128 FEDERAL REPORTER. �Farwell V. Brown. �{Circuit Court, W. B. Wiseonsin. Febniary 13, 1880.) �ATTAcroiENT — Pkeferencb of Cbeditoes. — ^The preference of ahonafil.^ crediter does notauthorize the issuingof an attachment uponthe ground tliat the defendant has disposed of his proper'.v ■with the intent of de- frauding his creditora. �BuNN, J. This case comos up on a traverse of the piain- tifif's affidavit, upon which an attachment was issued. �The affidavit states that deponent has good reason to believe that the said defendant has assigned, conveyed, disposed of or canceUed his pxoporty with intent to defraud his creditors; and that said defendant is ahout to ahscond from the state of Wiseonsin, to the injury of his creditors. There was no proof ofïered under the charge of abseonding from the state, and the sole issue is whether the defendant had conveyed or dis- posed of his property with intent to defraud his creditors. �This is clearly the issue, and not simply whether the depo- nent, at the time of the making of the affidavit, had reason to believe the defendant had fraudulently conveyed or disposed of his property with such intent. The deponent's reason to believe was a material fact for the purpose of suing ont the writ, but counts for nothing when the facta constituting the ground for sustaining the attachment are denied. Here the parties corne to doser quarters, and use facts, instead of rea- sons for belief, for their weapons. �The defendant had in fact conveyed and disposed of the greater part of his property, consisting of a stock of goods, and some notes and store accounts, to his brother, P. E. Brown, and the issue to be tried is whether the sale was made with the intent to defraud the defendant's creditors. If it- was, the attachment must be sustained, otherwise not. �The defendant, previous to August 12, 1879, had, since the fall of 1872, been a merchant at Belmont, Wiseonsin. In July, 1878, his health failing, he sent for his brother, P. E. Brown, to corne and take charge of the store and earry on the business for him. defendant remained sick in Chicago some seveu weeks, and after coming home, not getting any better, ��� �
