case Hungerford all versus earl all April Eq can ab pl Freem c the father make  a settlement on trustee in trust to pay his debt therein mention reserve pound  a year to himself for life remainder to his son c father continue in  possession and twelve year after contract debt by bind whether the settlement  be fraudulent as to the bondcreditors the father make a voluntary settlement  on trustee to raise money to pay his debt therein mention and portion for his  young child reserve pound per and Vernon chancery case er p to himself for  life remainder of the whole to his son for life and to his first and other son  in tail c the plaintiff be bondcreditors to the father for money lend twelve  year after the make of this settlement question whether the settlement  fraudulent against they vide Sagitary v hide ante p Vernon chancery case per  Lord commissioner Hutchins the settlement fraudulent and the plaintiff ought  to have a decree for it be proper to be determine here for this court  determine touch charity and fraud long before the make of any statute concern  the same this settlement not pursue for the trustee do not enter and take  possession accord to the deed but permit the father to live in the house c and  a deed not at first fraudulent may afterward become so by be conceal or not  pursue by which mean creditor be draw in to lend their money but the other two  commissioner doubt it be send to be try at law say vide white v Hussey all pre  Ch where the lord commissioner all of opinion they may decree a conveyance to  be fraudulent mere for be voluntary and that without any trial at law the  principal case be this William Roger Esq be seize in fee of the premise in  question of about pound per and mortgage the same to one reynardson in fee who  by the direction of Roger in assign the mortgage to earl and the other  defendant and then reynardson and Roger and his wife in consideration of pound  debt owe by Roger to various person name in the deed and of a jointure to the  wife do by lease release and fine convey the say premise to the use of earl  and the other defendant and their heir in trust for the payment of the say  debt out of the rend or by lease or sale of any part thereof and until the  debt pay for payment of pound per and to Roger and his wife for maintenance of  they and their child and pound per and for Roger his private expense and after  payment of the debt for payment of pound per and to Roger and his wife during  their life and after the death of the survivor of they to the first and so to  the ten son in tail remainder to daughter in tail and the say trustee be by  sale or mortgage of any part of the premise to secure the annuity or rend  charge aforesaid and the residue of the rend and profit be limit to the say  Roqers and his heir so as he may take the profit but not dispose of they but  for the full value except it be for a jointure for another wife or such  occasion as shall be allow of by two trustee and in case the say Roger and his  wife die leave a son and daughter such son be to give pound to his sister out  of the pound per and to he limit with a power for the say Roger and one of the  trustee join to revoke the settlement of pound per and limit to the son and to  settle it upon other child it appear that Roger keep possession of the house  and part of the estate from the time of the settlement until his death and  farm it and cut down timber c and receive the profit and defendant earl of the  other part and in the course of such management about twelve year after the  settlement contract debt with the plaintiff but of what nature do not appear  Roger die without have revoke the settlement leave William Roger his son one  of the defendant and three daughter and about six year after his death one of  the daughter marry and about three year after that another marry and both  their portion be pay or secure by defendant William Roger who have also give  the three sister security for her dividend and pay off the survive trustee  pound remain due on the account and take back the legal estate of the premise  be worth about pound per and and the say trustee and Roger have sell part of  the say estate before the say plaintiff debt be contract and from the time of  the settlement the court baron and leet be call in the name of the say Roger  and the trustee as lord of the manor under these circumstance a trial at law  as to the validity of the settlement be order Reg lib a fol No contrariety of  opinion appear in the register book Vernon chancery case er p