Evening star., 1925-05-26

Tennessee's sensation over what
some editors facetiously call the mon
key law" Is echoing through the coun-
try. with William Jennings Bryan's
contention that the hand that writes
the teachers pay check should control
the school supplying the basis of much
Of the discussion. The question, to be
fought out in the courts. is whether
Tennessee can enforce a State law
against teaching the doctrine Of evolu-
tion in the public schools. There are
vigorous champions of the right of
State to regulate its institutions, but
a great many editors insist that the
question is whether truth shall be
limited by law. Inevitably Mr.. Bryan
has become something Of the storm
center since he volunteered to assist
in upholding the States case.
1T will not be for the court to de-
termine" asserts the Chattanooga
Times, whether evolution is or is not
a sound doctrine; that is for. the con-
science Of the individual citizen to de-
eide. The courts, therefore, will have
only to determine whether the Legisla-
ture has a right to deny the youth of
the State information with respect Of
life and its continued opportunities for
advancement and growth" The consti-
tutional issue is emphasized also by
the Knoxville Sentinel. which declares
that the only question that will be de-
termined by the courts will be as to
"the right and authority of the Legis-
lature to restrict the freedom Of
thought and inquiry on scientific and
religious subjects On the question of
evolution, however, the Sentinel holds
that I'VE are becoming of such a
sameness of thinking, or of echoing
the things we are told to think about
political and economic affairs, as well
as intellectual matters, that it Is well
to differ about something occasionally
to see whether we still have the power
to differ
A battle royal" in Tennessee is
predicted by the Charlotte Observer,
which believes that some readers
may be surprised by the statement of
Judge John r. Neal. leading counsel
for Prof. j. c. Scopes, at Dayton, that
examination of the text books pre-
scribed by the State Uniform Text
Book Commission shows that all the
books OF science prescribed by law
in Tennessee are based on the Darwin
theory Of evolution" The Observer
further quotes Judge Neal as saying
that If the statute Is declared conSti-
tutional others will be prosecuted to
make it unpopular.
X X X v
Uc SHlOICSlilcIll VI ldW dS SAcLlpll-
fed in this case Is upheld by the
Altoona Mirror, which states: I'VE
may be strong adherents to the theory
of evolution. But Tennessee had the
right to exclude evolutionary teaching
from her schools. The high school
instructor who has def1ed the State
is clearly in the wrong, and thatewith-
out reference to the correctness Of his
theory. Any constitutional law must
be obeyed until repealed"
I The broad question of tho freedom
Of the teacher is taken up by several
newspapers as applying to all educa-
tional institutions, and Mr.. Bryan's s
attitude Is energetically assailed. I'VE
want our children, to be taught the
truth, as 1t is understood by the mind
and conscience of the men and wom-
ZEN to whom we intrust the work" F"
says the Wisconsin State Journal. ITO
place teaching on any other basis, and
particularly to place 1t on the basis
80 BADLY laid down by Mr.. Bryan, is
to degrade it beyond the hope Of use
fulness."
Mr. Bryan's intention to strike a
blow ''at education in these United
States is seen by the Hartford Times,
which argues: THE implication is
that truth has nothing to do with
teaching. but that the function of
schools is to teach whatever dogmas
local majority happens at given
moment to approve. Could anything
be more deadly?"
THE vital issue in the test case is
not that of whether Darwinism and
Christianity can or cannot be recon-
ciled, but the even greater one of
|Thether the inquiry Tor truth shall be