Edgerton

(concurring).

I concur in the decision reached by Judge DENMAN and in the opinion prepared by him insofar as it treats of the amendment to (or the deletion from) the indictment. Implicit in the reason for the holding that the amendment is fatal to the judgment is the conclusion that the amendment does affect the substantial right of appellants.

I concur in Judge STEPHENS’ concurring opinion.

This is an appeal from a judgment of the district court in which the defendants, J. Howard Edgerton and Clifford W. Twombly, were convicted of using the mails to defraud in violation of 18 U.S.C.A. § 338 . They have brought separate appeals to this court.

Appellants and five other persons were jointly charged by indictment on fifteen counts with devising a scheme and using the mails to obtain money and property from the investors in a building and loan association which was organized and conducted business under the laws of the State of California. The general nature of the alleged scheme as set forth in the indictment (and ostensibly shown by the evidence) was the creation of a corporation, First Security Deposit Corporation, hereafter called the Deposit Corporation, for *698 the purported purpose of liquidating the former building and loan association. Thereafter a series of independent or subsidiary corporations were created and controlled by the defendants, through which they would repurchase, at depressed market prices, interests in the Deposit Corporation held by those to be defrauded, and resell such interests at par value to the latter corporation, which they likewise…