New Britain herald., 1925-07-17
SCIENTISTS ARE
 NOT ID TESTIFY
(cotnlnued from First Page)

tsns. documents Ar. Darro" h. slsted on having the remainder Of the day in which to prepare the statements of what hls side desired 10 put into the record.
 Well" said Judge Fauls'on. 'h you think r oill rake Inc day 'ps- t!ce is more important than time,
 Although court Nas in session only Go minutes, the judge giving his decision at a;Sl, il was stormy After defense attorneys had raised their voices in vehement protest 10 the courts runng, another argument developed on the question o' the weekend recess. The defense tn- sisted on this tton and while tho state protested. the court finally ruled for the halt n the proceed inRs,
 Judre rrss'on ,ratcated that on his return 70 the bench Monday ho would insist cn the case moving more rapidly. This vas taken to mean that the case might end Mon day,
 Judges Ruling
 Judge EaUlston, in his opinion, excluding scientific testimony said,
 This case now is before the court upon a motion by the attorney gen ersl to exclude from the considnra- tion of the jury certain expert testt- mony offered hv the defendant, the import of such testimony being an effort 70 explain the origin of man and life The state insists that such evidence is wholly irrelevant, in- competent and mlmportant 10 the issue impending. and that f. should be excluded
 Upon tho other hand the defense insists that this evidence is highly competent and relevant to the is- sue involved and should bA ad- nltted'
 He read the first section of the statute involved in this case and added:
 "The state says that it is both proved and admitted that this ds- fendant did teach in Rhea county within the limits of the statute, that man descended from lower order of animals: and that with these facts ascertaina1 and proven, if has met the requirements of the statute and has absolutely established the defendants guilt; and with his guilt thus admitted and established, his ultimate conviction is unavoidable and inevitable and that no amount Of expert testimony can aid and en- Tighten the court and jury upon thf real issues. or affect the final results
 "Tn other words the state insists that by fair and reasonable con. struction Of the statute the req of' fense provided against in the act l' 10 teach that man descended from lower order of animals and that whom this Is accomplished by 2 fail interpolation and by legal impica tton, the whole offcnse is proved That is, the state eays, that the lat ter clause interpretS and rXplain' what the lcgislatUre meant and in tended by tne Use cf the claus any theory that denies the story Q divine creation as taught in th Bible
 "Dut the fond3nt is not oonthn 10 agree with the state in it's theory but takes issue and says that before there can be any conviction the stat must proro two things.
 First. that the defendant taugh evolution in the sense used in th' etatute,
 "second. that thiq teaching va contrary to the Riblo.
 That these gro questions of fact that the proof must show what evo luton Is. so that the jury may d." tcrnnA whether e~olu'ion az taugh by the defendant conflicts with th' Bible; that if Is not merely what thu defendant eaia or what inc hool taught, and that they cannot do thi without evidence, That is that th defendant must have taught th descent of man from q lower origin Of animals and a theory contrary 4 that of divine creation as taught h, the Bible That tho teaching nf "ltho would not be crime.