Opinion
May, 1810.
Action to recover damages of defendant for taking and carrying away certain goods which he had seized by a writ of replevin at the suit of Ireland. Plaintiff alleged a sale of the goods to him before this writ. Defendant, to prove the sale fraudulent, showed that vendor and vendee were near relations, and then offered evidence of other fraudulent conveyances of real estate about the same time.
That act of fraud being wholly unconnected with the present case, the proof of it cannot be admitted, nor would it be even presumptive evidence against the plaintiff if it could be admitted. Phill.Ev. 133.