
    Halifax,
    October Term, 1798.
    
      Brodie vs. Seagroves.
    
    .T>RODIE had obtained a judgment against Finch, had tafeéis» out execution and caused it to be levied on his effects 0®, the day appointed for the sale, they conversed privately together; and the goods seised were sold by the cwnstable altogether at one bid ; namely, the standing corn, household) furniture and the tobacco, and Brodie became the purchaser», it was.; understood at the time by those present, that Brodie intended* to get satisfaction out of pan of the goods and to return the. residue ; and in consequence of this understanding, one of. the-witnesses forbore to bid. All the goods purchased, were, after, the sale, left by Brodie in Fin elds possession, who prepared the-tobacco for market, and was carrying it to Virginia, when ano-, thef creditor, one Lees, obtained judgment against him and, execution ; and by the defendant, Seagroves, a constable, seized», the tobacco and sold it, having first offered Brodie to pay the-amount of his judgment and costs, and take the tobacco, which* Brodie refused.
   Per curiara.

Haywood, Justice.

Supposing the constable* to have sold in the manner here stated, of his own accord tho’* the sale was irregular, still the property vested in the vendee £ but if sold pursuant to an agreement between Brodie and Finch,, then the unusual manner of the sale, (that is to say, the setting up of all the goods at one bid, especially when that tends as in. the present case, to make the goods sell at a ‘great undervalue,, and consequently to disappoint some creditor, who otherwise.-xnight have obtained satisfaction of his debt also) is an evidence-nf fraud which is to be collected from circumstances, and will; vitiate the sale in toto.

Verdict and judgment for the defendant*  