purchaser for value and to entitle him to the protection due a purchaser without notice of the fraud. The fact that a transferee of goods in payment of an antecedent debt from a fraudulent vendee paid the latter a small sum of money, as an additional consideration, on the advice of his lawyer, and for the sole purpose of making the sale valid, does not make him a bona fide purchaser for value.34 One holding under a deed expressed to be for a small sum of money and for love and affection stands in the same condition as his grantor, to whom the property was conveyed in fraud of creditors of the next preceding grantor.35 When a stranger pays a mortgage debt in whole or in part, he becomes, however, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, by implication a purchaser of the debt to the extent of his payment. If the mortgaged property is conveyed to such stranger, the payment of the mortgage is sufficient consideration to support the conveyance, and if the grantee takes the conveyance without knowledge of the intention of the grantor to defeat his creditors, he is entitled to hold the property. 36

§ 57. Rights and liabilities as to original parties.-A bona fide purchaser for value and without notice from a fraudulent grantee takes a good title and, as against him, the original grantor and his heirs are estopped from setting up the fraudulent character of the original conveyance," either for the purpose of recovering the property, enforcing a trust or secret equity arising from the fraud perpetrated by the original grantor on his credi

38

34. Victoria Paper Mills Co. v. New York, etc., Co., 28 Mich. Rep. (N. Y.) 123, 58 N. Y. Supp. 1070.

35. Harrison v. Hatcher, 44 Ga. 638.

36. Jennings v. Smith, 22 Pa. Co. Ct. 554.

37. Fury v. Kempin, 79 Mo. 477, aff'g 9 Mo. App. 30.

38. Somers v. Pumphrey, 24 Ind. 231; Fary v. Kempin, supra.

In Texas, under Act Jan. 18, 1840, § 2, a purchaser from one who has been in possession of goods, chattels, or slaves, for more than three years, cannot commit a fraud against one who asserts that he had loaned the property to the party in possession, without exhibiting any written contract of loan. Grumbles v. Sneed, 22 Tex. 565.

tor," or defeating a right of action accruing to such purchaser to foreclose and enforce a fraudulent mortgage transferred to him by the mortgagee." Such a purchaser, however, can enforce only such rights as he has acquired from the fraudulent grantee, and has no right of action to enforce a voluntary contract which existed between the original parties." A fraudulent grantee will not be heard to assert that the transaction with his grantor was colorable, fraudulent, and for the accommodation of his grantor, as against one who, relying upon the record, and in good faith, has purchased the property from him."

58. Rights and liabilities as to creditors of original grantor generally. A bona fide purchaser for value is protected, under the statutes of 13 and 27 Elizabeth and similar statutes adopted in this country, whether he purchases from the fraudulent grantor or the fraudulent grantee, and there is no difference in this respect between a conveyance made to defraud subsequent creditors, and one made to defraud subsequent purchasers, they both being voidable, and not void. It has been held that a fraudulent conveyance is, as against creditors of the grantor, absolutely void under these statutes, and that a bona fide purchaser from the fraudulent grantee acquires no title, because his grantor's title is void," but this doctrine is no longer maintained by the

39. Sorrells v. Sorrells, 4 Ark. 296; O'Brien v. Gaslin, 20 Neb. 347, 30 N. W. 274; Danbury v. Robinson, 14 N. J. Eq. 213, 82 Am. Dec. 244.

40. Moffett v. Parker, 71 Minn. 139, 73 N. W. 850, 70 Am. St. Rep. 319; Alliance Trust Co. v. O'Brien, 32 Or. 333, 50 Pac. 801, 51 Pac. 640, possession is not constructive notice to a mortgagee of a tenant's equitable interest in the mortgaged premises, where the loan was secured by one to whom the legal title had been transferred in fraud of creditors.

43

41. Quirk v. Thomas, 6 Mich. 76. 42. Silverman v. Bullock, 98 Ill. 11.

43. Anderson v. Roberts, 18 Johns. (N. Y.) 515, 9 Am. Dec. 235; Wright v. Howell, 35 Iowa, 288; Danbury v. Robinson, 14 N. J. Eq. 213, 82 Am. Dec. 244; Boyer v. Weimer, 204 Pa. St. 295, 54 Atl. 21; Reynolds v. Vilas, 8 Wis. 471, 76 Am. Dec. 238. And see cases cited in notes 46 and 47, infra.

44. Roberts v. Anderson, 3 Johns. Ch. (N. Y.) 371, rev'd 18 Johns. 515,

courts. It is now held, as a general rule, that a bona fide purchaser or incumbrancer of property from a previous grantee or vendee, to whom it had been conveyed for the purpose of defrauding creditors, before the creditors have taken any steps to subject the property or set aside the fraudulent conveyance, takes a good title, and is entitled to protection as against the claims of the creditors of the original grantor who were intended to be defrauded by the first conveyance, who have not acquired a prior

lien on the property," or as against a subsequent purchaser at a sheriff's sale of the property on execution under a judgment

48

against the fraudulent grantor. A conveyance by a wife to a bona fide purchaser of land which her husband caused to be conveyed to her in fraud of his creditors is good as to his creditors, though they had no notice of it, by record or otherwise.19 But a subsequent purchaser from the fraudulent grantee will be postponed to a prior purchaser at an execution sale under a judgment against the fraudulent grantor, although the fraudulent grantee was in possession at the time of the sale, and his vendee was a purchaser for value and without notice of the fraud.50 The statute against fraudulent conveyances affords no protection to innocent purchasers of property from conditional vendees, although the conditional sale is not recorded as required by statute, unless such purchaser, or those under whom he claims, has had possession for the period prescribed by the statute.51

§ 59. Protection according to nature and extent of consideration. A bona fide purchaser or incumbrancer from a fraudulent grantee of property conveyed in fraud of creditors, of which he had no knowledge, is entitled to protection to the extent of the

Va.-Coleman v. Cocke, 6 Rand. 618, 18 Am. Dec. 757.

Wash.-Sawtelle v. Weymouth, 14 Wash. 21, 43 Pac. 1101.

W. Va.-Blackshire v. Pettit, 35 W. Va. 547, 14 S. E. 133.

Wyo.-Metz v. Blackburn, 9 Wyo. 481, 65 Pac. 857.

Can.-Dalglish v. McCarthy, 19 Grant Ch. (U. C.) 578.

Eng.-Halifax Joint Stock Banking Co. v. Gledhill (1891), 1 Ch. 31, 60 L. J. Ch. 181, 63 L. T. Rep. N. S. 623, 39 Wkly. Rep. 104.

A bona fide vendee of a purchaser at a tax sale may hold the title as against creditors, although the debtor permitted the sale to avoid creditors. Brooks v. Jones, 114 Iowa, 385, 82 N. W. 434, 86 N. W. 300.