Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 8.djvu/818

804 FECEBAL BEPOBTBB. �the bill of goods they were insolvent, and did not expect to pay for the same." The case was tried with a jury, and a verdict rendered for the plaintiffs. Motion is made for a new trial. �Barcroft, Gatch e McCaughan, for plaintiffs. �Parsons e Runnells, for defendant. �Nelson, D. J. The rule stated by Hilliard on Sales meets with my approval, tq-wit : "Where the purchaser is insolvent, and has no reasonable expectations or intention of paying for the goods, he gains no title against the vendor." It is not necessary to allege or show falsei pretence or other direct artifice. When no questions are asked, no false pretences, no artifice resorted to, silence is not fraud ; but concealment of insolvency, with no reasonable expectation of paying, renders a sale fraudaient. See Thompson v. Base, 16 Conn. 71, 81 ; Johnson v. Monell, 2 Keyes, 665; Powell v. Bradlee, 9 Gill. & J. 220, 248, 278; Talcott v. Henderson, 31 Ohio St. 162, 52, note, and p. 301, �Donaldspn v. Farewell, 93 U. S. 631, is not in confliot with the view expressed in this case., The fact?. ii^eice fully sustained the opinion annpunced by this court. The point made, that the defendant was an offtcer of the state court, and the circuit court of the United States has np jurisdiction, is nottenable. �The assignment waa the voluntary act of Harter & Clau8>,r;and the defendant was their appointee. The property is in, the defend- ant's custody as trustee for the creditors, and tb^ statutory . pro- visions relative to the exercise pf ,the trust are such as a court of chanoery would apply. �The evidence was sufficient to justify the verdict, which the court was authorized to put in proper form. �Motion denied, and it is ao ordered. Judgment will be entered by the clerk, but without costs. ��� �