Challenge

' 1.

A request to fight — to fight a duel. Whether made by word or letter, is indictable at common law. Tends to a breach of the peace. He who knowingly carries «■ challenge for, another is gu Uty of the offense."

See Phize-mght.

2.

Objection to the legality of a vote about to be cast.

See Ballot.

3.

Objection to a cause being tried before a particular judge on account of alleged bias, prejudice, interest, or other disqualification. ' Chicago & Pacific R. Co. v. Mc Glinn, 114 U. S. 547 (1885), Field. J. 2 3 Bl. Com. 328. >2 Bl. Com. 338; 4 Kent, 301; 1 Washb. E. P. 103. *3B1.

Com. 123; j6.

46'l. » [1 Washb. E. P. 88. " Clare V. People, 9 Col. 133 (1886), Helm, J. ' Mid. E. chalenge^ a claim: F. chalotige, a dispute, accusation. 4. Objection to a juror or jurors drawn to try a cause. Challenge to the array. An exception to the whole panel in which the jury are arrayed or set in order by the sheriff in his return. 1 The reason which, before awarding the venire, would be sufficient to cause it to be directed to the coroner or to elisors, will be sufficient to quash the array when made by an officer of whose partiality there is any fair ground of suspicion; also, if the sheriff arrays the panel under the direction of either party, i Challenge to the polls. An exception to particular jurors. Lies for any matter showing disqualification. Also known as " principal challenge" and as the " challenge for cause." Challenge for cause. For which a reason is assigned, — to the array or to the polls. An objection to a particular juror; and may be "general" — that he is disqualified from serving in any case, or "particular" — that he is disqualified froin serving in ttie action on trial.* Vhallenge for favor. Of the same nature and efi Eect as a principal challenge "propter affectum." Peremptory challenge. For which no reason is assigned. Principal challenge. 1. "Propter defectum " — for disability: as, alienage, infancy, unsound mind, insu'fiicient jsroperty. 3. " Propter affectum " — for bias or partiality: as, opinion formed; of kin to a party, or of the same fraternity or corporation; his attorney, servant, or tenant, or entertained by him; promised money for verdict; sued by exceptant in an action involving legal malice; being formerly a juror or an arbitrator in the matter; influenced by scruples against the punishment. 8. "Propter delictum" — for an offense committed: as, convicted of treason, forgery, perjury, or otlier crimen falsi.3 A jiu-or unsuccessfully challenged for cause maybe challenged peremptorily. In felonies, at common law, thirty-five peremptoi-y challenges were allowed the accused; at present the number is about twenty in capital cases; in civil cases, if allowed at all, o^ly to a very limited extent. The State is allowed peremptoiy challenges in capital cases, the number varying in the different States. When a challenge for bias, actual or implied, is disallowed, and the juror is peremptorily challenged and ' 3 Bl. Com, 359. 'Cal. Penal Code, § 1071; 70 Oal. 11. excused, and a competent juror is obtained in his place, no injury is done the accused, if, until the jury is completed, he has other peremptory challenges which he can use.^ Experience has shown that one ot the most effective means to free the jury-box from men unfit to be there is the exercise of the peremptory challenge... The number of challenges must necessarily depend upon the discretion ot the legislature, and may vary according to the condition of different communities, and the difficulties in them of securing intelligent and impartial juries. Originally, by the common law, the crown could challenge peremptorily without limitation as to number. By an act passed in the time ot Edward I, the right was restricted to challenges for cause. But, by rule of court, the crown wrfs not obliged to show cause till the whole panel was called. Those not accepted on the call were directed to stand aside; and if a full jury was not otherwise obtained, the crown was required to show ^ause against those jurors; if no sufficient cause appeared, the jury was completed from them. The right to challenge is the right to reject, not to select, a juror. If from those who remain an impartial jury is obtained, the constitutional right of the accused is maintained.^ Challenges are to be made before the jury is sworn. In the Federal courts the justness of a challenge is determined by the judge, without the aid of triors." See Jurt; Opiniox, 2; TRmas; Voia DraE.