Meehan

The facts and circumstances of these two eases are practically identical; therefore, while there are separate transcripts of record, they have been briefed and submitted together on this appeal and will be disposed of in one opinion.

Appellants were indicted for perjury in violation of section 125 of the Criminal Code (18 USCA § 231), and, after separate trials *858 before different juries, each was eonvieted and appeals. The perjury is alleged to have been committed during an interference proceeding before the United States Patent Office. Mansell A. Davis applied for a patent on a folding camp bed and appellant Prey also applied for a patent on the same bed. An interference was declared by the Commissioner of Patents and depositions of appellants, Prey and Meehan, were taken in support of Prey’s claim for patent. Appellant Prey offered a certain drawing (U. S. Ex. 5) as evidence that he was the inventor of the bed in question and in his deposition stated that the drawing was made by him during the month of April or May, 1925. Appellant Meehan testified by deposition that he knew the drawing was made by appellant Prey and that he had seen it in the joint office of the Kittle…