Evolution

There is no issue that is an issue that soon or later does not get into the halls of Congress. Evolution vs. Fundamentalism seems in a fair way of becoming an issue. Several disciples of the late Mr. Bryan have already proposed a national anti-Evolution act or Constitutional Amendment. But the prospect of such action is remote as compared to the prospect of bringing the measure into Congress.

Last week one Loren H. Wittner, clerk in the Treasury Department and professed atheist, applied for an injunction to stop payment of salaries to the Superintendent of Schools in Washington, and the head of the Biology and Chemistry Departments of Washington high schools. He based his action on a rider to the District of Columbia appropriation act for this year which provides : ". . . that no part of this sum shall be available for the payment of the salary of any superintendent, assistant superintendent, director of intermediate instruction or supervising principal who permits the teaching of partisan politics, disrespect of the Holy Bible or that ours is an inferior form of government."

The rider was attached to the law by Representative John W. Summers of Walla Walla, Wash., and passed without receiving any attention to speak of.

Mr. Wittner contends that the teaching of evolution and other allied subjects constitutes disrespect to the Holy Bible*

Mr. Wittner's case is not taken seriously. It was believed that it will be dismissed for legal reasons on the grounds that he had no right to ask such an injunction. But when the next District of Columbia appropriation bill comes up next winter the question of whether or not the clause will stand must be discussed. Political observers believe generally that it will be discussed and reaffirmed--because the Fundamentalists are militant and the Evolutionists are amused.

A secondary sensation followed upon the first. It was found that Mr. Wittner, in taking his oath of office, had not only stricken out the word "swear" and left "affirm" (which is an offered alternative since certain sects regard swearing as blasphemous), but had also stricken out the words "so help me God" which conclude the oath. The oath is prescribed by law and it was suggested that the Treasury Department might undertake to oust him on the grounds that he had not taken a proper oath.

"Without precedent," exclaimed officials, throwing up their hands in surprise. But there is something that approaches a precedent. Walt Whitman, now regarded by many as the chief fount of American poesy, was, shortly after the Civil War, ousted from the Treasury Department because atheistical tendencies were discerned in Leaves of Grass.

Said Mr. Wittner of his own case:

"I am not worried about losing my job. I can make a living anywhere, but of course to be thrown out of employment just at this time would handicap me in fighting this case.

"I do not believe in the existence of God and therefore I did not swear to God. I affirmed and you can be held for perjury on affirmation as well as on an oath.

"I do not believe that any court will hold the oath constitutional, because swearing to it virtually means that Government clerks must accept the definite religion of Christianity. That would be a violation of the first article of the Constitution. As I am a true atheist, I could not conscientiously sign an oath containing those words, for that would have demanded that I lie." Said Congressman Thomas L. Blanton of Texas:

"You ask for my opinion. I never straddle the fence and will give it. I am against any teacher in any Government school maintained by the tax money of the people of the United States teaching 'disrespect for the Holy Bible,' and I was for Dr. Summers' amendment on May 3, 1924, am for it now and I will be for it whenever it forms another issue before the House."

*Among the things taught in the public schools which Mr. Wittner alleges involve disrespect of the Bible are:

1) That it is impossible for a living person to overcome the force of gravity and ascend beyond the limit of vision, whereas the Bible teaches that Elijah went up alive to Heaven, Christ rose from the dead and did the same and the dead shall rise and go to Heaven on Judgment Day.

2) That after a body disintegrates it cannot be reendowed with life, whereas the Bible says that the bodies of the dead will be resurrected on Judgment Day.

3) That one element cannot be changed into another nor can something be made out of nothing, whereas the Bible says God made man out of dust and the whole earth out of nothing.

4) That life has existed on earth for millions of years, whereas the Bible teaches that

the earth was created less than 6,000 years ago.

5) That the sun in the centre of the solar system which the earth moves around, whereas the Bible declares that the earth is the centre around which the sun, moon and stars revolve.

6) That speech is the gradual outgrowth of the development of intellect in human evolution, whereas the Bible says that all men had one speech until God confounded them to stop the building of the tower of Babel.