Lonergan

(dissenting.)

A re-examination of the record and opinion in this case has caused me to conclude that serious error was committed upon the trial, particularly in the admission in evidence of Government’s Exhibit 75. This letter contained hearsay statements that were not admissible in evidence and which were so extremely damaging in character that they could not have failed to improperly influence the jury.

A rehearing should be granted.

On .Petition for Rehearing.

Rehearing denied.

Appellant was indicted, tried, convicted, and sentenced for violating section 215 of *643 the Criminal Code, 18 U.S.C.A. § 338 . He appealed. We affirmed the judgment of conviction. 9 Cir., 88 F.2d 591 . The Supreme Court granted certiorari, 58 S.Ct. 18 , reversed our judgment, and remanded the case for further proceedings. 58 S.Ct. 430 , 82 L.Ed.-.

We held that 28 of appellant’s assignments of error (numbered 5, 9 to 25, inclusive, and 31 to 40, inclusive) did not conform to our rule 11 and, therefore, should, not be considered. The Supreme Court held that “some,' if not all,” of these assignments were “sufficiently definite and formal to demand consideration.”

Four of them (assignments 5, 20, 34, and 36) were specified in appellant’s brief, but were not discussed or argued, in his brief or orally. We have nevertheless considered these assignments, and find no merit in them.

Assignments 9 to 15, inclusive, are to the admission of and refusal to strike out the seven letters which appellant was found guilty of having mailed or caused to be mailed for the purpose of executing the fraudulent scheme described in the indictment. Objections thereto were as follows:

To the letter set…