Clarence Seward Darrow

Son of Ammirus Darrow and Emily Eddy

Noted Attorney, author and lecturer

Second Cousin of Frances Louise Berlin

Clarence Seward Darrow, son of Ammirus Darrow and Emily Eddy Darrow, was born 18 April 1857 in Kinsman, Trumbull, OH.  He was educated in public schools in Ohio and then became an Ohio country school teacher where he made $30.00 per month. He spent a year at Allegheny College in Meadville, PA, and another year of law school at the University of Michigan and then read law in Ohio until he was admitted to the bar in 1878.  Early in his legal career, Darrow practiced law in Kinsman, Andover, and Ashtabula, Ohio. In 1887, he moved to Chicago, Illinois where he eventually became one of that city's most successful lawyers. In time, he became one of the most famous lawyers in the entire country.

He credited two events for his decision to opt for a career first in teaching and then law. Those events were, first, his aversion to "hard work" in which after two days he had quit a back breaking farm job and, second, a wife's refusal to sign a Deed of Sale in Kinsman, OH for a house her husband had agreed to sell to Clarence -- in anger, Clarence left Kinsman for Chicago. He believed "that we're all cheats, potentially at least, though most of us manage to stay out of jail!" 

Clarence was married to Jessie Ohl in 1879.  They had one son, Paul, who was born 10 December, 1883 in Andover, OH. Clarence and Jessie were divorced in Chicago in 1897.

During World War I, Clarence vigorously advocated US. participation to crush the alleged German autocracy. But soon he changed his stand to pacifism and spoke of the war as "national insanity." 

He was a noted criminal lawyer with Chicago offices at 77 W. Washington. Clarence belonged, at different times, to the law firms of Darrow, Masters, and Wilson (Chicago), and Darrow, Sissman, Holly and Carlin (N. Dearborn St., Chicago, 1925). An ardent Democrat, he pled many labor causes. He handled many prominent cases, including litigation against the gas monopoly in Chicago, representing the anthracite miners in the Philadelphia coal strike (1902-1903), and counsel for the McNamara brothers in the Los Angeles Times dynamite case (1911). He was appointed by President Franklin Delano Roosevelt to chair a commission to study the National Recovery Administration.

In 1924 he defended Leopold and Loeb. A summary of that case is given below.

"Bobby Franks, 14, was heading home one afternoon in May 1924 when a car pulled up beside him and he was lured inside.
Two brilliant University of Chicago students, Nathan Leopold and Richard Loeb, killed him for the thrill of it and to prove their intellectual superiority.
The boy's body soon was found, along with Leopold's glasses.
Once on trial for their lives, famed defense attorney Clarence Darrow would save them in a speech that condemned capital punishment.
Loeb would die in prison after the intellectual - in the infamous phrase of one Chicago newspaper - ended his sentence to another inmate with a proposition.
In 1958, Leopold was released on parole. He died in 1971."

Another case dealt with the Mayor of Chicago. Historian Douglas Bukowski describes the case as a tough year for Big Bill Thompson.
"At City Hall, it was business as usual: Mayor William Hale "Big Bill" Thompson's pal Fred Lundin was indicted for defrauding the school system of a cool million dollars. He was acquitted - as were other Thompson cronies - by the brilliant legal tactics of a local lawyer named Clarence Darrow."

One of his most celebrated trials was the Scopes trial, where Clarence represented the defendant's right to teach the Theory of Evolution in public schools. A link at the following URL has a large amount of information dealing with this trial -- http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/delao/darrow.htm

In October of 1999, Jim Ritter a staff reporter of the Chicago Sun-Times wrote the following:

"Another Chicagoan, Clarence Darrow, made headlines in 1925. The liberal attorney and social reformer spent a sweltering summer in Tennessee, defending high school teacher John Scopes' right to teach evolution.
Darrow became famous defending labor leaders and other unpopular clients. "He was a fighter for the underdog, no matter who the underdog was," said Tracy Baim, Darrow's great-grandniece. Baim is publisher of Outlines, a gay and lesbian newspaper in Chicago.
Chicagoans listened to WGN radio as Darrow sparred with prosecuting counsel William Jennings Bryan, the populist three-time presidential candidate and fundamentalist Christian. Darrow called Bryan to the stand and asked him if he believed the story of Jonah being swallowed by a whale.
"Yes, sir. . . ," Bryan said. "If the Bible said so."
Seventy-four years later, the debate still rages. Kansas' recent decision to drop evolution from the high school curriculum outraged scientists. But no one with the passion and eloquence of Darrow has stepped forward to champion their cause."

