
    Henry Ward versus Elijah A. Gould.
    Where a case was submitted to the determination of the Court upon a report of re» ferees and decided, it was held that the Court could not look into affidavits of the referees giving a construction of their report and stating the question which was intended to be presented.
    This case was formerly submitted to the determination of the Court upon the report of referees, and a decision was made, as published in 4 Pick. 104. Ward, the defendant, now offered affidavits of the referees, stating their belief that the parties to the sale mentioned in the report, by their subsequent agreement to keep it secret, meant to deceive the creditors of the vendor in regard to the ownership of the property, and that the question intended to be presented to the Court was, whether the agreement, under the circumstances of the case, was or was not such a fraud upon the creditors of the vendor as would render the sale void as to them. The Court having regarded the question of fraud as a question of fact, the defendant prayed that the report might be recommitted, in order that the fact of fraud might be stated.
   But the Court said they were not at liberty to look into the affidavits ; that to obtain the referees’ construction of their report was irregular; that they were of opinion, as before, that it was a mere matter of evidence, whether keeping the sale a secret was a fraud or not, and if the referees found t fraudulent, they should have stated the fact.

Petition for recommitment dismissed.  