Evening star., 1925-07-28

| Some take it seriously
! There is not a university in the
world of any high standing where
| the professors do not tell you about
| Nietzsche and discuss him. or where
| the books are not there.
If this boy is to blame for this,
| where did he get it? Is there any
| blame attached because somebody
! took Nietzsche's philosophy seriously
and fashioned his life upon it? And
| there is no question in this case but
| what that is true. Then who is to
| blame? The university would be
more to blame than he is; the schol-
ars Of the world would be more sto
blame than he is. The publishers
| of the world are more to
blame than ne is. Your Honor it is
hardly fair to hang a 19-year-old boy
| for the philosophy that was taught
him at the university. 1t does not
| meet my ideas of justice and fair
ness to visit upon his head the phi
| losophy that has been taught by uni
versity men for 25 years
Blames Universities.
'In fairness to Mr.. Darrow, | think
l ought to quote two more para.
! graphs. After this bold attempt to
| excuse the student on the ground that
| n
| ing youth into a murderer by the
| philosophy of an atheist, and on the
| further ground that this philosophy
| was in the libraries of all the col
| leges and discussed by the professors
| I-some adopting the philosophy and
| some rejecting it-on these two
| grounds he denies that the boy should
| be held responsible for the taking OF
! human life. He charges that the
/
responsible than the boy and that
| the universities were more response
! BILE than the boy, because they fur
nished such books to the students, anc
| then he proceeds to exonerate the
universities and the scholars, leaving
nobody responsible. Here is Mr.. Oar
rows language:
! Now, 1 do not want to be mis-
understood about this. Even for the
| sake of saving the lives Of my clients
| ] do not want to be dishonest and tel
! the court something that / do not hon
estly think in this case. l do not
! think that the universities are Il
blame. l do not think they should bt
held responsible. l do think, how
ever, that they are too large, and thai
| they should keep a closer watch, i
possible, upon the individual.
DamnabIe Philosophy.
but you cannot destroy though
because, forsooth, some brain ma!
be deranged by thought. 1t is tn,
duty of the university, as 1 conceive
it, to be the greatest storehouse o
the wisdom of the ages, and to have
its students come there and learn anC
choose. l have no doubt but wha
it has meant the death of many, bu
that we cannot help
This is a damnabIe philosophy, anC
yet it is the flower that blooms OF
the stalk of evolution. Mr.. Darrov
thinks the universities are in duty
bound to feed out this poisonous stuff
TO their students, and when the
students become stupefied by it anC
commit murder, neither they nor tn,
universities are to blame l am sure
your honor, and gentlemen of thu
jury, that you agree with me wheI
/ protest against the adoption of any
such philosophy in the State O
Tennessee. A criminal is not relieved
from responsibility merely because HI
found Nietzsche's philosophy in
library which ought not to contain
1t. Neither is the university guilt
less if it permits such corruptinl
nourishment to be fed to the souls
that are intrusted to it's care But
go step farther, would the Stat,
be blameless if it permitted the uni
versitieS under its control to bt
turned into training schools for mur
derers? When you get back to the
root of this question you will finC
that the Legislature not only had {
right to protect the students from the
evolutionary hypothesis, but was il
duty bound to do so.
Quotes Loeb Defense.
While on this subject, let me cal
your attention to another proposition
embodied in Mr.. Darrows speech He
said that Dicky Loeb, the younger
boy, had read trashy novels, of the
blood and thunder sort. He even wen
so far as to commend an IHinoi:
statute which forbids minors readinl
stories of crime. Here is what Mr.
DarroW said: We have a statute il
this State, passed only last year, if
recall it, which forbids minors readinE
stories of crime. Why? There is ONLY
one reason; because the Legislature. il
it's wisdom, thought it would have
tendency to produce these thought.
and this life in the boys who reaC
lthem.'
IF Illinois can protect her boys
why cannot this State protect the
boys of Tennessee? Are the boys o
Illinois any more precious thai
yours?
But to return to the philosophy O
an evolutionist. Mr.. Darrow said: :
say to you seriously that the parents
of Dicky Loeb are more responsible,
than he, and yet few boys had better
parents again, he SAYS
I know that one of two things hap
pened to this boy; that this terrible
crime was inherent in his organism
and came from some ancestor, or tha
it came through his education and hi
training after he was born HI
thinks the boy was not responsible fo
anything; his guilt was due, accord
ing to his philosophy, either to hered
ity or environment.
But let me complete Mr.. Darrow
philosophy based on evolution. HI
says: L do not know what remot,
ancestor may have sent down the seet
that corrupted him. and l do not know
through how many ancestors it ma!
have passed until it reached Dick,
Loeb. All I know is, it is true, ant
there is not a biologist in the worlC
who will not say 1 am right.
Menace to Worlds Morals.
Psychologists who build upon tn,
evolutionary hypothesis teach tha
man is nothing but a bundle of char
, acteristics inherited from brute an
cestorS. That is the philosoph!
which Mr.. Darrow applied in this cele
brated criminal case. Some remote
ancestor'-he does not know how re
mote-'sent down the seed that cor
rupted him. You cannot punish tn,
ancestor-he is not only dead, but, &C
Cording to the evolutionists, he wa!
q brute and may have lived a mil
lion years ago. And he says that al
the biologists agree with him-nC
wonder so small a per cent of th'
biologists, according to Leuba, believe
in a personal God.
| This is the ouintessence of evOlu