Page:The World's Most Famous Court Trial - 1925.djvu/117

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been validated.
FOURTH DAY'S PROCEEDINGS
113

"Be it further enacted that any teacher found guilty of a violation of this act shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction shall be fined not less than $100, nor more than $500, for each offense."

In contradiction of the opinion of the legal leader of the prosecution, the attorney-general, the defense contends that before you, gentlemen of the jury, can convict the defendant, Scopes, of a violation of this act, the prosecution must prove two things:

First—That Scopes taught a theory that denies the story of the divine creation of man as taught in the Bible, and

Second—That instead and in the place of this theory he taught that man is descended from a lower order of animals.

Scopes Must Have Taught Evolution and Also Denied Bible Story

The defense contends that to convict Scopes the prosecution must prove that Scopes not only taught the theory of evolution, but that he also, and at the same time, denied the theory of creation as set forth in the Bible.

The defense contends the prosecution must prove that the defendant, Scopes, did these two things and that what he taught was a violation of the statute.

We will prove that whether this statute be constitutional or unconstitutional the Defendant Scopes did not and could not violate it. We maintain that since the Defendant Scopes has been indicted under a statute which prohibits the teaching of the evolutionary theory, the prosecution must prove as part of its case what evolution is.

So that there shall be no misunderstanding and that no one shall be able to misinterpret or misrepresent our position we wish to state at the beginning of the case that the defense believes there is a direct conflict between the theory of evolution and the theories of creation as set forth in the Book of Genesis.

Bible Story Not Scientifically Correct

Neither do we believe that the stories of creation as set forth in the Bible are reconciliable or scientifically correct. The defense will also prove by credible testimony that there is more than one theory of creation set forth in the Bible and that they are conflicting. But we shall make it perfectly clear that while this is the view of the defense we shall show by the testimony of men learned in science and theology that there are millions of people who believe in evolution and in the stories of creation as set forth in the Bible and who find no conflict between the two. The defense maintains that this is a matter of faith and interpretation, which each individual must determine for himself, and if you, men of the jury, are able to reconcile the theory of evolution and the theories of creation as set forth in the Bible, you are not only entitled to your view, but you will be supported in it by millions of your citizens who are of high culture, learning and deep religious faith.

The defense will prove these facts to you and you will determine the question for yourself.

No Conflict Between Evolution and Christianity

While the defense thinks there is a conflict between evolution and the Old Testament, we believe there is no conflict between evolution and Christianity. There may be a conflict between evolution and the peculiar ideas of Christianity, which are held by Mr. Bryan as the evangelical leader of the prosecution, but we deny that the evangelical leader of the prosecution is an authorized spokesman for the Christians of the United States. The defense maintains that there is a clear distinction between God the church, the Bible, Christianity and Mr. Bryan. * * * (Here Mr. Malone referred to Mr. Bryan's introduction to Jefferson's "Statute of Religious Freedom").

The great political leader in com-