Jones v. Heronford

Opinion of the Court by

Judge Hardin:

Whether the sale from E. H. Jones, of the slaves to the appellant was actually fraudulent or not, or whether the expressed consideration of the bill of sale was feigned or not, there is no contrariety of evidence as to the possession of the slaves after the date of the contract. There was no change of possession, but E.. M. Jones remained, as he had been before, in possession of the slaves.

In such a case the doctrine is too well settled to admit of controversy, that the sale is fraudulent per se and void as to Toona fide creditors of the vendor. It is true…