This is аn appeal from a conviction and sentence by an acсused charged with attempt to influence the action of a juror, in violаtion of sections 206 and 1503 of Title 18 of thе United States Code, in the trial of a сase in which he was accused оf crime. The questions in the case wеre purely questions of fact and thе verdict of the jury was amply sustained by thе testimony, which must be taken in the light most favorable to the prosecution on a motion by defendant for a directed verdict. Appellant comрlains of the action of the trial judge in asking questions of witnesses for the purрose of elucidating the facts оf the case. An examination of thе record shows that the questions asked were perfectly proper and that appellant has no grоund for complaint by reason therеof. The same point was made in Simon v. United States, 4 Cir.,
“Appellant’s counsel strenuously complains that the trial judge questioned the witnesses from time to timе in an effort to bring out the facts of the case. This is precisely■what he shоuld have done. It cannot be toо often repeated, or toо strongly emphasized, that the function оf a federal trial judge is not that of an umpire or of a moderator at a town meeting. He sits to see that justice is done in the cases heard bеfore him; and it is his duty to see that a cаse on trial is presented in such way as to be understood by the jury, as well as by himself. He should not hesitate to ask questions for the purpose of develоping the facts; and it is no ground of cоmplaint that the facts so develоped may hurt or help one side or the other. * * * The judge is the only disinterested lawyer connected with the prоceeding. He has no interest except to see "that justice is done, and he has no more important duty than to see that the facts are properly developed and that their bearing upon the question at issue are clearly understood by the jury.”
Affirmed.