Manuel

Defendant appeals from a judgment which followed her conviction of the crime of forgery.

The sole error urged as ground for reversal is the ruling of the court in denying defendant’s challenge interposed to the panel of jurors summoned to try the case. The ground of the challenge was that “there has been a substantial departure from the form provided by law in this: That, the sheriff in summoning the jury failed and intentionally omitted to draw the jury from the whole body of the county . . . but confined himself to a certain part, namely, the city of Upland, and to a certain class, namely, woihen; that in so doing the sheriff . . . was biased and prejudiced in summoning this jury.” In support of the motion^it was made to appear that the court made an order directing the sheriff to summon twenty-five good and lawful persons from the body of the county to act as jurors in the trial of the case; that in compliance with the order the sheriff summoned twenty-five women, all of whom were residents of that part of the county known as Upland; that his reason for omitting men from the jury was that the county had no accommodations for keeping • a mixed jury overnight, and, in his…