668 FEDBRAIi BBPOBTBB. �would have done, and in that view it is certainly equitable that he sbould credit on the debt the value of the property. It is not denied by the counsel for Lynch that this wbuld be so, but for an agreement betweeu the parties suggested by him that the proceeds only should be applied on the debt. Thi» is not proved by the testimony. I think the case should be referred back for further proof as to the value of the property at the time of the sale, or afterwards, -when used and disposed of by Lynch, and as to the existence of such an agreement, if the claimant desires to make such proof. �The deposition of proof of debt is very defective in not set- ting forth how and when the property was sold. This should be amended. �Order accordingly. ���BuEDicK, Assignee, v. Gill and Wife. [Oircuit Cov/rt, D. lowa. Aprll 29, 1881.) �1. Fbaudttlbnt Convbtaiice— Peesumption of Fbaud. �Fraud will be presumed where a voluntary conveyance to a wife is followed within a short time by the fraudaient disposition of the remaining estate of the grantor. �2. Samb — BcBSEQnEKT Ceeditoes. �Such conveyance will be void as to all subsequent as well as all prior creditors of the grantor. �3. Samb — Pkoof op Injctet. �It does not seem to be necessary to show injury to the creditors, In addition to a fraudaient intent, in order to avoid a conveyance upon the ground of fraud. �4. Samb — Same. �If, however, a person, when about to contract debts, makes a vol- untary conveyance, with the actual intent to deprive his future creditors of the means of enforcing collections of their debts, and this purpose is accomplished, such subsequent creditors are unques- tionably thereby injured. — [Ed. �In Bankruptcy. Appeal from district court. �Clark e Heywood and Gillmore e Andenon, for assignee. �Herschl d Preston, for Sarah Gill. ��� �
