref>"The Great Trial," ''Time'' 6 (20 July 1926): 17.</ref>
Attacks on Bryan were predictably frequent and nasty: ''Life'' awarded him its "Brass Medal of the Fourth Class," for having "successfully demonstrated by the alchemy of ignorance hot air may be transmuted into gold, and that the Bible is infallibly inspired except where it differs with him on the question of wine, women, and wealth."<ref>''Life'' 86 (9 July 1925): 7.</ref> Papers across the country routinely dismissed the efforts of both sides in the trial, while the European press reacted to the entire affair with amused condescension.

Famously vituperative attacks came from the literary gadfly [[H.L. Mencken]], whose syndicated columns from Dayton for the ''[[Baltimore Sun]]'' drew vivid caricatures of the "backward" local populace, referring to the people of Rhea county as "Babbits," "morons," "peasants," "hill-billies," "yaps" and "yokels." He chastised the "degraded nonsense which country preachers are ramming and hammering into yokel skulls." The nicest thing Mencken managed to say about the community was that "The Klan has never got a foothold here, though it rages everywhere else in Tennessee."<ref>Edgar Kemler, ''The Irreverent Mr. Mencken'' (Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1948), 175-90. For excerpts from Mencken's reports see William Manchester, ''Sage of Baltimore: The Life and Riotous Times of H.L. Mencken'' (New York: Andrew-Melrose, 1952) 143-45, and ''D-Days at Dayton: Reflections on the Scopes Trial'', ed. Jerry R. Tompkins (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State Univ. Press, 1965) 35-51.</ref> Mencken attempted to perpetuate a hoax, distributing flyers for the "Rev. Elmer Chubb," but the claims that Chubb would drink poison and preach in lost languages were ignored as commonplace by the people of Dayton and only the ''[[Commonweal]]'' bit.<ref>H.L. Mencken, ''Heathen Days, 1890-1936'' (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1943) 231-34; Michael Williams, "Sunday in Dayton," ''Commonweal'' 2 (29 July 1925): 285-88.</ref> Mencken's most venomous assault was his withering obituary of Bryan, "In Memoriam: W.J.B," in which Mencken became one of the few people ever to accuse Bryan of insincerity.<ref>"In Memoriam: W.J.B." was first printed in the ''Baltimore Evening Sun'', 27 July 1925; rpt. by Mencken in the ''American Mercury'' 5 (October 1925);: 158-60 and in his ''Prejudices (Fifth Series),'' 64-74.</ref> Years later Mencken did question whether dismissing Bryan "as a quack pure and unadulterated" was "really just," but the damage could hardly be undone.<ref>Mencken, ''Heathen Days,'' 280-87.</ref> Mencken's columns made the Dayton citizens irate and drew general fire from the Southern press.<ref>"Mencken Epithets Rouse Dayton's Ire," ''New York Times'', 17 July 1925, 3.</ref> Ironically, after Raulston ruled against the admission of scientific testimony, Mencken left Dayton, declaring in his last dispatch "All that remains of the great cause of the State of Tennessee against the infidel Scopes is the formal business of bumping off the defendant."<ref>"Battle Now Over, Mencken Sees;
Genesis Triumphant and Ready
for New Jousts," H.L. Mencken, ''The Baltimore Evening Sun'', July 18, 1925, http://www.positiveatheism.org/hist/menck04.htm#SCOPES9, URL accessed April 27, 2008.</ref> Consequently, the journalist missed Darrow's cross-examination of Bryan on Monday.

===Stage and film===
The [[Play (theatre)|play]] ''[[Inherit the Wind]]'' (1955), by [[Jerome Lawrence]] and [[Robert Edwin Lee]] was loosely based on this trial. The play turned Darrow and Bryan into characters named Henry Drummond and Matthew Harrison Brady.<ref>[http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/scopes/SCO_INHE.HTM Notes on Inherit the Wind] UMKC Law School. Retrieved 15 April 2007.</ref> The play was made into a [[1960]] film directed by [[Stanley Kramer]], with [[Spencer Tracy]] and [[Fredric March]] as Drummond and Brady. There have also been a trio of television versions, with [[Melvyn Douglas]] and [[Ed Begley]] in 1965, [[Jason Robards]] and [[Kirk Douglas]] in 1988, and [[Jack Lemmon]] and [[George C. Scott]] in 1999. The Scopes trial did not appear in the ''[[Encyclopædia Britannica]]'' until 1957, when its inclusion was spurred by the successful run of ''Inherit the Wind'' on [[Broadway theater|Broadway]], which was mentioned in the citation. It was not until the 1960s that the Scopes trial began to be mentioned in the history textbooks of American high schools and colleges, usually as an example of the conflict between fundamentalists and modernists, and often in sections that also talked about the rise of the [[Ku Klux Klan]] in the South.<ref>Lawrance Bernabo and Celeste Michelle Condit (1990). "Two Stories of the Scopes Trial: Legal and Journalistic Articulations of the Legitimacy of Science and Religion" in ''Popular Trials: Rhetoric, Mass Media, and the Law'', edited by Robert Hariman. Tuscaloosa: The University of Alabama Press, 82-83.</ref>

Since 1987, the city of [[Dayton, TN|Dayton]] has staged a reenactment of the trial using the original transcripts, performing it in the very same courtroom in which the trial took place. The annual event occurs during Dayton's Scopes Trial festival with several performances showing over the weekend. In [[2007]], [[Bryan College]], the institute founded in memory of Bryan, purchased the rights to the production and made a filmed version for DVD release using the same performers entitled "Inherit the Truth" in an attempt to clear up any misunderstandings regarding the trial due to ''[[Inherit the Wind]]''. <ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.bryan.edu/4290.html|title=Bryan offers DVD of 'Inherit the Truth'|accessdate=2007-10-16}}</ref>

==See also==
* [[Darwinism]]
* [[Evolution]]
* [[Creationism]]
* [[The Origin of Species]]
* [[1860 Oxford evolution debate|Huxley-Wilberforce debate (1860)]]
* [[Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District]]

==Notes==
{{reflist|2}}

== References==
*{{Harvard reference
| Surname = de Camp
| Given = L. Sprague
| Authorlink = L. Sprague de Camp
| Year = 1968
| Title = [[The Great Monkey Trial]]
| Publisher = Doubleday
| ID = ISBN 0-385-04625-1
}}
*{{Harvard reference
| Surname = Larson
| Given = Edward J.
| Authorlink = Edward J. Larson
| Year = 1997
| Title = [[Summer for the Gods|Summer for the Gods: The Scopes Trial and America's Continuing Debate Over Science and Religion]]
| Publisher = BasicBooks
| ID = ISBN 0-465-07509-6
}}
*{{Harvard reference
| Surname = Larson
| Given = Edward J.
| Authorlink = Edward J. Larson
| Year = 2004
| Title = Evolution
| Publisher = Modern Library
| ID = ISBN 0-679-64288-9
}}
*{{Harvard reference
| Surname = Menefee
| Given = Samuel Pyeatt
| Year = 2001
| Title = Reaping the Whirlwind: A Scopes Trial Bibliography
| Journal = Regent University Law Review
| Volume = 13
| Number = 2
| Pages = 571-595
}}
*{{Harvard reference
| Surname1 = Scopes
| Given1 = John T.
| Authorlink1 = John T. Scopes
| Surname2 = Presley
| Given2 = James
| Authorlink2 = James Presley
| Year = 1967
|date=June, 1967
| Title = Center of the Storm: Memoirs of John T. Scopes
| Publisher = Henry Holt & Company
}}
*<ref>{{cite book | last = Hakim | first = Joy | authorlink = | coauthors = | title = War, Peace, and All That Jazz | publisher = Oxford University Press | date = 1995 | location = New York, New York | pages = 44-45 | url = | doi = | id = | isbn = 0-19-509514-6 }}</ref>

==Further reading==
* ''[[Six Days or Forever?]]'' by [[Ray Ginger]] (ISBN 0-19-519784-4).
* ''The World's Most Famous Court Trial, State of Tennessee vs. John Thomas Scopes: Complete Stenographic Report of the Court'', by John Scopes (ISBN 0-306-71975-4).

==External links==
* [http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/scopes/scopes.htm Scopes Trial Home Page] by Douglas Linder. University of Missouri at Kansas City Law School
* [http://www.positiveatheism.org/hist/menck04.htm Mencken's columns on the Scopes Trial]
*[http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/scopes.asp Scopes Trial & Inherit the Wind Q&A] Answers in Genesis (Creationist organization)
*[http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/monkeytrial/ American Experience - Monkey Trial] PBS
*[http://atheism.about.com/library/glossary/evolution/bldef_scopesmonkeytrial.htm Scopes Monkey Trial] About.com
*[http://www.newyorker.com/archive/content/articles/051205fr_archive01 Marquis James's 1925 New Yorker Report on the Scopes Trial]
*[http://www.americanheritage.com/events/articles/web/20060710-john-scopes-creationism-evolution-darwin-intelligent-design-william-jennings-bryan-monkey-trial.shtml 20 Questions About the Scopes Trial] AmericanHeritage.com
*[http://personal.uncc.edu/jmarks/Darrow.html Transcript of Bryan's cross-examination] Jonathan Marks. University of North Carolina at Charlotte.
*[http://www.bradburyac.mistral.co.uk/tennesse.html The Scopes Trial - The facts behind the Myths]
*[http://www.csudh.edu/oliver/smt310-handouts/wjb-last/wjb-last.htm Text of the Closing Statement of William Jennings Bryan at the trial of John Scopes, Dayton, Tennessee, 1925]
*[http://siarchives.si.edu/research/scopes.html Unpublished Photographs from 1925 Tennessee vs. John Scopes "Monkey Trial" Found in Smithsonian Archives]
*[http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/monkeytrial/sfeature/sf_music.html# "Monkey Music"], a series of songs in reaction to the trial from PBS's [[American Experience]].

[[Category:1925 in law]]
[[Category:1925 in the United States]]
[[Category:Evolution]]
[[Category:History of Tennessee]]
[[Category:Rhea County, Tennessee]]
[[Category:Trials in the United States]]
[[Category:History of the United States (1918–1945)]]
[[Category:Tennessee state case law]]
[[Category:Creationism-related court cases]]

[[de:Scopes-Prozess]]
[[eo:Proceso Scopes]]
[[fr:Procès du singe]]
[[ko:원숭이 재판]]
[[he:משפט הקופים]]
[[pl:Małpi proces]]
[[ro:Procesul Scopes]]
[[ru:Обезьяний процесс]]

Revision as of 16:01, 21 May 2008

jack squat

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Scopes_trial&oldid=213970484"