Evening star., 1925-07-16
STATE OPENS FIGHT
TO BAN EXPERTS AS
SCOPES WITNESSES
Would Permit Dangerous
Abuse, w. J. Bryan, Jr.,
Says in Debate.
VITAL TO INFORM JURY,
DEFENSE RElTERATES
Judge Admits Question One That
He Cannot Decide Without
Some Study.
Rx the Associated Press.


to exclude testimony of scientists.
The defense was prepared to put
up a determined fight to get testi-
mony into the record from qualified
experts on the subject of evolution
and its relation to the Bible.
William Jennings Bryan, jr., opened
the argument for the State. He was
followed by Arthur G. Hays for the
defense, with Attorney General Stew
art closing for the State.
The jury, excluded from the court
room yesterday during the testimony
of DR.. Maynard NJ. Metcalf, a test
Witness" still was out of the room.
DIR. Metcalf, a zoologist, gave testi-
mony of evolution yesterday to show
the nature of the evidence the de-
fense would insist on.
Bryan, Jr., Enters Debate.
The argument by w. ]. Bryan. jr.,
marked his first appearance before
the court. He characterized the eX-
pert testimony suggested by the de-
fense as the weakest, the mostcapa-
BILE of abuse and the most danger
Gus"
He said that Clarence Darrow, de-
fense attorney in the LoebLeopold
trial, characterized experts as ''pur-
During his sons speech. William
Jennings Bryan sat just behind him
and listened intently to every word,
leaning forward at intervals to hear.
Finally the Florida man moved his
chair and took a seat several fleet
nearer.
In support of his contention that
testimony should be confined TO the
facts, young Bryan cited numerous
authorities.
The defendant, seated with his
counsel, listened with his elbows on
q table and apparently followed the
argument closely. S
THE only issue this Jury must de-
eide is whether or not John Thomas
Scopes violated the law" Bryan said.
ITO permit testimony by experts
would be TO substitute trial by experts
for trial by jury"
Among the authorities cited by Mr.
Bryan during the course of his brief
were many decisions by the Supreme
Court Of Tennessee.
Hays Makes Reply.
Arthur Garfield Hays replied for the
defense.
First" he said, the prosecution
insisted upon the jury's not hearing
the law; now they insist upon its not
hearing the facts.
I'VE admit that Mr.. Scopes taught
what the State witnesses said he
taught; not that he violated the law
by doing so. !, for one, must be
shown that there is variance between
what he taught and the Bible.
Our scientists are not here to give
opinions. They are here to state the
facts of science. None of them are
paid experts. They come here in the
interest of science.
Does your honor or any one else
know what evolution is without hear
ing the evidence?
IF your honor says that opinion
evidence may not be produced, may
not evidence of the facts be intro
duced?" he continued.
He contended that even if Scopes
had taught that man had descended
from monkey, he would not have
taught that he was descended from a
lower order of animals, since both
man and monkey were classified in
the same order of animals, as pri-
mater.
He argued that under the law any
thing was relevant as evidence that
tended to throw light upon the subject
in question
Asks to Explain Evolution.
they be allowed to show what evolu-
tion is and what the Bible is.
Even if on no other ground he
argued, this evidence should be ad-
mitted as information for the court"
During Mr.. Hays argument Judge
Raulston questioned the attorney as
70 his understanding as'to Mr.. Whites
testimony yesterday in regard to the
expiration of contract authorizing
text books.
John r. Neal interposed to say that
the contract had expired but no sub
stitute had been provided, leaving the
books in full force.
w. j. Bryan spoke in the case for
the second time, rising to suggest that
the passage of the statute prohibiting
the teaching of evolution theories sus-
pended all text books in conflict with
the law.
Another bit of side play came up
when Mr.. Hays spoke of Mr.. Bryan"
suggesting that perhaps he should say
the distinguished leader of the prose
cution."
The court remarked that William
Jennings Bryan, sr., had not vet
made an argument in the case and
anything he might have said outside
the courtroom would not be compe-
tent discussion in argument. Mr..
Bryan called attention to the fact
that he was not the leader of the
prosecution, but merely associate
counsel, and that Attorney General
Stewart was in charge of the States
case.
Stewart Explains Status.
Mr.. Stewart announced that he
''bowed" to Mr.. Bryan. Mr. HAYS
resumed. and the argument went on
Herbert E. Hicks followed with a
speech stressing the States position
that scientific testimony has no place
in the case.
Mr.. Hicks stated that the State
would resist any effort to convert the
courtroom into a high school or col
lege. The proposed scientific testi,
mony would bring another jury into
the case, he said. He suggested that
the State should have a right to chal-
lenge three without cause and the
whole bunch" 70. cause.
Ben T. Mckenzie. former attorney
general, spoke in support of the States
CONTINUED ~on Page .5r Column.2.l~