Evolutionary Anthropology 16:126–131 (2007) CROTCHETS & QUIDDITIES The Scopes Trial ‘‘People, this is no circus. There are no monkeys up here. This is a lawsuit, let us have order.’’ Court Officer Rice KENNETH M. WEISS In 1925, the Dayton businessmen Would he be willing to stand trial to were not happy. Nothing ever hap- test the law? He agreed, though he pened in their sleepy town of less than couldn’t remember whether he had 2 2,000 souls. They wondered what actually taught the evolution sections they could do to get a little action or of Hunter (Fig. 2). They put ‘‘the Pro- maybe even a little notoriety, and the fessor’’ on trial for this offense, which money that came with it. Earlier in the carried a fine of between $100 and year, the state legislature had passed a $500. new law called the Butler Act; the To make the most of the occasion, townsmen seized an opportunity to they brought in a celebrity prosecutor turn the law into manna from heaven. who had been a leader in the struggle of The Butler Act, passed by the Ten- religion against evolution, the former nessee legislature, stated ‘‘That it shall Presidential candidate and Secretary of be unlawful for any teacher in any of State, William Jennings Bryan (Fig. 3). the Universities, Normals and all other That would ensure a conviction and public schools of the State which are would attract national media attention supported in whole or in part by the as well. In defending Scopes, the Ameri- public school funds of the State, to can Civil Liberties Union brought in a teach any theory that denies the story celebrity of their own, Clarence Darrow of the Divine Creation of man as (Fig. 3), probably the most famous law- Figure 1. John T. Scopes. From Tompkins.5 taught in the Bible, and to teach yerofhisage,afighterforenlightened instead that man has descended from but unpopular causes, and already a a lower order of animals.’’ The stage known Bryan antagonist. As everyone was set for a real crowd pleaser! local girl had caught his eye. So he was In 1924, the young John T. Scopes around, playing tennis one afternoon, (1900–1970; Fig. 1), a freshly minted when he was approached by the town law major from the University of Ken- businessmen who wanted to bring tucky, was hired as football coach and some lively action to Dayton. Still per- physical science teacher at the Rhea spiring, he walked down to Robinson’s County, Tennessee, high school.3 In drugstore to meet them. What they his first year, he also briefly taught wanted to know was whether he biology as a substitute when the regu- thought that biology could be taught lar biology teacher was ill. The follow- without including evolution. Scopes ing summer, Scopes stayed in Dayton said no. He had read Darwin as a child, rather than leaving town because a and ‘‘thought Darwin was right. It was the only plausible explanation of man’s long and tortuous journey to his present physical and mental develop- Ken Weiss is Evan Pugh Professor of ment.’’3 He acknowledged that his sub- Anthropology and Genetics at Penn State bing stint had included some review of University. biology, using the class textbook, Hunter’s Civic Biology,4 which in- cluded discussions of evolution. V C 2007 Wiley-Liss, Inc. By teaching this material, the insti- Figure 2. Hunter’s diagram of evolution. Note DOI 10.1002/evan.20144 Published online in Wiley InterScience gators said, Scopes was clearly in vio- the small circle at the top representing (www.interscience.wiley.com). lation of the new anti-evolution law. mammals. From Hunter.4 CROTCHETS & QUIDDITIES The Scopes Trial 127 edy’’ for the ‘‘improvement of the future race,’’ since we can’t kill the defectives, is selective breeding, pre- venting their intermarriage ‘‘and the possibilities of perpetuating such a low and degenerate race.’’ On the other hand, there was Elizabeth Tuttle, who in 1667 was a person ‘‘of strong will, and of extreme intellectual vigor’’ and begat a long list of distinguished citi- zens, even including several university presidents. Good genes indeed! As Hunter4 pointedly noted, ‘‘The evi- dence and the moral speak for them- selves!’’ Surprisingly, what should have been Exhibit A, Civic Biology’s actual con- tent, was hardly mentioned in the trial at all. Nor did Scopes himself ever tes- tify until he responded to the verdict.1 This might seem strange, since the only issue actually on trial was whether he had taught a book that vio- lated the Butler Act. Besides the fact that he couldn’t remember if he’d Figure 3. Legal aid. The famous face-off of Darrow (left) and Bryan, at the trial. Source: public domain. actually taught the evolutionary parts of Hunter, Scopes was never called to testify because Darrow feared he knows, Darrow embarrassed poor faculty. His contacts included at least would be asked whether he was Bryan, ‘‘the idol of all Morondom,’’6 over one student of the prominent geneti- actually a biology teacher and that he his literal interpretations of the Bible. cist Thomas H Morgan and Civic Biol- might not stand up well under inter- The Scopes trial was made into a ogy became the leading text in its rogation about biology.8 play and a Hollywood movie, ‘‘Inherit field.8 the Wind,’’ which are still seen and Hunter attributed the gradually helped make a modern American advancing nature of life to Darwin’s 7 ‘‘THE ROCK OF AGES IS MORE legend. The trial is well-remembered ‘‘theory of evolution,’’ with adaptive as the image of a triumph of Science IMPORTANT THAN THE AGE natural selection at its core. He essen- 1 over Religion, rather than a narrow tially defined evolution as a steady pro- OF ROCKS’’ (Bryan) legal test, much less a trial explicitly gression from primitive to advanced. Clarence Darrow only showed up in staged as a publicity stunt for Dayton. He quickly applied that notion to Dayton after he read that Bryan1 had Nevertheless, the tactic succeeded, humans, asserting that we evolved signed on for the prosecution. It was because while ‘‘Most of the newspa- from ‘‘lower animals.’’ So if Scopes the only case Darrow ever took for no pers treated the whole case as a farce taught this kind of stuff, his fate would fee.6 He was determined to undermine instead of a tragedy ...they did give it seem to be sealed! Bryan, who headed the movement re- no end of publicity.’’6 But underlying In subsequent sections, Hunter said sponsible for fundamentalist anti-evo- the trial’s theatrics were issues of sub- there are five human races, each dif- lution activities around the country, stance that are not as well remem- bered as its caricature in legend. To ferent in ‘‘instincts, social customs, including the Butler Act. Darrow’s see what those issues are, let’s look and, to a certain extent, in structure,’’ ‘‘only object, was to focus the attention first at what the students were actually and that these include ‘‘the highest of the country on the progamme of being taught. type of all, the Caucasians, repre- Mr. Bryan and the other fundamental- sented by the civilized white inhabi- ists in America .... Education was in tants of Europe and America.’’ He took danger from ...religious fanaticism.’’6 A PROPER CASE FOR THE a strongly eugenicist view of human From the beginning, it was clear PROSECUTION—OR nature, describing a few famous cases that this was a show trial. The weather taken from the leading book on eugen- was hot, the courthouse jammed (Fig. FOR THE DEFENSE? ics.9 These included one ‘‘Margaret, 4), journalists everywhere. The trial George W. Hunter, a teacher at New the mother of criminals,’’ and the Kal- was broadcast on radio and loud- York’s famous DeWitt Clinton High likak family that spawned countless speakers, and the pie`ce de re´sistance School, regularly consulted with ‘‘feeble-minded,’’ sexually immoral, was even held outside on the court- nearby Columbia University’s biology and drunkard descendants. The ‘‘rem- house lawn to accommodate the large, 128 Weiss CROTCHETS & QUIDDITIES sented,10 and that’s when Darrow made enough for a verdict to be reached a famous monkey out of Bryan. The without extraneous interpretation. transcript shows a lawyer of legendary In a way, it didn’t matter. Bryan’s skill going after his witness the way testimony was widely publicized any- lawyers do, on highly selective particu- way and is what everyone remem- lars and with great rhetorical aplomb bers. But if the tables had been heavily dosed with satire.1 turned and the great orator had had Darrow raked Bryan over the coals his chance to put Darrow on the defending biblical literalism, chapter stand in the full light of publicity, and verse. Was Jonah really swallowed our view of the trial might be some- by a whale? Or was it a fish? Did what different. Joshua really lengthen a day by com- manding the sun to stand still? Did IF DARROW HAD TESTIFIED human races really all arise in the 4,200 years since Noah’s flood? Where We can’t know what Bryan would did Cain get his wife? But this wasn’t have asked, but we can obtain inklings quite the spontaneous grilling the because in fact, Bryan did, after a fash- legend seems to imply. In 1923, the ion, interrogate both Darrow and Dar- pump had been primed when, in the win. Bryan had raised a few of his Figure 4.