Page:North Dakota Reports (vol. 48).pdf/503

 conveyance in toto in behalf of creditors. This case is on all fours with the case at bar. Clark v. Bell, 40 Tex. Civ. App. 3989 S. W. 38.

The following cases lay down the same rule on fact very similar. Russell v. Davis, 133 Ala. 647; 31 So. 514; 91 Am. St. R. 56; Cox v. Collis, 109 Iowa 270; 80 N. W. 343; Wiltse v. Flack, 115 Iowa 51; 87 N. W. 729; Griswold v. Szwanek, Neb., 118 N. W. 1073.

"A husband cannot give to his wife that which the law regards as belonging to his creditors. Hence, if he is insolvent, or if his conveyance leaves him with an amount of property insufficient to pay his debts, it may be avoided at the instance of existing creditors." 12 R.C. L. p. 516.

"A conveyance from husband to wife requires less proof to show fraud, and, when a prima facie case is made, stronger proof to show fair dealing, than would be required if the transaction were between strangers." 12 R. C. L. 515.

This court has recognized the above rule. Meichen v. Chandler, 20 N. D. 233.

Theodore Koffel, for respondents.

The wife is not required to keep any books or account when dealing with her husband in relation to her separate estate. Buhl et al v. Peck et ux, 37 N. W. 876.

That relationship between the vendor and vendee is not a badge of fraud, nor a ground for suspicion, has been recently held by our own Court. First National Bank of Ashley v. Mensing, 180 N. W. 58; Fluegel v. Henschal, 74 N. W. 996.

No presumption of fraud can arise from the mere fact that the parties to the conveyance in question are husband and wife. Nor can there be any ground for scrutinizing the transaction more carefully or with greater suspicion than if the conveyance had been made to strangers. Beach v. White, Walk; 495; Perkins v. Perkins, 1 Tenn. 537; Teller v. Bishop, 8 Minn. 226.

The relationship does not create a presumption.of fraud. - Note 2, go Am. St. Rep. 497.

Neither was she required to take from her husband any kind of acknowledgements of indebtedness for her advance. Adoue v. Spencer, 50 L. R. A. 817 and note.

Mere suspicion does not render a conveyance fraudulent. Steele v. DeMay, 60 N. W. 684.