Trial Summary: Day One
July 10, 1925
Minneapolis Daily Star. July 10, 1925
The trial began with a prayer given by Reverend Cartwright. The defense did not like having a prayer in a case involving religious controversy but did not make an issue of it—at least not right away. The first order of business was to empanel a grand jury to re-indict Scopes, since the original jury indictment was not properly done. Judge Raulston charged the new grand jury by reading the Butler Act, and, because it was alleged that Scopes had taught a doctrine denying the story of the Divine creation of man, the judge also read the first chapter of Genesis. Judge Raulston instructed the grand jurors that their task was simply to determine whether Scopes violated the Act, and not to consider their opinions of the legislation. He also informed them that a violation of the Butler Act was a misdemeanor.
After Scopes was re-indicted, Darrow asked the judge about the defense’s expert witnesses they planned to introduce. The defense had lined up nationally known experts who were willing to travel to Dayton, but they anticipated that the prosecution would object to the admissibility of expert testimony. The defense and prosecution conferred on the matter, and Stewart announced to the court that the defense’s efforts to introduce expert testimony would be “resisted by the state as vigorously as we know how to resist it.”
Tom Stewart, a member of the prosecution team, suggested they select a jury before arguing the expert testimony issue. Stewart and Darrow both requested that they adjourn for the rest of the day due to the heat. Judge Raulston decided that they should stay in session for two hours to begin the jury selection process. A jury of twelve local men, likely sympathetic to the prosecution, was selected in about two and a half hours. This was short by Darrow’s standards, as he typically considered jury selection to be of great importance. However, the jury was acceptable to the defense team since there was little alternative, and a conviction of Scopes would allow them to appeal the case and review the constitutionality of the Butler Act. The main aim of the defense team was to create a strong trial court record of evidence and arguments that would be useful on appeal.