Remembering the Scopes Monkey Trial

While writing a few weeks ago about the B.C. teachers’ reluctance to administer province-wide standardized tests, I was reminded of the 1925 case of State v. Scopes in Tennessee.  That trial went on to be known as the “Scopes Monkey Trial” and is perhaps the most celebrated example of a court addressing an employee’s obligation to follow workplace rules.

The trial pitted the forces of creationism and evolutionism against each other, with nothing short of the origins of the universe up for grabs.  Although ultimately more of a curiosity than a serious exploration of the issues, the case has gone on to fame spawning books, movies, documentaries and much academic comment.

The story of the Scopes monkey trial started in March of 1925 with the Tennessee House of Representatives’ passage of the Butler Act.  The Butler Act made it unlawful, in any state-funded school, to teach any theory denying the Biblical story of the divine creation of man and to assert that man is “descended from a lower order of animals”.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) quickly sought to finance a case to test the constitutionality of the Butler Act.  The ACLU’s view was that the Butler Act was designed to benefit a particular religious group and was, therefore, unconstitutional.  It found a willing participant in one John T. Scopes, a teacher at Clark County High School in Dayton, Tennessee.

Scopes was duly charged with having taught in class from a textbook chapter on evolution.  His trial commenced in early July, 1925 (clearly, the wheels of justice moved more quickly a century ago).

The trial in Dayton had the trappings of a heavyweight bout.  The lead counsel, William Jennings Bryan for the pro-creationist prosecution, and Clarence Darrow for the pro-evolutionist defence, were political and legal giants of the time.

Bryan had been a 3-time democratic candidate for the Presidency of the United States and had also served as Secretary of State.  He was a noted orator on many topics including prohibition and his opposition to the evolutionary theories of Charles Darwin.

Darrow was one of America’s most famous lawyers and might have been at the top of his game in 1925.  His career was not without controversy – having been charged at one point with attempted bribery of jurors – but he was a leading ACLU member and was regarded as one of America’s foremost civil libertarians.

The trial in Dayton, Tennessee was attended by hundreds of onlookers and journalists and commanded wide international attention.  The event seemingly turned Dayton into something resembling a carnival – one report mentioned trained chimpanzees performing on the courthouse lawn.  The trial was broadcast on national radio and famed journalist H.L. Mencken reported daily – Mencken apparently coined the phrase “monkey trial”.

In a narrow sense, the trial was simply about the issue of whether or not Scopes had breached the Butler Act by teaching evolutionary theory in class.  Both Bryan and Darrow, however, had greater objectives.

At the trial, there was really no attempt by the defence to deny that Scopes had breached the Act.  Scopes himself seemingly faded into the background and didn’t even end up testifying in his own defence.  The defence team had its eyes on an appeal to the State Supreme Court, where it could fully argue the constitutionality of the Butler Act.

Darrow attempted to call as witnesses a series of experts on evolutionary theory to attack the literal interpretation of the Bible but this effort was frustrated.  As a result, he instead called Bryan (counsel for the prosecution) as a witness on the basis that Bryan was one of America’s foremost students of the Bible - this unorthodox twist provided the trial with its most dramatic moments.

Here was a one-on-one, no-holds-barred confrontation between science and faith.  Turning the event into even more of a sideshow, the trial judge convened the session on the courthouse lawn.  It also seems that the jury was not present for this phase – throwing into question whether Darrow’s examination of Bryan had any legal value at all.

For several hours, Darrow and Bryan bickered over various aspects of creationist theory as captured in the Bible.  Darrow badgered Bryan, mocking him and his knowledge of Biblical theory.

Typical of the clash was one skirmish, after the purpose of Darrow’s examination was called into question.

Bryan:  The purpose is to cast ridicule on everybody who believes in the Bible, and I am perfectly willing that the world shall know that these gentlemen have no other purpose than ridiculing every Christian who believes in the Bible.

Darrow:  We have the purpose of preventing bigots and ignoramuses from controlling the education of the United States, and you know it, and that is all.

They squabbled about topics ranging from the swallowing of Jonah by a whale, to the likely impact of the earth coming to a standstill, the date of the great flood, the age of the earth, the origin of Cain’s wife, and the temptation of Eve by the serpent.

Eventually, the judge brought the spectacle to a halt and ordered it “expunged” from the record.  Although subsequent dramatizations show Darrow scoring a knockout victory, the transcript shows Bryan effectively sidestepping (and, at times, turning the tables and making a bit of a monkey out of Darrow).  At best, the historic battle might be characterized a draw.

Darrow, for the defence, then asked the judge to direct the jury to find Scopes guilty as charged (and deprived Bryan, for the prosecution, of his primary opportunity to pontificate by way of a closing statement).

Scopes was found guilty of having breached the Butler Act and was fined $100.  On appeal, the Supreme Court of Tennessee overturned the conviction on the basis of a procedural irregularity and that was the end of the matter.  William Jennings Bryan died in his sleep only 5 days later.

The Butler Act was repealed in 1967.  A year later, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that such statutes were unconstitutional.

Scopes and Darrow and Bryan and the courts of Tennessee proved incapable of resolving the mysteries of the universe once and for all.  But they set a precedent for many future conflicts over the right of the employer, and the state, to dictate the actions of employees.