Blair

(after stating the facts as above). The indictment in question is based on sections 37 and 10 of the Criminal Code of the United States (Act March 4, 1909, c. 321, 35 Stat. 1088 [Comp. St. 1913, §§ 10201, 10174]), the former of which reads:

And the section which the defendants are charged with having conspired to violate, so far as here applicable, is as follows:

[ 1 ] It is well settled that, when a case is submitted upon an agreed statement of facts, the sufficiency of the facts so agreed on to sustain the judgment entered may be reviewed on writ of error. United States v. Eliason, 16 Pet. 291, 300, 10 L. Ed. 968 ; Henderson’s Distilled Spirits, 14 Wall. 44, 53 , 20 L. Ed. 815 ; Hipple v. Bates County, 223 Fed. 22 , 138 C. C. A. 436 . See, also, Kennedy v. Brent, 6 Cranch, 187 , 3 L. Ed. 194 ; Brent v. Chapman, 5 Cranch, 358 , 3 L. Ed. 125 .

[2] The Constitution of the United States provides:

And by the Sixth Amendment of the Constitution it is declared:

The constitutional right thus secured to one charged with crime means a trial by jury according to the course of the common law, which right cannot even be waived. Thompson v. Utah, 170 U. S. 343, 346, 349, 353 , 18 Sup.…