Evening star., 1925-07-28

u Continued from flISI IdSe.f
faith in the Bible as the word of
Cod
This indictment we prove by com.
pairing the processes described as evo-
lutionary with the text of Genesis, -
he said.
Our second indictment" the ad-
dress said, lis that the evolutionary
hypothesis carried to its logical con-
clusion disputes every vital truth of
the Bible. Its tendency. naturally, if
not inevitably, is to lead those who
really accept ii first TO agnoSticiSm
and then to atheism
The third indictment against evo-
luton was that it diverts attention
from pressing problems of great inn
portance TO trifiinS speculation
Sees Reform ParaIyzed.
"Our fourth indictment against the
evolutionary hypothesis is that, by
paralyzing the hope of reform, ii dis
courages those who labor for the inn
provement of mans condition. Mr.
Bryan said.
The fifth charge brought was that
IF taken seriously and made the
basis of the philosophy Of life (eyo-
lution) would eliminate love and carry
man back TO a struggle of tooth and
claw"
Clarence Darrow and his conduct of
the defense in the Leopold-Loeb MUIR
der case brought lengthy criticism
from the fundamentalist champion,
under the question he asked:
DO bad doctrines corrupt the
morals of students?"
Reviewing quoted excerpts from
Darrow's plea in behalf of Babe
Leopold because he had become
"enamored of the philosophy Of Metz
sche" Mr.. Bryan declared: This is
damnable philosophy, and yet it is the
flower that blooms on the stalk of
evolution. Mr.. Darrow thinks the
universities are in duty bound to feed
out this poisonous stuff to their stu
dents, and when the students become
stupified by 1t and commit murder
neither they nor the university are
to blame"
Mr.. Bryan went into a discussion
of science, declaring that science
lis a magnificent material force, but
it is not a teacher of morals" And
that evolution is at war with religion
because religion is supernatural He
claimed that science needs religion to
inspire with lofty purposes those who
employ the forces that are unloosed
by science. Christianity, he said,
cannot remain indifferent.
The text of Mr.. Bryan's address
follows:
May it please the court, and gentle
men of the jury.
"Demosthenes. the greatest of
ancient orators, in his Grafton on the
crown, the most famous OF his
speeches, began by supplicating the
favor of all the gods and goddesses
of Greece. If, in a case which in
volved only his own fame and fate,
he felt justified in petitioning the
heather gods of his country, surely
we, who deal with the momentous
issues involved in this case, may we'll
pray to the Ruler of the Universe for
a wisdom TO guide us in the perform
ance of our several parts in this
historic trial.
LET me in the first place congratu-
late our cause that circumstances
have committed the trial to a COM
munity like this and intrusted the
decisions to a jury made up largely
of the yeomanry of the State. The
book in issue in this trial contains on
it's first page two pictures contrasting
the disturbing noises of a great city
with the calm serenity of the country.
1t is a tribute that rural life has fully
earned.
Appreciates Honesty.
II appreciate the sturdy honesty and
independence of those who come into
living near to nature, worship
natures God, and who, dealing with
the myriad mysteries of earth and
air, seek to learn from revelation
about the Bibles wonder-workinS God.
I admire the stern virtues, the vigi-
lance and the patriotism of the class
from which the jury is drawn, and
am reminded of the lines of Scotland's
immortal bard, which, when changed
but slightly describe your country'S
confidence in you:
"Oh, Scotia, my dear, my native soil,
For whom my warmest wish to
Heaven is sent,
Long may thy hardy sons of rustic
toll
Be blest with health and peace and
sweet content,
And, oh, may Heav'n their simple
lives present
From luXury's Contagion, weak and
vile
Then, howeer crowns and coronets be
rent,
A virtuous populace may rise the
while,
And stand, wall of fire, around
their muCh-loved isle"
Denies Freedom Curbed.
Let us now separate the issues
from the misrepresentation inten-
tional or unintentional that have OBJ
scured both the letter and the purpose
of the law. This is not an interference
with freedom of conscience. A teacher
can think as he pleases and worship
God as he likes, or refuse to worship
God at all. He can believe in the Bible
or discard it; he can accept Christ or
reject Him. This law places no obliga-
tionS or restraints upon him. And so
with freedom of speech. He can, so
long as he acts as an individual, say
anything he like on any subject. This
law does not violate any rights guar
anteed by any constitution to any in
dividual. 1t deals with the defendant,
not as an individual, but as an en-
ploye, an official or public servant,
paid by the State, and therefore, un-
der instructions from th4 State.
The right of the State tb control the
public schools is affirmed in the recent
decision in the Oregon case, which de-
clares that the State can direct what
shall be taught, and also forbid the
teaching of anything 'manifestly in
imical to the public welfare The
above decision goes even farther, and
declares that the parent not only has
the right to guard the religious well
fare of the child, but is in duty bound
TO guard it. That decision fits this
case exactly. The State had d right
to pass this law, and the law repre-
sents the determination of the parents
to guard the religious welfare of their
children"
Law Is Christians Protection
u