Prohibition and Evolution AIM: What fueled the moral crusade against alcohol and modernism in the 1920’s?

I. The Noble Experiment Background 1. Progressives, Anti-Saloon League and Women’s Christian Temperance push for legislation 2. Blue Laws: 1917 27 “Dry” states 3. WWI strengthens argument for prohibition: Lever Act 4. 1920 – Volstead Act creates 18th amendment 5. 16th amendment – income tax

B. Impact on Society Society Divided Support Prohibition Against Rural Areas Northeast Republicans Northern Democrats Christian Fundamentalists Immigrants “Demon Rum”

2. Obstacles to enforcement a. Geography - SMUGGLING

b. Speakeasies 1) Sense of secrecy romanticized the times

c. Bootlegging Large quantities coming in from Canada Fashion used to bootleg “Bathtub Gin” and “Home Brew”

d. Bribery of Government Officials “The National Gesture”

3. Problems with Prohibition Organized Crime – “Mafia” Gangsters made millions from bootlegging and gambling Led to bribes, corruption of officials, gang wars

St. Valentine’s Day Massacre Gang Wars

Elliot Ness and the Untouchables 1)Treasury Dept went after Capone 2)Found guilty of tax evasion

4. Reasons for its Repeal Taxes raised for its enforcement as revenue was lost from excise tax. Difficulty enforcing Depression Hits Repealed with 21st amendment, 1933

“Can morality be legislated?”

II. Evolution and Religion in the 1920’s Fundamentalism 1. Literal interpretation of the bible 2. Extremely conservative view of the world 3. Reactionary attitude towards anything modern

B. Clash between old and new New or Modern Urban Inventions: radio, movies New Gender Roles Changing behaviors Jazz Music and dance crazes Foreign Influences Old Ideas -Small-town and rural values -KKK and racism -Fundamental religion -Prohibition

C. Scopes Monkey Trial, 1925

Butler Act: disallowed teaching evolution in Tennessee schools. John T. Scopes – biology teacher charged with violating the law. Clarence Darrow of the ACLU William Jennings Bryan for the Prosecution

National coverage Pitted one authority “the Bible” against another “science”.

“The important question he (Darrow) asked was whether Scopes’ teaching for evolution had affect my religion in any way. He asked if I still attended church and Sunday school and beloved in the Bible. I said I was still religious.

D. Outcome of the Trial Scopes found guilty We claim that the defendant is not guilty, but as the court has excluded any testimony, except as to the one issue as to whether he taught that man descended from a lower order of animals, and we cannot contradict that testimony, there is no logical thing to come except that the jury find a verdict that we may carry to the higher court, purely as a matter of proper procedure. We do not think it is fair to the court or counsel on the other side to waste a lot of time when we know this is the inevitable result and probably the best result for the case.

Scopes appeals to Tennessee Supreme Court Your honor, I feel that I have been convicted of violating an unjust statute. I will continue in the future, as I have in the past, to oppose this law in any way I can. Any other action would be in violation of my ideal of academic freedom — that is, to teach the truth as guaranteed in our constitution, of personal and religious freedom. I think the fine is unjust (World's Most Famous Court Trial 313).

1968:Epperson v. Arkansas Sup Ct 1968:Epperson v. Arkansas Sup Ct. ruled that such bans contravene the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment because their primary purpose is religious. Tennessee had repealed the Butler Act the previous year.

5. Impact Growing chasm within Christianity among Fundamentalist and liberal Protestants Evolution Argument continues today Impact media played on public opinion