Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 2.djvu/134

 ADLEB V. EOEEB. 127 �extent is deelaratory of the jurisdictionof a court of chancery over trustees, among whom are assignees under voluntary conveyances for the benefit of Creditors. �The property in possession of such assignee is not in cm- todia legis, for the assignee is not an officer of the state court, but a trustee, subject to statutory provisions compelling him to execute his trust aecording to the terms prescribed by the assignor in the conveyance. The authority of the assignee depends upon the validity of the assignment, and is not con- ferred by the court. The right of a creditor or other person interested to contest the legality of a voluntary conveyance in a court of competent jurisdiction is not obstructed by the law prescribing the manner of executing assignments made for the benefit of creditors. �A creditor having a standing in the federal courts can con- test the validity of such assignaient, and a state law cannot deprive him of it. �It remains only to determine whether this assignment was made with intent to delay, hinder and defraud creditors. �The only intent which will determine the validity of an assignment is that of the assignor, at the time it is made, and contemporaneous fraudulent acts are evidence of this intent. �It is in proof that Ecker being insolvent, and owing debts amounting to more than double the value of his assets, took from his business, within four weeks before his assignment, a sum equal to one-half of the value of the property assigned, and erected with it a building upon a lot owned by his wife, and within a short time thereafter joined with his wife in giving a mortgage upon this property to his father-in-law for three times the amount of any debt owing either by him or his wife, and this mortgage and accompanying notes were sent to the father-in-law without any request on his part or any information on the subject until the papers were received. There is no evidence to counteract or explain why such mort- gage was given for so large a sum, after one-fourth of his entire assets had been taken from his business in the manner above stated, and under circum stances caloulated to show an ����