The time to make a challenge is between the appearance and swearing of the jurors ; Thompson v. Com., 8 Gratt. (Va.) 637 ; State v. Patrick, 48 N. C. 443 ; Lewis v. Detrich, 3 Ia. 216;. McFadden v. Corn., 23 Pa. 12, 62 Am. Dec. 308 ; Jackson v. Pittsford, 8 Blackf. (Ind.) 194; Williams v. State, 3 Ga. 453; State v. Bunger, 14 La. Ann. 461; State v. Anderson, 4 Nev. 265 ; Woodward v. Dean, 113 Mass. 297 ; but see Haynes v. Crutchfield, 7 Ala. 189 ; U. S. v. Morris, 1 Curt. C. C. 23, Fed. Cas. No. 15,815; Burns v. State, 80 Ga. 544, 7 S. E. 88 ; Thorp v. Deming, 78 Mich. 124, 43 N. W. 1097 ; the fact • that a panel has been passed by a party as satis factory will not prevent him from challeng ing one of the jurors so passed at any time before he is sworn ; Silcox v. Lang, 78 Cal. 118, 20 Pac, 297; Daniels v. State, 88 Ala. 220, 7 South. 337. See Mayers v. Smith, 121 III. 442, 13 N. E. 216 ; Boteler v. Roy, 40 Mo. App. 234. A challenge for cause should be made before the juror is sworn ; People v. Duncan, 8 Cal. App. 186, 96 Pac. 414 ; but the court may permit it before the jury is completed ; People v. Schmitz, 7 Cal. App. 330, 94 Pac. 407, 419, 15 L. R. A. (N. S.) 717 ; so also peremptory challenges may be made before the juror is sworn ; State v. Deliso, 75 N. J. L. 808, 69 Atl. 218.
It is a general rule at common law that no challenge can be made till the appear ance of a full jury ; 4 B. & Ald. 476 ; Tay lor v. R. Co., 45 Cal. 323 ; on which account
a party who wishes to challenge the array may pray a tales to complete the number, and then make his objection. Challenges to the array, where allowed, must precede those to the poll ; and the right to the former is waived by making the latter ; Co. Litt. 158 a; Bacon, Abr. Juries, E, 11; People v. Rob erts, 6 Cal. 214•; Weeping Water Electric Light Co. v. Haldeman, 35 Neb. 139, 52 N. W. 892 ; but see Clinton v. Englebrecht, 13 Wall. (U. S.) 434, 20 L. Ed. 659. In cases where peremptory challenges are allowed, a juror unsuccessfully challenged for cause may sub sequently be challenged peremptorily ; 4 Bla. Com. 356 ; 6 Term 531; 4 B. & Ald. 476. See Com. v. Webster, 5 Cush. (Mass.) 285, 52 Am. Dec. 711.
Manner of making. Challenges to the ar ray must be made in writing ; People v. Doe, 1 Mich. 451; Suttle v. Batie, 1 Ia. 141; but challenges to the poll are made orally and generally by the attorney's or party's say ing, "Challenge," or "I challenge," or "We challenge ;" 1 Chit. Cr. Law 533-541; 4 Hargr. St. Tr. 740; Trials per Pais 172; Cro. Car. 105. See State v. Knight, 43 Me. 11; Zimmerly v. Road Com'rs, 25 Pa. 134; Rolland v. Com., 82 Pa. 306, 22 Am. Rep. 758.
The guaranty in the constitution of a trial by jury does not prevent legislation as to the manner of selecting jurors or allowing peremptory challenges to the state; State v. Ward, 61 Vt. 153, 17 AU. 483. See JURY, Qualifications.