Boling

The defendant was convicted of the crime of manslaughter, under an information charging him. with murder; from the judgment and an order denying a new trial he appeals.

His first point is, that the court erred in not allowing his challenges as to three persons sworn to answer ques *381 tions as jurors, on the ground of actual bias. There was no exception taken to the decision of the court in the admission or rejection of testimony upon the trial of the challenges.

It has been often held by the appellate court that no exception can be taken to a decision disallowing a challenge to a juror for actual bias; that section 1170 of the Penal Code does not authorize it. (People v. Riley, 65 Cal. 108 , and cases there cited.)

It is also urged that the court erred in giving, of its own motion, a part of instruction 8, which is: “When the act is proved to have been done by the defendant, if it be an act itself unlawful, the law in the first instance presumes it to have been intended, and the proof of justification or excuse lies on the defendant to overcome this legal and natural presumption.” And also in giving in the same way this part of instruction 9: “Malice is implied by law from…