Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 7.djvu/897

 OOWEIiL V. APPLEOATE. 885 �section. It must be alleged and proven by the plaintiff not only that the cohveyance to the Drains was insufficiently stamped or the stamps not cancelled, but that the omis- sion in either case arose, not from accident or ignorance, but was the resuit of an "intent to evade the provisions" of the law; that is, with intent to defraud the government of the stamp duty. Camphell v. Wilcox, 10 Wall. 422; Green V. Holway, 101 Mass. 243. �The act (schedule B) provides that when the " considera- tion " of the conveyance does not exceed $500, it shall be stamped with a stamp of the value of 60 cents, and an additional stamp of the same value for every additional $600 of consideration. The statement in the d.eed of the nature and amount of, the consideration, is at most only prima facie true, and may be contradicted. Therefore the stamps must be Bufficiient for the actual consideration, be that more or loss. �It appears from the bill that the conveyance in question is not suffioiently stamped, — the true consideration being. $2,000, while that expressed in the deed and for which it is stamped is only $600, — and that the stamp actually used is not cancelled. But it does not appear that the omission to , stamp the conveyance as for a consideration of $2,000 rather tban $500, or the omission to cancel the one actually used,, was the resuit of an intention to defraud the government; and this intent will not be presumed from the mere fact of the omissio», which may have been caused by ignorance or accident. It must be alleged and proved; but the weight to be given to the fact of omission, as an item of evidence, will depend upon the circumstances. �It is true that every one is presumed to intond the ordinary consequences of his voluntary act, (Or. Civil Code, § 766, subd. 3 ;) and it is equally true that a necessary consequence of the omission to duly stamp this conveyance was a loss to the gov- ernment. But it is still open to question whether the omis- sion was the voluntary act — the very will and purpose — of the maker of the conveyance; and even if it was, whether the motive of the act was to defraud the government or not. ��� �