Mysterious stories followed Clarence even after his death. In another Chicago Sun-Times story written in 1999, the unknown reporter was interviewing a person named Crowe, who was probably a Chicago tour guide. He writes:

"But Crowe, 51, has other tales, too, including the time he said he saw the spirit of legendary lawyer Clarence Darrow one evening near the Museum of Science and Industry. It was Halloween night four years ago, and Crowe had taken a filled tour bus to the museum's south lot.
Darrow's ashes are scattered in neighboring Jackson Park.
As they stood in the lot, Crowe said, they saw someone standing on a bridge over the lagoon. "Here was an old man in a hat and a camel hair coat, looking like he walked out of the 1930s," he recalled.
The group called to him, and two young men took over after him, while the old man turned and began walking away. The pair got within 60 feet, when they froze. Later, "all they could say was it was too scary," Crowe said.
The mysterious stranger strolled off the bridge, turned a corner and was gone."

An Agnostic, he believed that there probably was not a hereafter, but rather our existence on this earth was all there is. He regarded Jesus Christ as an ancient philosopher. Three essays which he wrote state his views: "Is Religion Necessary? No!", "Why I am an Agnostic" and "Absurdities of the Bible". 

There are several quotes attributed to Clarence Darrow regarding his thoughts on religion and other ideas.  They are from essays that he wrote on the subject.

"The world has been one long slaughter-house from beginning, until today, Helling goes on and on and will forever."

Clarence married his second wife, Ruby Hamerstrom, in 1905. She was related to the Gregg shorthand family. 

I located the following document in the FBI files on Clarence Darrow. It is in reference to an article that appeared in the May issue of Esquire in 1936. The article is directed to John Edgar Hoover.

John Edgar Hoover
      Director

Federal Bureau of Investigation

June 24, 1936.

 Memorandum from MR. Tolson

    There appeared in the May issue of  “Esquire" an article entitled “Attorney for the Defense" by Clarence Darrow This article appears to be a rather frank discussion of the interworkings of the minds criminal lawyers as exemplified by Clarence Darrow. It is thought that possibly portions of this article might be helpful to the Director in making future addresses at which time he might desire to point out how unscrupulous criminal lawyers stimulate disrespect for law and influence crime conditions.

    In the course of this article, Mr. Darrow attempts to discuss justice and the jury and goes into rather minute detail as to what facts to consider in selecting a jury. Pertinent portions of the article are set out below:

     ‘The stage, the arena, the court, are alike in that each has its audience thirsting to drink deeply of the passing show.” The author then goes on to state that youth frequently chooses law as a profession because it brings him before the public eye. In commenting on court. He states, “Chancery cases are not especially interesting nor exciting, however. These are supposed to be heard by a judge. He listens long enough to feel satisfied that the case promises to consume considerable time and work and interfere with many hours of leisure, so he refers it to a ‘Master in Chancery,’ a lawyer-friend of his own appointment, who is paid by fees that come directly from the litigants; the Master in Chancery employs a court reporter who takes the evidence in shorthand while the Master may take a nap” and later the documents are ‘locked up in a sate to await the blowing of Gabriel’s horn.’

    "Always the element of luck and chance looms large.’ If it is a criminal case, it is not the facts themselves or the law alone that determine the results.                   

    “Selecting a jury is of the utmost importance.” A lawyer in selecting the jury should know both sides, of the case and to guard his client’ a interest, he must know the likes and dislikes the opinions and fads of judges and jurors. Property rights are safer in the hands of courts than jurors. The more a lawyer knows of life, human nature, psychology, and the reactions of the human emotions, the better he is equipped to select "twelve men, good and true.’

    ‘In this undertaking, everything pertaining to the prospective juror needs be questioned and weighed; his nationality, his business, religion, politics, social standing, family ties, friends, habits of life and thought; the books and newspapers he likes and reads, and many more matters that combine to make a man; all of these qualities and experiences have left their effect on ideas, beliefs and fancies that inhabit his mind…Involved in it all is the juror’s method of speech, the kind of clothes he wears, the style of haircut, and, above all, his business associates, residence and origin.

     “The litigants and their lawyers are supposed to want justice, but, in reality there is no such thing as justice, either in or out of court. In fact, the word cannot be defined. . In the last analysis, most jury trials are contests between the rich and poor.” Criminal cases, however, practically always have the poor on trial.

     “The most important point to learn is whether the prospective juror is humane. This must be discovered in more or less devious ways. As soon as ‘the court’ sees what you want, he almost always blocks the game. Next to this, in having more or less bearing on the question, is the nationality, politics, and religion, of the person examined for the jury. If you do not discover this, all your plans may go awry.’

     Assuming that underdogs are being represented because of injuries received or because of an indictment brought by what the prosecutors name themselves ‘the state’ “then what sort of men will we seek? An Irishman is called into the box for examination. There is no reason for asking about his religion; he is Irish; that is enough. We may not agree with his religion, but it matters not; his feelings go deeper than any religion. You should be aware that he is emotional, kindly and sympathetic. If he is chosen as a juror, his imagination will place him in the dock; really, he is trying himself. You would be guilty of malpractice if you got rid of him, except for the strongest reasons.’

