They argued, first, that the transfer of the note did not take effect merely by putting it in the post, and second, that it was an unlawful preference under the Fraudulent Conveyances Act 1571.
If a man has bills of exchange sent by the post, or goods consigned on shipboard, or sent by a common carrier, and has paid a valuable consideration for them, the contract is undoubtedly complete.
It has been determined, that a conveyance of all a man’s property in trade to pay a bona fide creditor of the most meritorious nature, though not amounting to half the debt, is fraudulent.
If the conveyance be to distribute all his effects just as the Statutes of Bankruptcy direct, it is fraudulent and void; because a man shall not choose his own assignees, and thereby defraud the law, which vests the power over bankrupts in the Great Seal.
In the present case there is no course of dealing of this kind; no demand; no threat; but it is done with a positive view of iniquity.Yates J, Aston J and Willes J concurred.