Q—It would take evidence to change it?
A—Yes, sir.
Q—A good deal of it, would not it?
A—Well, I suppose it would.
Mr. Darrow—Challenge him for cause.
Mr. Stewart—Challenge for cause.
The Court—Let me ask him? Yes.
Q—Would that opinion of evolution have any weight with you in determining whether or not this defendant is guilty or innocent?
A—No, sir.
Q—It would not?
A—No sir.
The Court—I do not want to prejudge a question that I may have to pass on tomorrow. I believe I will excuse Mr. Ferguson.
Mr. Stewart—We except to that, if the court please.
The Court—I want to hear you on that, before I pass on it, it looks like it is up to them.
Mr. Stewart—We have some authorities we will be glad to submit to the court. Of course, if your honor is to excuse a man, we will not do that.
The Court—That is the very question you are to argue before me tomorrow. I take it, at great length.
Mr. Stewart—No, sir, a different matter. Of course, if a man is subject to a challenge by the defendant because he believes the Bible conflicts with the theory of evolution as he understands it, if that gives them a ground to challenge for cause, then, for the converse reason the state would have ground to challenge for cause and the result would be everybody on earth who could be brought here, would be challenged.
The Court—Let me see, the statute says it shall be unlawful to teach any theory that conflicts with the story of the Divine creation of man, as taught by the Bible.
Mr. Stewart—Yes, the result is, the defense will challenge every man who does not believe in evolution, if the court's ruling is correct. That would given the state the right to challenge every man who does believe in the theory of evolution; we would have the same right to challenge that the defense would. The result is, everybody who was capable of having an opinion at all, would be subject to challenge by one side or the other.
Mr. Darrow—I think, your honor, that statement is hardly correct. If you can find one that believes in it we will promptly challenge him.
J. S. Wright, being duly sworn and examined on the voir dire testified:
Examination by the court:
Q—Are you a householder or freeholder of this county?
A—Yes, sir.
Q—Are you related to Walter White, the prosecutor, or John T. Scopes, the defendant?
A—No, sir.
Q—Have you formed or expressed an opinion as to the guilt or innocence of this defendant?
A—No, sir.
Q—You have no opinion as to the guilt or innocence, at all, Mr. Wrght?
A—No, sir.
Q—You have heard of the case?
A—Yes, sir.
Q—You have not heard any of the proof?
A—No, sir.
Q—Have no bias or leaning either way?
A—No, sir.
Q—Have not studied evolution at all?
A—No, sir.
Q—So you have no opinion in any way about it?
A—No, sir.
The Court—Competent.
Mr. McKenzie—What church do you belong to, Mr. Wright?
A—Belong to the Baptist.
Mr. McKenzie—Pass him to you, Colonel.
Examination by Col. Darrow:
Q—You are a farmer?
A—Yes, sir.
Q—Live near here?
A—No, sir; live at Spring City.
Q—How far away is Spring City, five miles about?
A—Yes, sir; about sixteen.
Q—Have a farm of your own?
A—Yes, sir.
Q—You live in this county most of your life, I presume, or all of it?