     ‘An Englishman is not so good as an Irishman, but still, he has come through a long tradition of individual rights, and is not afraid to stand alone; in fact, be is never sure that he is right unless the great majority is against him.

     ‘The German is not so keen about individual rights except where they concern his own way of life. Liberty is not a theory. It is a way of living. He has not been among us long, his ways are fixed by his race, and his habits are still in the making. We need inquire no further. If he is a Catholic, then be loves music and art; he must be emotional, and will want to help you; give him a chance.

     ‘If a Presbyterian enters the jury box and carefully rolls up his umbrella, and calmly and critically sits down, let him go. He believes in John Calvin and eternal punishment. Get rid of him with the fewest possible words before he contaminates the others. Unless you and your clients are Presbyterians you probably are a bad lot, and even though you may be a Presbyterian, your client most likely is guilty.

     ‘If possible, the Baptists are more hopeless than the Presbyterians. They, too, are apt to think that the real home of all outsiders is Sheol and you do not want them on the jury, and the sooner they leave the better.

     ‘The Methodists are worth considering; they are nearer the soil. Their religious emotions can be transmuted into love and charity. They are not half bad, even though they will not take a drink, they really do not need it so much as some of their competitors for the seat next to the throne. If chance sets you down between a Methodist and a Baptist, you will move toward the Methodist to keep warm.

     ‘Beware of the Lutherans, especially the Scandinavians; they are almost always sure to convict. Either a Lutheran or Scandinavian is unsafe, but if both—in—one, plead your client guilty and go down the docket. He learns about sinning and punishing from the preacher, and dares not doubt.

     ‘As to Unitarians, Universalists, Congregationalists, Jews and other agnostics, don’t ask them too many questions; keep them anyhow; especially Jews and agnostics. It is best to inspect a Unitarian, or a Universalist, or a Congregationalist, with some care, for they may be prohibitionists; but never the Jews and the real agnostics! And, do not, please, accept a prohibitionist: he is too solemn and holy and dyspeptic.

     ‘I have never experimented much with Christian Scientists; they are too serious for me.

     “You may defy all the rest of the rules if you can get a man who laughs. Few things in this world are of enough importance to warrant considering them seriously. So, by all means, choose a man who laughs. A juror who laughs hates to find anyone guilty.

     ‘Never take a wealthy man on a jury . . . Don’t take a man because he is a good man. This means nothing. You should find out what he is good for.’

     Mr. Darrow then goes on to state that he is happy his career at the bar was brought to a close as female jurors came into prominence at about this, and he suspects them of taking "their new privilege seriously. " Futility, accord- ing to Mr. Darrow, is the one big word that stands over courts and other human activities. A crusade might go forward for a while but soon its participants succumb to human frailties and the whole system is checkered by mistakes. "Many men are in prison and some are sent to death by mistaken identification . . . Many are made from descriptions and photographs and urged on by detectives, lawyer’s and others vitally interested in the result. In situations of strong agitation, acquittals are rare, and sentences made long end barbarous and inhuman.’

     Mr. Darrow concludes his article by stating that the social forces must seek the causes of crime as has the medical profession, urging that “each so-called Dillinger” be examined until ‘they discover its cause and then learn bow to remove the cause."

 Respectfully,  s/ R. E. Joseph

Clarence Seward Darrow died of heart disease 13 March, 1938 in Chicago, IL. At the time of his death, his wife, Ruby, son Paul and sister Jennie were at his bedside. Clarence was cremated and his ashes were scattered from the bridge in Jackson Park, Chicago, IL

For several years after Clarence's death, Ruby lived in a nursing home in Oconomowoc, WI. She died there 6 July 1957, at the age of 88 years. Her relatives indicated that her body would be cremated and the ashes scattered over the same lagoon in Jackson Park in Chicago where Clarence’s ashes had been scattered.

There have been many books written about Clarence Seward Darrow and several that he authored himself. A partial list of those publications are shown below.

Attorney for the Damned: Clarence Darrow in the Courtroom
Edited by Arthur Weinberg,
Chicago, Illinois,
The University of Chicago Press:
1989

Clarence Darrow: A One Man Play
by David W. Rintels,
Garden City, New York,
Doubleday & Company, Inc.:
1975

Clarence Darrow for the Defense
by Irving Stone,
New York, New York,
Doubleday & Company, Inc.:
1975

Darrow: A Biography
by Kevin Tierney,
New York, New York,
Thomas Y. Crowell Publishers:
1979

Farmington
Clarence Darrow

Resist No Evil
Clarence Darrow

The Story of My Life
Clarence Darrow

If you wish to learn more about Clarence Seward Darrow just select any search engine and type in the name Darrow, Clarence. There one can find a tremendous amount of information, including transcripts of trials in which he was involved and newspaper articles that were written about those trials. Clarence is undoubtedly the most famous relative on my mother's side of the family.