And in 30 Cyc. 1454, the rule is stated as follows: "The rule that under an indictment for perjury defendant cannot be convicted on the uncorroborated testimony of a single witness is not applicable to a case of subornation of perjury." In United States v. Thompson (C.C.) 31 F. 331 (1887), Judge Deady held that the person solicited to commit perjury is not an accomplice in the crime of subornation committed by the person who suborned him, and that the fact that he committed the perjury did not prevent the jury from convicting the suborner of the solicitation on his testimony. Judge Deady held that the defendant could be found guilty of subornation of perjury on the uncorroborated testimony of the person solicited to commit the perjury; the question of his credibility being for the jury.

We find that in People v. Evans, 40 N.Y. 1, it was held that subornation of perjury may not be proven by the uncorroborated testimony of the person suborned. The contrary was held by Judge Deady in United States v. Thompson (C.C.) 31 F. 331. In State v. Renswick, 85 Minn. 19, 88 N.W. 22, it was held that, where it is sought to establish by his own testimony the perjury of the person suborned, his testimony must be corroborated, but that the fact that the accused suborned or induced him to commit the crime may be established by the uncorroborated testimony of the witness if it satisfies the jury beyond a reasonable doubt.

It was one of the few cases in which the law undertook to punish criminally an unexecuted intent or purpose to commit a crime. U.S. v. Walsh, 5 Dill. 58, Fed. Cas. No. 16,636. But, under the statute of the United States now under consideration, the doing of some act in pursuance of a conspiracy is an ingredient of the crime, and must be established as a necessary element of the offense, although the act need not be in itself criminal or amount to a crime. U.S. v. Thompson, 12 Sawy. 155, 31 F. 331. With this general statement and explanation of the statute involved in this case, I will proceed to consider the allegations in the indictment, which, as I said before, contains two counts.