Hanson

(after stating the facts as above). The record shows that the case came on for trial before the court below July 8, 1924, a jury having been ex- , pressly waived by the parties, and that not a single exception complained of by any assignment of error was taken during the course of the trial. That being so, even if there had been any error committed by the court in any of its rulings during the trial, they cannot be here considered, not only because of provisions of the federal statute, but of numerous decisions of the Supreme Court, of this court, and many other federal courts. See sections 649, 700, Revised Statutes (Comp. St. §§ 1587, 1668), and sections 1266-1268 Compiled Statutes of 1918; Norris v. Jackson, 9 Wall. 125 , 19 L. Ed. 608 ; Cooper v. Omohundro, 9 Wall. 65 , 22 L. Ed. 47 ; Town of Martinton v. Fairbanks, 112 U. S. 670 , 5 S. Ct. 321 , 28 L. Ed. 862 ; Lehnen v. Dickson, 148 U. S. 71, 13 , S. Ct. 481, 37 L. Ed. 373 ; Pabst Brewing Co. v. E. Clemens Horst Co. (C. C. A.) 264 F. 909 ; Oakland Water Front Co. v. LeRoy (C. C. A.) 282 F. 385 ; Dunsmnir v. Scott, 217 F. 200 ; United States v. Columbia, etc., R. R. Co. (C. C. A.) 274 F. 625 ; United States Shipping Board…