30 KIPP v. HANNA.—2 BLAND.

sumed trust that affords the evidence of an intended fraud against
creditors; because it is perfectly evident, that a man who is greatly
indebted, cannot, nor ought not, to be allowed to reserve for his
own use, or to give away his property to the prejudice of his
creditors—and consequently no donation can be permitted to stand
against them, where it is at all doubtful, whether or not the re-
maining" property of the grantor will be sufficient to satisfy all his
debts; Walker v. Burrows, 1 Atk. 93; Taylor v. Jones, 2 Atk. 602;
although the fact of the grantors being totally insolvent at the
time, would be conclusive evidence of the fraudulent character of
the conveyance; yet his being at the time indebted in some small
amount, compared with his property and circumstances, and the
value of the donation, would not, of itself, and alone, affect the
validity of the conveyance; because every man must be indebted
for the common bills of his house, though he pays them every
week. Lush v. Wilkinson, 5 Ves. 387; Kidney v. Coussmaker, 12

Ves. 155; Nunn v. Wilsmore, S. T. R. 529.

In the case under consideration, it appears that Alexander B.
Hanna was a tradesman, in no very extraordinary affluent circum-
stances; his household furniture formed a considerable part of his
estate, even according to his own reckoning; and, counting up his
whole fortune, the house and lot, in controversy, formed a large
and important portion of it; yet with debts, then due and still un-
paid, amounting to between twelve and thirteen hundred dollars,
he made this voluntary conveyance of that very large and im-
portant portion of his estate, in trust for the benefit of his wife
and children; which donation, however, he had not finally per-
fected, by * clearing it of all incumbrances, until after he

35 became much embarrassed in his pecuniary affairs, and just
before his legally avowed insolvency. I am, therefore, perfectly
satisfied, that this deed of the 22d of July, 1817, must be deemed
altogether fraudulent and void as against the creditors of the de-
fendant Alexander B. Hanna.

These plaintiff's represent, as well as those who were creditors of
Alexander B. Hanna at the time he executed the deed of the 22nd
of July, 1817, as those who had become so since that time, and
prior to his obtaining the benefit of the insolvent laws. Upon the
principle, that au estate obtained by fraud can only be vacated by
him who has the prior right; Twyne's Case, 3 Co. 83; it has been
settled, as a general rule, with some few exceptions, that no credi-
tor can have a voluntary conveyance set aside, on the ground of
its having been made to his prejudice, unless he was a creditor at
the time the conveyance was made. But it has also been long
well established, that where a voluntary conveyance has _ been
vacated for the benefit of those who were creditors at the time, all
subsequent creditors may be let in to participate of the funds.
Walker v. Burrows, 1 Atk. 93; Lush v. Wilkinson, 5 Ves. 386, n;