This appeal is pitched exclusively on the contention of appellant that the Government’s case was established solely by circumstantial evidence and that such-evidence “was wholly insufficient to convict, as it did not exclude, as it must, every other reasonable conclusion than that of guilt”. Appellant does not deny having done the acts that are alleged as the overt act under the conspiracy. There was ample evidence of the existence of a conspiracy and of appellant’s, identification with the other alleged conspirators to warrant the finding by the-trial court, sitting without a jury, that appellant was guilty beyond a reasonable-doubt.

The judgment is affirmed.