Wagner

Agreed to be heard together by stipulation filed herein, these three cases are appeals from orders overruling the pleas in abatement interposed in the several causes.

The pleas in abatement set forth that the grand jury which found the indictments was not drawn in accordance with the Alaska jury law (Laws Alaska 1931, c. 100, § 2), in that only approximately 1,200 names and less than 1,250 names were in the jury box at the time of the drawing, and that the Alaskan law required that the riames of four-fifths of the voters, to wit, four-fifths of 5,291 should be in.the jury box. In the appellee’s answers to the purported pleas in abatement it is admitted that the names were not drawn in accordance with the law of Alaska as to the number of names placed into the jury-box. The answer in each case, however, denied that the appellant-had been or *712 would be prejudiced because of the reasons alleged in the plea of abatement, and further denied that the grand jury had been illegally drawn, for reasons with which we are not here concerned.

The appellant filed a demurrer to the answer, which demurrer the court below overruled. Whereupon the order appealed from, as stated above, was…