The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1911-10-14
xcond Day Of the Trial of
lanes B. Mcnamara Passes
I Without Selection of
a Juror.
TUBBORN CONTEST
OVER EVERY POINT
institution of California Is
Said 10 Differ From Consti-
tuition Of United States;
Other Tecknicalities.

\ OS ANGELES. Oct. i3.-After
Two days of court sessions in the
inal of James b. Mcnamara for
the murder Of Charles J. Hagger-
a victim of the Los Angeles
'ns explosion and fire, on October I, i,
EIO no Juror had been selected even
rhtively tonight, and no decision
sd been reached as to the eligibility oi
4. first talssm examined. Although
|srt proceedings moved forward with
A Interruption. the magnitude Of the
mes involved in the examination OF
\. Nelson. the first talesman, made
deliberate.
4 AZ sunset, when court adjourned, ar
ruents on Nelson s status remained
finished. At the close OF court,
riff William \. Hammel aud Il dep
n escorted the prisoner, numauacled,
Eu the bail of records through the
naming courthouse corridor and
.fos g narrow street. where his
|uther, John j. Mcnamara. is con
hsd. awaiting his turn for trial
a PROVISION Of the constitution Of the
BE Of California. differing somewhat
N the constitution of The United
aIss: sections OF the state penal code
Enrding the qualifications OF jurors, and
contest over the meaning Of the rec
b OF Nelson's examination. combined
furnish points OF contest which affect
\ alone the tslesman under eramina-
d but nvery prospective Juror, Dnd for
81,
n Attorney Talks. ;
ne sornber courtroom scene. where
3psing counsel argued for every point
[idyantage in the struggle over
ms life, was relieved once or twice
fouches of unconscious humor, which
Pned 10 appeal Ia the court. Once,
IN G. Ray Horton. a boyish attorney
2n single handed. made the long after
ms argument for the state, assured
court that he was not intending 10
Ning an cfhsy OF error 10 terrlfy your
lor," Judge Bordwell smiled broadly:
20, no." he said understandiDgly, and
elsd himself 10 listen further
Ine constitution OF California gusran-
p q fair trial for all parties in Httga-
~ whereas that % tho United states
2nntees such rights TO the defendant.
al code OF the state under act OF leg
-turc was intended. Horton declared.
fnsole intelligent men TO serve on
Flhs. and allows anyone To do so un-
usual restrictions who are OF not
.k Of mind which will prevent acting
+h entire impartialitN and without
Egpdice 10 the substantial rights OF
'tr party"
p these Two propositions Attorney
lon based his argument, contendins
u that the rights OF the state must
Esseved as scrupUlmisly as those OF
defendant, and further, that the
.ainal code made express provision tcr
a service .or Il man OF Nelson's frame
mind.
qnion Of Talesman.
uerraptod iii d deciaraJion that !Sei-
naa declared nc was without piaS
90 the defense. Attorney Horton re-
Aed That II the record showed otner.
was because the talcsman had
4u.sd the defendants owr case win
oppressed opinion that the Times
ng was blown up by dynamite.
ss rur record ns read by Attorney Joseph
~ OF counsel for the defcusc. quoted
.'n as saving that he had an opinion
t.ming McNamara's guilt or tnno-
tnat he had Eeid such opinion for
y. tour months and that IL would take
''%TG'sN " u
: ,ssssl ssl announced that hs would go
Me record on this point.
po,o,,hey pos,, Clarence S. Darrow. chief or
~ for the defense, made the argu-
~ aealnst the accepting OF Nelson as
s,1r nS. after he had been challenged. on
w Nus Of bias. earlier In the day.
ans, section Of the criminal code can
EIsI men,s constitutional rights,
ms opening statement. "a de-
.b,aa.. mcst be Tried bv a jury, not by
|ssncal'on ~ meeting. Never before nave
|kos. az onicer Of the State asking the
ID ~ 70 take a juInr who has sworn
10 Nv mas held an opinion for montns
a utne nc defcndants guilt or innocence
ss,a nl II would take strong evidence
1;'aoss that opinion.
is% legislature. IN enactiuG the penal
t.L.a apded barrow. perhaps thought
w. away some Of the safeguards
I'd n.Iound lfc.' and nc remarked;
|Elc's seuine we could convince TIE
|sssb ,!s''orney here IL we get proof
vaaa for Appeal.
y con,.na,'ed that a. ruling adverse 70
e6ns,.,yhtion regarding Nelson would
i1lp r,ied ground for appeal. IL was
lssuresHo so'nt that Horton, IN his address,
-Eso the court.
,,nSrt .2nrt OF appeals he said. would
~ sbllakc 10 investigate such case
/ n dn..".'c WAS great"
h IN, mink the court cares TO cor :
ce ~ possible action Of court OF
fot,n.o11 Interrupted Judge Bordwcll. and
1h,a seemed 10 agree.
fansntn attorney Horton was making his
n Tn.. n