Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1911-10-20
Mcintosh Also Challenged.


There is no section of the criminal code
covering circumstantial evidence, and for
this reason 1t was necessary to construe
Adams attitude on this question as bias
toward the prisoner.
Adams is a socialist. and portion of
his examination was taken up in separat-
ing his theoretical political bias and his
personal attitude. toward the prisoner.
The defense under Attorney Darrow
resisted the challenge.
Darrow's examination was by way of
attempted demonstration that man
who believes that gas destroyed the Los
Angeles Times building still might be
unrrejudiced to whether James B.
Mcnamara was guilty of causing the
death of Charles J. Haggerty.
A few minutes later the state chal-
lenged Talesman A. r. Mcintosh because
of his objection to the death penalty on
circumstantial evidence This challenge
also was resisted by the defense.
Though the impanelng of a jury to
try the case of James B. Mcnamara.
indicted for murder resulting from the
explosion of the Times building, still
is a matter of weeks, definite progress
had been made when court opened to-
day toward defining the issues. prin-
cipal and collateral, along which the
battle will be fought
After having concluded it's examination
for cause among eleven of the twelve
taleSmen in the box. reServing still with
the courts permission the right to in
terrogate further H. Y. Quackenbush
about matters yet being investigated,
the defense had emphasized by three
challenges for cause that it would con-
slider as hostile talesmen who not only
were prejudiced against labor unions
and their methods of operation. but
those who firmly believed dynamite de-
the Times building.
The court is not expected to render its
decision on these challenges until the
state has had its opportunity to examine
talesmen for cause. The prosecution,
therefore, continued today its examina-
ton of T. w. Adams. and it was ap-
parent by the line of questions. too. that
the state deemed Ii essential that no
talesman should serve who said gas ex-
plosion caused the Times disaster. The
state, Furthermore. in its examination OF
has revealed that 1t Will CONSIDER
unacceptable those talesmen in whose
minds socialistic views are imbedded.
State Also to Bar Prejudice.
The state has vigorously resisted the
questions Of Clarence S. Darrow, chief
for the defense, in which he
sought to learn talesmen's views on
whether or not labor unions as conducted
were a menace or an advantage to So
ciety and been opposing the argument
of the defense that labor unions are d.
rectly involved in the case by asserting
that the main issue Is whether the de-
fendant wrecked the Times building. re-
gardless of his labor affiliations. But in
its examination Of talesmen the state, on
the other hand, expects to find men who
are preiudiced in favor Of labor unions
and likewise maintain that gas caused
the explosion.
The defense, in taking the view that
4 man who believes the building was de-
,troved by dynamite thereby believes the
defendant guilty and has prejudged the
,ase. has attempted to hold the prose-
,ution to an analogous arrangement by
Offering not to resist challenges against
alesmen who firmly believe the building
vas blown up by gas. The state, how
.ver is unwilling to accept the situation
Is exactly analogous.
While one section would disQualify a
nan for having fixed opinion en- is
,ues involved, another section declares q
alesman eligible if his opinions are based
,nly on reading public prints, il he can
eel them aside. On Judge Walter Bord- |
veil. therefore, devolves the task of rul-
ng on these distinctions I'm saying wheth |
.r challenges for cause entered by the
lefense against George w. Mckee. Otto
\ Jessen and E. ]. Shower shall be
.llowed. Mckee and Jessen are against
inions and believe dynamite caused the |