#### Roane’s Administrator v. Vidal.

Argued, Tuesday, January 18th, 1814.

i. Equitable Aid — Enforcement of Secret Trust to Defraud Creditors. — A Court of Equity ought not to give its aid to a plaintiff claiming under a deed of gift from a person who made a previous transfer of the same property to another for the purpose of defrauding creditors; the object of the bill being to enforce a secret trust between such transferor and transferee.

This was a suit, in the Superior Court of Chancery, for the Williamsburg District, on behalf of William George Vidal against John Roane, administrator, with the will annexed, of Thomas Roane, deceased, for certain negroes claimed by the plaintiff, under a deed of gift, from Mrs. Frances Daniel, widow of George Daniel, deceased, of whom the said Thomas Roane, in his life time was administrator ; and also for *her share of the residuum of the estate of the said George Daniel.

From the bill, answer, exhibits and depositions, it appeared that Mrs; Daniel had bought the negroes in question, at the sale of the estate of her husband, by the administrator ; that she afterwards gave a bond to Thomas Roane, acknowledging that she had hired them of him, during her natural life, for the sum of twelve shillings yearly, promising to clothe and feed them, and pay their taxes during her life ; and at her death they were to return to the said Thomas Roane, his heirs, executors, administrators, or assigns. In her deed to Vidal, (conveying to him the said negroes and her share of the residuum aforesaid,) and in his bill, the object of that bond was stated to have been to defraud her creditors. In the defendant’s answer, this allegation was declared to be false ; and it was averred, that Mrs. Daniel, being unable to pay, or give security for, the price of the slaves, Thomas Roane agreed to take the purchase on himself, and to give her the use of them for life ; in consequence of which agreement the said bond was executed. From the testimony it appeared that, after executing the bond, she took the oath of insolvency, and gave in a schedule of her property, without comprehending therein those negroes, of whom she continued in possession. Her deed to Vidal was executed in her last illness, at a time when her death was expected. The fraud and combination between Thomas Roane and her was proved, only, by evidence of her own declarations.

The chancellor, on the 22d of April, 1812, decreed that the defendant do deliver up to the plaintiff, to be cancelled, the bond, or deed, given by Frances Daniel, to his testator Thomas Roane, deceased, dated the first day of January, 1798 ; and that the defendant also deliver into the possession of the plaintiff the slave Judy, and all her increase, to wit, Martha, Ceano, Noah, Caty, Fdy, and Godfrey, and their increase, or such as may have been born since the institution of this suit; that the defendant render an account, before a commissioner, of the annual hires and value of the said *slaves, from the --- day of December, 1807, until the present time; that an account also be taken of the value of any of the said slaves which may appear to the said commissioner to have been sold ; and that interest be calculated thereon from the time of such sale— “and the court, being of opinion that no order or decree could be made in this cause, relative to the residuum of the estate of George Daniel, deceased, until all the parties interested were before the court, directed the plaintiff to amend the bill.”

On the prayer of the defendant, an appeal was granted him from this decree.

Wickham for the appellant.

Wirt for the appellee.

Saturday, January 29th, 1814,

the president pronounced the following opinion of this court.

The court, having maturely considered the transcript of the record of the decree aforesaid, the original bond from Frances Daniel to Thomas Roane, and the arguments of counsel, is of opinion, that it is fully proved, in this case, that Frances Daniel was the purchaser of the slaves Judy and her children, at the public sale thereof, made by the administrator of her deceased husband, and thereby became vested with the absolute right to the said slaves.

It is stated in the bill, and also in the deed under which the appellee claims, that she transferred her right to the said slaves to the intestate of the appellant, for the express and sole purpose of defrauding her creditors ; and that she gave a writing, evincing this transfer of property, to the said intestate ; and it is in proof that she took the oath of an insolvent debtor, without surrendering these slaves, although she admits, in her deed to the appellee, that there was a secret trust between her and the appellant’s intestate, that the said slaves were to remain her property. *79And this bill is brought to enforce a compliance with this secret trust.

"The answer denies the fraud and combination alleged in the bill; and it is no where proved, except by the declarations of the said Frances: but, if it were fully proved, a Court of Fquity would be bound, not only by its own principles, but by the express letter of the statute made in suppression of such transactions, to refuse its aid to a party claiming under such circumstances. The court is therefore of opinion, that the said decree of the Court of Chancery is erroneous in giving the slaves in controversy to the appellee ; and that the bill, as to them, ought to have been dismissed : and that, in taking the accounts, under this view of the case, the representatives of the said Frances Daniel would be properly chargeable, out of her share of the residuum of her deceased husband’s estate, with fifty pounds one shilling, the price of the said slaves, and interest thereon. But, should it appear to the said Court of Chancery, (as one witness says the said Frances confessed was the fact,) that, she being unable to pay, or give security for the price of the said slaves, the intestate of the appellant agreed to take the purchase on himself, and to give her the use of them during her life, then he would be a bona fide purchaser thereof, for a valuable consideration ; and his representatives would be chargeable, in the accounts to be taken, with the said price and interest.

Therefore, it is decreed and ordered, that the said decree, so far as it gives the slaves in controversy, with their increase, value, and hires, to the appellee, and directs the bond, or deed, to be cancelled, be reversed and annulled ; that the bill, so far as it claims the said slaves, he dismissed ; and that the appellee pay to the appellant his costs by him expended in the prosecution of his appeal aforesaid here ; and it is ordered that the cause be remanded to the said Court of Chancery, to have the proper parties brought before that court, and the necessary accounts taken, to ascertain the residuum of the estate of George Daniel, deceased, pursuant to the foregoing principles’, in order to a final decree.