2216 ARTICLE 51

be written upon two lists, and one of said lists forthwith delivered to the
respective parties or their counsel in the cause; and the said parties or
their counsel may each strike out four persons from the said lists and the
remaining twelve persons shall thereupon be immediately empanelled and
sworn as the petit jury in such cause.

Panel, before it is stricken from, should present twenty names beyond reach of
challenge. Counsel may examine jurors only in discretion of court, but are entitled
to have court examine them before striking. Assumption that court's action correct.
Beck v. State, 151 Md. 616. And see Lockhart v. State, 145 Md. 613.

Members of panel may not be examined on their voir dire merely to ascertain
whether any were acquainted with parties to suit, since acquaintance is not disqualifica-
tion. State v. Welsh, 160 Md. 543.

Before jury was sworn the court allowed a party to withdraw his strike of a juror
and exercise such strike against a man who had been originally accepted for panel,
the result being the substitution on panel of former for latter; such action being within
the discretion of the court and not appearing to have resulted in injury, was no ground
of reversal. Blumenthal & Bickart v. May Co., 127 Md. 285.

Object of this section discussed. The parties have a right to have their challenges
determined before they strike under this section. Lee v. Peter, 6 G. & J. 452.

Either party may challenge a juror for cause before he is sworn, whether he has or
has not struck under this section. Edelen v. Gough, 8 Gill, 89.

Where there is more than one plaintiff or defendant the right to strike four names
does not extend to each party, but is limited to each side. Diamond State Co. v.
Blake, 105 Md. 573.

Where there is more than one traverser they can only strike four names between
them. Hamlin v. State, 67 Md. 335; Diamond State Co. v. Blake, 105 Md. 573.

Right of court to consolidate cases, discussed in connection with this section.
Friedenwald v. Baltimore, 74 Md. 124.

Cited but not construed in Cohen v. State, 173 Md. 223.

An. Code, 1924, sec. 14. 1912, sec. 14. 1904, sec. 14. 1888, sec. 14. 1797, ch. 87, sec. 9.

14. If the said parties or their counsel, or either of them, shall neglect
or refuse to strike out from the said lists the number of persons directed
in the preceding section, the court may direct the clerk to strike out from
the list of the party so neglecting or refusing the number in said section
directed, and the remaining twelve persons shall be empanelled and sworn
as aforesaid; but this and the preceding section shall ,not take away the
right of any person to challenge the array or polls of any panel returned
in the manner allowed by the laws of this State.

The privilege of striking distinguished from right to challenge array or polls for
favor or cause. The latter extends to each person accused.. Hamlin v: State,. 67 Md..337.

The challenges for cause should be determined before jury is struck under sec. 13.
Object of this section discussed. State v. Glascow, 59.Md. 212.

An. Code, 1924, sec. 15. 1912, sec. 15. 1904, sec. 15. 1888, sec. 15. 1798, ch. 94.

15. The several courts of this State shall at all times have power to
direct talesman to be summoned to serve on juries where, without such
talesmen, there would not be twenty of the original panel, exclusive of
the jury charged, from whom a jury can be formed; or may direct such
talesmen to be summoned whenever, by challenging or otherwise, a suffi-
cient number of jurors cannot be had to try the case, either civil or
criminal.

The fact that sheriff, in selecting talesman from courtroom, selected only white
men, there being a few colored men in the room, was not sufficient to show discrimination
against negroes. Lee v. State, 163 Md. 57...

An. Code, 1924, sec. 16. 1912, sec. 16. 1904, sec. 16. 1888, sec. 16. 1798, ch. 94.

16. If the parties or their counsel agree, the drawing of a panel of
twenty jurors in any cause may be dispensed with.