Trial Summary: Day Five
July 16, 1925
Minneapolis Daily Star. July 16, 1925
The trial was set to resume with Darrow’s direct examination of Dr. Metcalf, but began with a dispute about whether expert testimony would be allowed in the trial. After Darrow’s argument that they should be heard, William Jennings Bryan, Jr., argued that “there is one place where expert testimony may never, in any event, be received; and that is where it is upon the very issue that the jury is to determine, and that is the situation in this case.” By this point in the trial, the second-floor courtroom had become so packed with journalists and spectators that Raulston raised concerns about the floor potentially buckling. He asked for order in the court so as not to cause a collapse.
In the afternoon session, Bryan addressed the legal arguments regarding the caption and body of the Butler Act, arguing that the law was sound. As Bryan saw it, the defense’s use of experts came too late and such evidence should have been presented to the legislature before the bill was passed. Bryan then gave a long, impassioned speech against evolution, presenting his view that evolution detracted from the dignity and unique status of humans, who were closer to God and should not be reduced to another class of mammal. Further, he expressed that teaching children the theory of evolution undermined the religious faith of children instilled by their parents.
In response, Malone spoke for the defense, arguing in favor of scientific inquiry and the pursuit of knowledge instead of religious restrictions on knowledge: “For God’s sake let the children have their minds kept open—close no doors to their knowledge; shut no door from them. Make the distinction between theology and science. Let them have both. Let them both be taught. Let them both live!” Malone’s speech was met with loud applause, and the assembled press gave him a standing ovation. Even J.W. Butler, the sponsor of the Butler Act, said it was “the finest speech of the century.”
Prosecutor Tom Stewart closed the day by arguing that the testimony of defense experts should be excluded, explaining the legislature’s intent in passing the Butler Act and his belief in the right to faith in the age of scientific process. Judge Raulston adjourned the court with a plan to rule on the admissibility of scientific evidence the following day.