In this alleged conspiracy to “transport in interstate * * * commerce any goods * * * knowing the same to have been * * * taken by fraud,” no substantial argument can be made on behalf of any appellant other than Clarence H. Newlin, Jr. There was overwhelming evidence that warrants their conviction by the jury. As to Newlin, Jr., it is clear from the record that he had sufficient connection with the setting up of the means through which the fraud was perpetrated and the acquisition of the property which became the subject of interstate commerce to warrant the submission to the jury of the issue of his knowledge and participation in the conspiracy.

The judgments are affirmed.