respondent denies the allegations in the Bill that the said $500 was given "without consideration & was designed to hinder delay and defraud [creditons?]" but in truth and in fact that the provision made in the Deed of Trust to secure the payment of the said $300 - was paid for by this respondent by giving to said Ruckers the sum of $300 [ins?] each and so $300 was the consideration and a full and fair consideration for Ruckers Bond to this respondent bearing date the 1* day of January 1842. This respondent further answers and says that the said last payment aforesaid was made as aforesaid [hef?] any [Sup?] was sense upon this respondent and indeed [long?] he [illegible] the filing of this complainants Bill.
This respondent avows that at the time of making the Deed of Trust for this respondents benefit by George A Rucker said Rucker had sufficient other property (not included in said Deed of Trust) to have paid off the debt owed to [W?] Carpenter to which the complainants as securities.
It is time as alleged in the Bill that this respondent directed the Trustee to proceed to see the property conveyed in the Deed but denies that it was done for any purpose of defeating the just claims of any one else - But in the contrary this respondent [?] that he had the property sold for the purpose of making money due him, out of the property converted if its could be done - This respondent attended the sale and run up the property's as make it cover the