Page:The World's Most Famous Court Trial - 1925.djvu/229

Rh culminated in man possessed of both animal and divine elements.

The theory of evolution is an attempt to explain the process in detail. It does not take place in a vacuum, but in an environment in which is God. Genesis and evolution are complementary to each other, Genesis emphasizing the divine first cause and science the details of the process through which God works. This view that evolution is not contrary to Genesis is held by many conservative evangelical theologians, such as Strong, Hall, Micou, Harris and Johnson. Mullins also holds to a theistic evolution."

Mr. Hays then read the statement of Dr. Fay Cooper Cole, anthropologist, University of Chicago; the Statement of Kirtley F, Mather, chairman of department of geology, of Harvard university, and the statement of Dr. Winterton C. Curtis, zoologist, University of Missouri.

At 11:40 a. m., during the reading of Dr. Curtis' statement, the further hearing of this case was adjourned to 1:30 p. m., when the following proceedings were had:

Gen. Stewart—This morning the court read a citation to one of the counsel for the defense, referring to a certain matter which occurred here on Friday and during the noon hour I conferred with some of the gentlementgentlemen [sic] for the defense, particularly the gentleman involved, Mr. Darrow, and Mr, Darrow has a statement that he wants to make at this time and I think it is proper that your honor hear him and I want to ask the court to hear the statement.

The Court—All right, I will hear you, Col. Darrow.

Mr. Darrow—Your honor, quite apart from any question of what is right or wrong in this matter which your honor mentioned and which I will discuss in a moment—quite apart from that, and on my own account if nothing else was involved, I would feel that I ought to say what I am going to say. Of course, your honor will remember that whatever took place was hurried, one thing followed another and the truth is I did not know just how it looked until I read over the minutes as your honor did and when I read them over I was sorry that I bad said it. This is not all I am going to say—I am just going to preface it. So on Friday I determined immediately on reading it over I would tell the court just what I thought about it this morning. In the meantime, I had seen the paper which stated that the court thought that I was trying to get in position where I would be held in contempt and they thought so and the like and I was at loss what to do, but I knew your honor wanted to be heard first. Now I want to say that what I say is in good faith, regardless of what your honor may think, it is right for you to do. But I say it because I think I ought to say it for myself. I have been practicing law for forty-seven years and I have been pretty busy and most of the time in court I have had many a case where I have had to do what I have been doing here—fighting the public opinion of the people, in the community where I was trying the case—even in my own town and I never yet have in all my time had any criticism by the court for anything I have done in court. That is, I have tried to treat the court fairly and a little more than fairly because when I recognize the odds against me, I try to lean the ether way the best I can and I don't think any such occasion ever arose before in my practice. I am not saying this, your honor, to influence you, but to put myself right. I do think, however, your honor, that I went further than I should have gone. So far as its having been premeditated or made for the purpose of insult to the court I had not the slightest thought of that. I had not the slightest thought of that. One thing snapped out after another, as other lawyers have done in this case, nol, however, where the judge was involved, and apologized for it afterwards, and so far as the people of Tennessee are concerned, your honor suggested that in your opinion—I don't know as I