to serve or to escape, deliberately equivocates in answer to
an important question as to his personal history.

"Are you acquainted with the accused or his family?" mildly
inquires the assistant prosecutor. "No--not at all," the
talesman may blandly reply.

The answer, perhaps, is literally true, and yet the prosecutor
may be pardoned for murmuring

"Liar!" to himself as he sees that his memorandum concerning
the juror's qualifications states that he belongs to the same
"lodge" with the prisoner's uncle by marriage and carries an
open account on his books with the defendant's father.

"I think we will excuse Mr. Ananias," politely remarks the
prosecutor; then in an undertone he turns to his chief and
mutters: "The old rascal! He would have knifed us if we'd
given him the chance!" And all this time the disgruntled Mr.
Ananias is wondering why, if he didn't "know the defendant or
his family," he was not accepted as a juror.

Of course, every district attorney has, or should have,
information as to each talesman's actual capabilities as a
juror and something of a record as to how he has acted under
fire. If he is a member of the "special" panel, it is easy to
find out whether he has ever acquitted or convicted in any
cause celebre, and if he has acquitted any plainly guilty
defendant in the past it is not likely that his services will
be required. If, however, he has convicted in such a case the