Page:The World's Most Famous Court Trial - 1925.djvu/127

 Court—Well, you may inspect it and cross-examine the witness about it.

Mr. Darrow—No—Just a minute. Not just any Bible.

Gen. Stewart—Of course we were going into the story of the creation.

Mr. Darrow—We want it so we can get a copy of the same book; that is all.

Gen. Stewart—This is the—

Mr. Darrow—Scofield.

Gen. Stewart—Holman's Pronouncing Edition of the Holy Bible, containing the Old and New Testaments. Translating—Text comformable to that of 1611, known as the authorized or King James version.

Mr. Hays—Now, if the purpose is to offer this book in evidence, we take exception to it. The act provides that one shall not teach a certain theory, different from what is taught in the Bible, and now he undertakes to provide that he shall not teach a theory contrary to the St. James' version of the Bible. If the court should take judicial notice of this exhibit as the Bible, you must likewise take judicial notice that there are various Bibles. And the King James' version is not necessarily the Bible and when they introduce one book in evidence, we are saying there are several different books called the Bible. It is not relevant unless those books are the same. You know there is a Hebrew Bible, of some thirty-nine books; and there is a Protestant Bible, and a Catholic Bible—the Protestant of sixty-six and the Catholic of eighty books; and you have the King James' version, and a revised version and there are 30,000 differences between the King James' version and it. You have the King James' version and it. You have the King James version here; there are thousands of Bibles. Who is to say that the King James version is the Bible. The prosecution will have to prove what Bible it is, and they will have to state the theory as taught in the Bible, and I presume the prosecution will be able to point out which theory of the creation as taught in the Bible they relied upon in prosecuting Mr. Scopes. We will insist upon an answer to this question. In People vs. Ring, an Illinois case, the court says:

Mr. Malone—What publishers?

Gen. Stewart—A. J. Holman & Co., Philadelphia, publishers.

Mr. Darrow—I didn't know the edition exactly. I am sure we can get that on sale here, can't we.

Gen. Stewart—How is that?

Mr. Darrow—Do you know whether we can find that on sale here?

Gen. Stewart—Yes, sir, you can find that same edition on sale, I think, at Robinson's drug store.

The Court—Of course, you can certify it. It is a Bible in common use. If we can't find it, we will have to get an extra one in the case, when we—I take it that another copy of this same Bible can be secured without difficulty, surely, at Mr. Robinson's.

Mr. Darrow—In this small town, I don't know.

Court—If you can't get that here, you can get it in some other town.

Direct examination of Mr. White continues by Gen. Stewart:

Q—On Pages 194 and 195 of this book, (biology) where the doctrine of evolution and the evolutionary tree is shown by a drawing. Did Mr. Scopes say that he reviewed that about the 20th of April, with the rest of the book?

A—It is my understanding that he reviewed the important parts of the book and that he reviewed that part, that refers to Charles Darwin's theory of evolution.

Q—And the same thing applies on Pages 252 and 253 and Pages 254 and 255?

A—Yes, sir.

Q—Which would refer to evolution?

Mr. Darrow—I turned down the leaves of that.

Gen. Stewart—They are marked right now. I want to call attention to the particular parts of that book.

Mr. Darrow—They are marked here.