V NEAL v. Fosrmml . 83
and the decision therein that theywere not so executed estops the par-
ties and their privies to allege or maintain aught to the contrary, in this
or anyother litigation between them. Outmm v. Morewood, 3 East, 346 ;
Cromwell v. County of Sac, 94 U. S. 351; Wd.20n’s E.v’·r v. Deen, 121 U. S.
525, 7 Sup. Ct. Rep. 1004;~ Bigelow, Estop. 84; U. S. v. Schneider, 35
Fed. Rep. 107. _
This disposes of the case made in the cross-bill. Goltra is estopped
toallege or contend that the conveyances in question are fraudulent.
That identical point was found against him in the former suit, and there-
fore, as against Foster or his grantees, he cannot make or state a. case
that will entitle him to subject the property to the satisfaction of either ~
of his judgments against the former.
In the progress of the case it was referred by the circuit judge to a
master, to take the testimony, and report the same with his conclusions
of fact and law thereon. The report iinds (1) that at the commence-
ment of this suit the several judgments mentioned in the pleadings were
owned by the plaintiifs therein, except those of Noon & Co. and Sibson,
Quackenbush & Co., which had been theretofore duly assigned to the
plaintiff, who was the owner thereof; (2) that the conveyances to Pearce
and John_A. Crawford were made in good faith, and for "full value,"
while that to William Crawford was made without consideration, and is
void as against the plaintiff and other creditors of said Foster; (3) that
on February 6, 1884, the date of said conveyances, and since, Foster
was insolvent, and has no property out of which any of such judgments
can be made; (4) that the real property conveyed to John A. Crawford
was at the date of the conveyance thereof worth $36,000, in addition to
which he then received from Foster accounts and grain-sacks worth
$6,000, in all $42,000, and that Foster then owed said Crawford on
notes and accounts $27,733.50, while the latter was liable to pay for the
former, as surety, about $16,000, all of which debts and liabilities he
released and paid, and also made good to sundry persons a deficiency in
wheat in the mill warehouse of near 20,000 bushels, which cost him
near $10,000 more, in all $53,733.50; (5) thatat the date of the con-
veyance to Pearce he was an accommodation indorser for Foster on a.
note for $5,000, that he afterwards paid; that the real property conveyed
to him wasworth $3,500, in addition to which he received $700 worth
of mill products; that the property conveyed to William Crawford was
then worth $18,000, upon which he has since expended in permanent
improvements the sum of $2,000.
Both parties excepted to the master’s report,—the plaintiff, to the find-
ing in relation to the conveyances to John A. Crawford and Pearce; and
the defendant William Crawford, to the finding concerning the convey-
ance to himself. _
On the argument, it was tacitly conceded that the conveyance to Pearce
was made for a full consideration, as found by the master, and with no ’
other purpose than to prefer him to other creditors, as the grantor law- '
Iully might, and of this there can be no doubt on the testimony.
At and before February 6, 1884, Foster was in a‘tinancial strait. By .
v.36F.no.1—3