Such expressions, coming with the weight of authority, are calculated to bias the minds of the jurymen, and may impair the right of the accused, guarantied by the constitution, to a trial of the issues of fact by an impartial jury. People v. Williams, 17 Cal. 142; People v. Ah Sing, 59 Cal. 400; People v. Mitchell, 55 Cal. 236; People v. Levison, 16 Cal. 99; People v. Walden, 51 Cal. 588; People v. Wong Ah Ngow, 54 Cal. 152; People v. Carrillo, Id. 63; People v. Fielen, 58 Cal. 218; People v. Graham, 21 Cal. 262; People v. Atherton, 51 Cal. 495. Fagan, a witness called by the defendant, was examined, and gave material evidence in the case.
The appellant contends that those two instructions were prejudicially erroneous. ( People v. Mitchell, 55 Cal. 236, and Davis v. Hearst, 160 Cal. 143, 177, [ 116 P. 530].) The instructions complained of are as follows: