Silva

The information contains two counts. In the first the defendants are charged with the offense of having “.in their possession and control a still, stillworm, still cap and still condenser designed, used and intended for use in the manufacture and production of intoxicating liquor for beverage purposes.” In the second it is charged that, on the same day, they did “operate and cause to be operated, a stilling device designed, used and intended for use in the manufacture and production of intoxicating liquor for beverage purposes.

The jury found the defendants guilty on the second count and not guilty on the first. The defendants separately moved for new trials, which were denied, and judgments of conviction followed. They have appealed from the judgments and the orders denying new trials. The appellants requested a transcript of the “reporter’s notes of the . . . examination of the jury panel during the time of securing the jury,” but made no request for a transcript of the reporter’s notes of the evidence taken at the trial, and no part of such evidence is contained in the record.

Appellants contend that the “verdicts are incompatible, incongruous, inconsistent and opposed to…