How we cite our quotes: (Act, Scene, Line)
Quote #1
BRADY. […] My friends of Hillsboro, you know why I have come here. I have not come merely to prosecute a lawbreaker, an arrogant youth who has spoken out against the Revealed Word. (I, I, 420-23)
This line lets us know that for Brady, the case isn't just about some technicality in the law; it's about Justice with a capital J. It's about bringing down a man who seems to be waging a war against the Bible.
Quote #2
BRADY. […] Now what will Drummond do? He'll try to make us forget the lawbreaker and put the law on trial. (I, I, 642-43)
This is often what happens when people are put on trial for breaking controversial laws: the trial becomes not about the person being prosecuted, but about whether or not the law itself is just. Sometimes the only way to change the law is to break it, and incite a court case.
Quote #3
BRADY (Annoyed) Does Mr. Drummond refuse this man a place on the jury simply because he believes in the Bible?
DRUMMOND. If you find an Evolutionist in this town, you can refuse him. (I, II, 93-97)
Courtroom dramas give us a cool look into the inner workings of the justice system that seemed so dry in civics class. Of course, both lawyers try to stack the jury in their favor by choosing people that are amenable to their side of the case.
Quote #4
DRUMMOND. The use of this title prejudices the case of my client: it calls up a picture of the prosecution, astride a white horse, ablaze in the uniform of a militia colonel, with all the forces of right and righteousness marshaled behind him. (I, II, 121-25)
Now, there's an image. Drummond is saying that it isn't fair to call Brady a "Colonel" because it unfairly biases the jury and the media to think that he's the righteous one—he's got the military behind him, after all. Can you think of any other titles that change the way that people see the person who gets to use it? (Where would Principal Skinner be without his title?)
Quote #5
BRADY. I've seen what you can do to a jury. Twist and tangle them. Nobody's forgotten the
Endicott Publishing case—where you made the jury believe the obscenity was in their own minds, not on the printed page. It was immoral what you did to that jury. Tricking them.Judgment by confusion. Think you can get away with it here? (I, II, 217-22)
Here, Brady's calling Drummond out for using some questionable tactics in order to win a previous case. Is it moral to convince a jury of something that might be untrue, in order to bring about a verdict that you believe is just? Wow. That's a pretty tough question. How much truth can you sacrifice in the pursuit of some larger sense of justice?
Quote #6
BRADY. […] But if the full penalty of the law is meted out to Bertram Cates, the faithful the whole world over, who are watching us here and listening to our every word, will call this courtroom blessed! (II, II, 58-61)
Legal justice is closely related to divine justice for Brady. In fact, he doesn't seem to care as much about defending the law as he does about his own belief system being promoted.
Quote #7
DRUMMOND. (To the JUDGE) I am trying to establish, Your Honor, that Howard—or Colonel
Brady—or Charles Darwin—or anyone in this courtroom—or you, sir—has the right to think!JUDGE. Colonel Drummond, the right to think is not on trial here.
DRUMMOND. (Energetically) With all respect to the bench, I hold that the right to think is very much on trial! It is fearfully in danger in the proceedings of this court! (II, II, 86-94)
So, Bert is technically on trial for teaching evolution. But Drummond is trying to take people's attention off of that law, which it's pretty obvious that Bert did break, and focus on questioning the righteousness of the idea behind the law. This courtroom tactic was very important in the 20th century; lawyers felt they had to bring unjust laws all the way to the Supreme Court so they could get them thrown out.
Quote #8
DRUMMOND. (In a low voice) Realizing that I may prejudice the case of my client, I must say that "Right" has no meaning to me whatsoever! (There is a buzz of reaction in the courtroom) Truth has a meaning—as a direction. But one of the peculiar imbecilities of our time is the grid of morality we have placed on human behavior: so that every act of man must be measured against an arbitrary latitude of right and longitude of wrong—in exact minutes, seconds, and degrees! (II, II, 142-49)
What is the difference between legal justice and right and wrong? Where does truth fit into all of this? Is it possible to have a non-"arbitrary" moral compass without religion? Do you think the relations between religion and morality are part of what motivate Brady to so zealously defend the law on trial in this play?
Quote #9
DRUMMOND. […] For it is my intent to show this court that what Bertram Cates spoke quietly one spring afternoon in the Hillsboro High School is no crime! It is incontrovertible as geometry in every enlightened community of minds! (II, II, 341-45)
Drummond's aiming to really manipulate the jury's thoughts and feelings in this case. He's admitting outright that his client broke the law, in order to try to make them see that it's the law that's truly wrong, not Bert.
Quote #10
BRADY. Your Honor, this entire trial is unorthodox. If the interests of Right and Justice will be served, I will take the stand. (II, II, 377-78)
Brady pretends to be at the mercy of Right and Justice, but we'll see later that he's really a slave to his own fame. This quote is just another example of him showboating.