Challenge

An objection to the capacity or right of a person. In Practice. An exception to the jurors who have been arrayed to pass upon a cause on its trial. An exception to those who have been returned as jurors.

Co. Litt. lB5b.

The most satisfactory derivation of the word is that adopted by Webster and Crabb, from "call," challeiige implying a calling off. The word is also used to denote exceptions taken to a judge's capacity on account of interest (2 Bin. [Pa.] 454; 4 Bin. [Pa.] 349), and to the sheriff for favor as well as affinity (Co. Litt. 158a; 10 Serg. & R. [Pa.] 336; 11 Serg. & R. [Pa.] 303). Challenges are of the following classes: (1) To the array. Those which apply to all the jurors as arrayed or set in order by the officer upon the panel. Such a challenge is, in general, founded upon some error or plies to all the jurors so obtained. These are not allowed in the United States generally (Colby, Prac. 235; 2 Blatchf. [U. S.] 435), the same end being attained by a motion addressed to the court, but are in some states (33 Pa. St. 338; 12 Tex. 252; 24 Miss. 445; 1 Mann. [Mich.] 451; 20 Conn. 610; 1 Zab. [N. J.] 656). (2) To the poll. Those made separately to each juror to whom they apply. Challenges to the poll are either: (a) For cause, — ^those for which some reason sanctioned by law is assigned. (b) Peremptory, — ^those made without assigning any cause, and which must be allowed as of course. The number of these is variously limited by statute. A challenge for cause lies also to the array. Challenge for cause was anciently divided into challenges: (i) For principal cause, — being for such cause as, if substantiated, was sufficient to show bias or disqualification. The grounds of principal challenge were pro Tpter defectum, for disability, as infancy or mental unsoundness; prdpter affectum, for partiality, as where the juror was of kin to the party, or bore some confidential relation to him; propter delictum, on account of crime committed by the juror, whereby he was disqualified.

3 Bl. Comm. 361.

To these was sometimes added propter honoris respeetum, from respect to a party's rank or nobility. (ii) To the favor, — ^those which are founded on reasonable ground to suspect that the jury is partial, though the cause be not so evident as to warrant a principal challenge. Challenges for principal cause were tried by the court; those to the favor by triors. The distinction between challenges to the favor and for principal cause is now obsolete. Several other divisions of challenges for cause have been suggested by American statute or text writers, as that into challenge grounded on general disqualificatipn, and challenges grounded on disqualification in respect of the particular case (Thomp. Trials, § 40), or that into challenges for actual bias, being for actual partiality as to the cause or the parties; and for implied bias, being such relationship towards _ a party or the cause as wiH, in contemplation of law, necessarily give rise to an implication of partiality, such as consanguinity to a party; confidential relation with a party; service on a previous jury in the cause, etc.

Gen. St. Minn. 1878, c. 116, §§ 18, 19.

In Election Law. Formal objection to the right of a person to vote at a particular election, or in a particular precinct. Generally made at the time the vote is offered. In Criminal Law. A request by one person to another to fight a duel. It may be oral or written. in France, which took cognizance of and registered the accounts of the king's revenue. Nearly the same as the English court of exchequer. Enc. Brit.