CCBA Welcomes Judge Gonzales

Bryan stated that if evolution “won” in the trial that Christianity
would be extinguished. Darrow argued, as inanely, that “civilization
itself” was on trial and not the Defendant (a line that has
been regrettably copied far too often since that time). From the
outset, the Defendant, John Scopes, was all but forgotten and
would have been as comfortably seated in the swelling audience
as much as in the dock. The trial became highly personal
between Darrow and Bryan. Darrow demonized Bryan and
accused him of even being responsible for the Butler Act (he
wasn’t), labeling the legislation as both “wicked” and “mischievous.”
From the standpoint of the present time, such word
slinging sounds fairly ho-hum, but in 1925 this terminology
directed against legislation designed to preserve contemporary
moral principles was incendiary and startling and grabbed
national headlines.
Due to the number of spectators, the trial was moved outside.
The cross examination of Bryan by Darrow (pictured above)
occurred on the eighth day of trial in the open air in an atmosphere
of lunchbox day time theater. The two egos had
thoroughly dominated the trial – and now the case was no
longer Tennessee v. Scopes, but had been turned inside out and
essentially mutated into Darrow v. Bryan. Bryan took the stand
to testify about the Bible and defend Truth. For two hours, the
two bantered with each other about the Bible and science. Darrow
ridiculed Genesis and called into question the plausibility of
the creation story – with Bryan doggedly on the defense. Darrow
questioned Bryan how Cain found his wife, since Adam and
Eve only begat Cain and Abel. Bryan replied that Cain had
“likely left the agnostics to go hunt for her.” On this point and
others, Bryan eventually found himself in retreat and he eventually
came to the point of conceding that the Bible cannot
absolutely be accepted literally in every respect – an admission
that constituted a major inroad against Biblical veracity from
Darrow’s perspective. Of course, all of this had nothing to do
with the Butler Act and John Scopes and the question of
whether he had violated the law – the supposed centerpiece of
the trial. Judge Raulston (the Judge Ito of his day) had been
hopelessly manipulated in the trial to that point, and finally ruled
the following day that the entire examination of Bryan had been
irrelevant and ordered it stricken.
In closing arguments, Darrow actually asked the Jury to return a
verdict of guilty against Scopes so that “the whole matter” could
be determined by the Tennessee Supreme Court. Remarkably,
his concession prevented Bryan from giving a final rebuttal argument
– a speech that he had labored on at great length, thereby
denying him his last act of grandstanding and the opportunity to
rehabilitate himself after the cross examination contest with Darrow
that, by the account of most observers, he had lost on
debating points, if not substance.
The Jury readily agreed with Darrow’s request and Scopes was
finally found guilty and then fined $100 by the Court. On appeal
his conviction was thrown out by the Tennessee Supreme Court on
technical issues, leaving the Butler Act intact. The court labeled the
trial “bizarre” (which it clearly was) – and signaled that it wanted to
hear no more such nonsense from any similar trial combatants.
Five days after the trial, William Jennings Bryan died. He had
been a diabetes sufferer and the trial had taxed his last reserves.
Darrow lived another 13 years. He emerged from retirement to
fight religion one more time in an event known as the “Mecca
Temple Debate” against an English writer, G.K. Chesterson, in
which they faced off on the question: “Will the World Return
to Religion” The event fostered no plays or movies. There is no
record of what was said, and that grand debate is now largely
forgotten.
After the trial, Scopes left Dayton, as he had planned all along,
and studied geology at the University of Chicago. He then
worked for Gulf Oil and the United Gas Company and, like
Cain, found a wife and also became baptized as a Catholic in
Venezuela on one of his assignments to that country. He died in
1970. What he may really have thought about evolution no one
seems to know – and as far as the trial was concerned, no one
really cared.
And what of the eye of the Hurricane – little Dayton After selling
thousands of gallons of lemonade, scores of blue plate
specials and jacking up the price of hotel rooms for a bit, the
town was hardly any better off. Dayton has roughly doubled in
size since 1925 – something that would easily have happened in
the intervening 87 years without the publicity of the trial.
As far as the Butler Act was concerned – no one else was ever
prosecuted under that law. As it turned out, one trip to the zoo
was clearly enough. The Act largely remained overlooked until
1967. At that time, another teacher Gary Scott was dismissed
for violating the Act. He sued for reinstatement, and began a
class action lawsuit in federal court. Enough was enough. Three
days later a bill was introduced in the legislature rescinding the
Act and was passed by both houses and signed by the Governor.
Scott was immediately reinstated.
No one wanted a rerun of what history has to concede was truly
a very bad movie.
ASSOCIATE ATTORNEY
Vancouver law firm Marsh, Higgins, Beaty & Hatch is seeking a licensed
Washington State attorney having a minimum of two years litigation experience.
The candidate should have consumer bankruptcy experience and
have experience in or willingness to develop, a couple other areas of law.
Basic knowledge of Microsoft word, Excel, and Outlook required.
Oregon license is a plus. The candidate will be expected to fully manage
his or her own cases and have direct client contact. This position provides
the opportunity for a candidate with initiative and a willingness to work
hard, to quickly develop as an attorney.
We offer a competitive benefits and compensation package.
Please respond to this ad by forwarding your cover letter and résumé to
legalmanager@yahoo.com.
HEARSAY - MAY 2012 21