The Indianapolis times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1922-1965, 1925-07-16
CRISIS REACHED
In SCOPES CASE
Continued From Page y

Continued From Page u
would have the opening and clos.
ing argument on the question and
the defense seeking the same adj
vantage for themselves.
Lawyers Cautioned
Judge Raulston had to caution the
attorneys not to fight among them
selves, but to address all remarks
to him.
Prosecuting Attorney Stewart pre-
scented to the court a motion to ex-
clude the scientific testimony on the
ground that under the interpreta'
ton Of the wording of the act, it
would be entirely incompetent.
Dudley F. Malone Of the defense
followed Stewart to insist that the
agreement entered into by the two
stats Friday to take up the ques-
ton of scientific testimony out of
order be adhered to.
Bryan Jr., Speaks
William Jennings Bryan Jr.,
opened argument for the prosecu-
ton.
ION your honor's ruling will de-
termine whether this case will be an
orderly case, or whether it will de-
generate into a debate on whether
evolution conflicts with the Bible.
said young Bryan. This expert
evidence, as being offered on evolu-
ton, is challenged by the State as
incompetent, irrelevant and i'm
material.
at have heard many harsh things
said about expert witnesses. Even
my friend Darrow, in the Loeb trial
referred to an expert witness as a
purveyor Of perjury 1 don't think
I have heard anything stronger than
that.
Testimony Dangerous"
''This kind Of testimony has al
ways been regarded by conservative
jurors with great disfavor."
"'T'he danger of such testimony
is that jurors may substitute such
opinions for their own" young
Bryan read from one of the prece-
dents.
w. ]. Bryan, Sr.. moved out
from the prosecution table and
leaned forward in his chair. listen
ing intently to his son, and tanning
himself with rapid strokes.
The trial got down to brass tacks"
yesterday, after FIVE days Of w1'an-
Cling, confusion and delay.
First Witnesses Called
Judge Raulston's ruling on the
defense's motion to quash was an
nounced, holding the anti-evolution
law constitutional. Scopes pleaded
not guilty. the jury was sworn, the
defense's demurrer was overruled,
the prosecution put on four wit
nesses and rested it's case and the
defense put the first of its scientific
witnesses on.
Darrow called Professor Mstcalfe.
front rank zoologist, to tho stand
to explain evolution to the jury.
Immediate objection was made by
the prosecution to the introduction
of Metcalf's or any other scientists
evidence. barrow asked that the
matter be argued and the judge con-
scented.
Prosecution Surprised
IT want all the light I can get
on the subject. gentlemen" said
Judge Raulston, because the matter
is extremely important and the most
difficult upon which I will have to
rule"
The defense sprang a surprise on
the prosecution by demanding that
proof be given by them regarding
what is the Bible"
Stewart introduced in evidence a
copy of the King James version with
which to prove that Scopes taught
theories contrary to the Bibles ac-
count of the creation of man. The
defense strongly objected. saying
there were literally scores Of differ
ent versions and the State would
have to establish exactly what is the
Bible. More will be heard on this
question later, If the scientific testi-