188 THE USE BOOK APPENDIX. 



and if it be true that inasmuch as the sole question involved in 

 this case is the constitutionality of the act, an appeal will not lie ia 

 this case from our decision to the circuit court of appeals a ques- 

 tion which it is not proper for us to determine we still feel that 

 the determination of the circuit court of appeals is binding upon us. 

 An appeal does not lie from our decision in this case to the Supreme 

 Court of the United States, and yet if such court had determined 

 the question of the constitutionality of the act such determination 

 would be binding upon us. 



Inasmuch as the circuit court of appeals is a court exercising 

 appellate jurisdiction over us in criminal cases of this character, 

 we are in like manner bound by its determination upon this ques- 

 tion, although the record may prevent an appeal being taken to 

 such court in the particular case before us. Indeed, if it be true 

 that no appeal lies to any court from our decision in capital cases 

 or in criminal cases where the constitutionality of a Federal statute 

 is the sole question involved, but the right of review of our deci- 

 sions in criminal cases is confined to the appellate jurisdiction of 

 the circuit court of appeals in minor criminal cases, and when less 

 important questions are involved, this somewhat anomalous con- 

 dition of the law should not prevent our recognizing the binding 

 force of a determination of such circuit court of appeals upon such 

 constitutional question, since if the record in this case presented 

 other questions for review, thereby giving it jurisdiction, such 

 court undoubtedly would have the right to, and would review in 

 connection therewith our determination upon the constitutional 

 question involved. Therefore, if it be that the correctness of our 

 determination upon the constitutional question can not be passed 

 upon by such court in this particular case, it is perhaps for that 

 reason all the more incumbent upon us to follow in the path 

 marked out for us by that court. 



Farns worth v. Montana, 129 U. S., 104; 

 Cross v. United States, 145 U. S., 571; 

 Chapman v. United States, 164 U. S., 436; 

 In re Heath, 144 U. S., 92; 

 Carter v. Roberts, 177 U. S., 496; 

 Holt v. Indiana Co., 80 Fed., 1; 

 Texas & P. R. Co. v. Blook, 60 Fed., 979; 

 Hubinger Co. v. Ry. Co., 98 Fed. 897; 

 Davis v. Burke, 97 Fed., 501. 



As we feel that we are in any event controlled by the decision 

 on the Dastervignes case, we do not think it necessary to state to 

 what extent we have changed our views from our original holding 

 in the light of a further examination of the question and the fuller 

 discussion afforded us upon the reargument. 



Judgment will be entered affirming the judgment entered in the 

 lower court in favor of the United States. 



