Raentsch

California State Constitution, Art. I, Sec. 13.

In Re Rider, 50 Cal. App. 797 .

Penal Code, Section 1093, Subd. 5, provides:

*108 Penal Code, Sec. 1095, provides as follows:

From the foregoing, it will be seen that the limit .of the court’s discretion is that it may direct that one counsel on a side may argue a criminal case. The law of the matter is found under Trial, 38 Cyc. at page 1470:

Under the foregoing authority, there are a large number of cases cited, and from the declaration of the right to argue, it necessarily follows that a refusal to allow argument would, as in the authorities cited, be held error.

It will be noticed that every authority cited in support of the foregoing proposition is a civil case. Apparently no court has ever yet presumed to refuse a partythe right to argue in a .criminal case. In the case of Douglass vs. Hill, 29 Kans. 527 , Justice Brewer, at that time a member of the Kansas Supreme Court and subsequently a member of the United States Supreme Court, said of the denial of the trial court to permit árgument in that case (at pages 528 and 529) :

In addition to the foregoing authorities, and in support of the proposition that the statute…