Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1885-10-25
a TEuST-nEED caEE.


}saac parrili. hc deed OF trust ex'
ecnted on tho ID day Of October, 1854
IN which his wife united conveyed e
Henrs Fegeahcimer. trustee, genera
sssorrmCat OF boots anu shoes. AIRY
Goods. clothing. and notions. and ms
store-fixtnFes. consisting OF show
case. two counters, and shelving, TO
secure to Jullas Meyer 4 Son the pay
nent Of S530.36. evidenced by 1--we
ueeoilable notes for equal amounts
pavahle 81 thlrty, sixty, and ninety
dave. four Knd tive months from the
Isl day Of October. 1854. And the
deed provide n follows. In the
event that default shall DC made III the
nsymept Of the aforementioned notes
as they become due and payable. then
the trustee. on teiag required 80 to DO
by the said julius Meyer d Son or the
holders OF the uotes. their executors,
administrator. c. assigns, shall sell
the property hereby conveyed and 1t
is covenapied and agreed between the
psrties aforesaid thst N case OF sale the
same shall be made after first adver-
tising tho time, place, and terms thereof
for i've Gays ~ some newspaper pub
hshed in the CITY Of Richmond.
The said party or the first part.
Isaac Parrill. = COVENANTS 20 pay al
taxes. dues. assessments, and charges
upon the said property 50 long as ne or
his heirs or assigns shall hold the same,
ans hereby waves the benefit OF the
homestead exemption as 10 the DEBT
secured by tins deed lie also cove
ranted 10 keep the property insured for
$3.50. 81 for the benefii Of the trustee
or his assigns. The grantor remained
In possession Of ali property embraced
IN the trast-deed, and continued TO con
duct the business and sell the trust
subject, a. If nc encumbrancc existed
thereon. Until the day OF January.
1855. lie PAID the first note al ma
turity but failing 70 meet the second
and third notes as they became due
and payable. Messfs. Meyer 81 Son flied
the deed ior record or January 3, 1888.
ThcreupOn the cOmpiainants, who are
creditors Of the Crantor, instituted this
suit 10 sci aside the deed and subject
such OF the property as remained 10 the
pavment Of then claims.
An Injunction was awarded on the
9th DAY Of MAY. 1855, restraining the
r1sntoI, trustee. and Denehciaries from
selling or otherwise disposlng OF the
trust subject. and by subsequent or
Der OF the court the property was sold.
and the proceeds arising from the sale
thereof deposited u bank 10 the credit
Ct The court, 20 abide the result Of this
controversy.
OPINION.
The complsnanis insist that the deed
from ParTill 10 tiegenheimer. trustee,
left III the graHior powers inconsistent
with and sufficient for the defeat
thereof. which were freely exercised by
hm and that the deed Is, therefore,
fraudulent aud void
The law is no. well settled that
q CONVEYANCE. proiessedlv for the
purpose Of securing creditors, IN
which the erauior expressly or im-
pledly retains a power inconsistent
with and adequate 10 the defeat Of the
avOwed object OF the conveyance, is
void as against creditors and purcha- ers
Q.anc e.. Lee g Rand, 2. 40; Shep-
pard rs. Iurpin. GT., p. 373 Ad-
dlDgton rs. Etheridge, II Gr., p. 436;
Perry Co. rs. -nandoah-F alley
Bank. Q 6r.. p. 755 Mccormick. IT,,
rs. Atkinson, rs. p. 81; and where
the deed either expressly OF by impli-
cation allows the grantor to remain in
possession Of, and exercise dominion
over. o stock IN trade conveyed for the
indemnity Of creditors until the matu-
rIty OF the debt, or until the creditors
require the property TO be sold. and
requires the grRntOr TO pay taxes Oh the
property co long a. be remains in pos
session OF the same. and the grantor
accordingly does remain IN possession
Of the properly and continues 20 buy
and sell. pay taxes, and conduct his
business generally a. If no deed had
been made. II Is the plain duty Of the
court to declare the conveyance void as
70 creditors and purchasers.
Briefly stated, the law seems 10 be
thai where a grantor remains IN pos
session Of . stock in trade, conveyed
10y tbs avowed purpose OF securing the
payment Of debts, and continues 10
carry on his business, selling the trust
subject al his Will and pleasure, &C
coTdIne 60 the usual course Of business.
without accountability 10 the trustee OF
benoiiciaries, the Court will consider
thee circumstances and resolve all
questions cf doubt against the validity
Of the conveyance.
Deeds OF tins character are calcu-
lated u mislead and deceive the pub
lie. They encourage and promote
frauds; and the strong current OF
authority Is IL favor Of declaring them
10 be fraudulent and void.
Finally, counsel for the defendants
contend that the oeed at bar should be
sustained a. u the store-hxtures. even |
II declared void as 10 the stock Of I
goods.
In the case OF Mccormick, trustee, I
q. Atkinson. &c, the grantor con- /
viewed the stock and fixtures OF drug T
store IN trust 10 secure the payment OF /
B bond payable al future day, and the
oced contained no provision giving 20 .
the trustee the right 10 take possession
o. the property OF 10 exerci control
over Il unless default should be made at
ID The payment Of the debt;
n which event the trustee, ii required
by the eeslac que trust. was authorized
10 sell the property IN the manner ana
ipon the terms specified in the deed.
The granior remained IN possession
ol The property anu continued TO sell
be stock II the line OF his business for
about eight months, when he sold the
Of the property to his
1rother. The creditors OF the pur-
'hsser levied upon the property, and IN
J contest between the trustee and the
execution creditors juice Lewis, in AZ
Ibie opinion--concurred IN by the en-
ire cours--Giscussed the question now
Elsed, and declared the deed void As 10