76 HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY.

dence; but this seems to me to be a strained and unnatural
view of the motives which probably influenced him at the time,
and one which could not safely be adopted, unless supported by
positive proof, or pregnant circumstances. This moreover is
not the allegation of the bill, which avers, that the deed was
made by Childs, "when he knew himself to be insolvent, and
contemplated applying for the benefit of the insolvent laws of
Maryland." Such an averment appears to me, to be inappli-
cable to a party, to whom the law in its then state, did not ex-
tend.

Conceding that the evidence in this case does show, that
Childs was in fact in insolvent circumstances at the date of the
deed, and that he knew himself to be so, (though this is like-
wise denied by his answer,) there is nevertheless not wanting
evidence, independently of the fact, that he was not entitled at
that time to apply for the benefit of the insolvent laws, going
to repel the presumption that he contemplated such an alterna-
tive.

There is not such a resemblance between the circumstances
of this case and the case of Dulaney vs. Hoffman, relied upon
by the counsel for the plaintiff, as would make the judgment
pronounced in the one, a safe precedent to be followed in the
other. The points of difference between them, if not numer-
ous, are strong and palpable and present abundant room for
a different determination. In Dulaney vs. Hoffman, there ex-
isted no impediment to an immediate application, by the parties
making the obnoxious preference, for the benefit of the insol-
vent laws, and in point of fact their application pressed rapidly
upon the heels of the transfer. In this case, at the time of the
transfer complained of, the party making it was in no condition
to apply at all, nor did he make his application for more than
three months afterwards. In that case there was no attempt
whatever to compromise with or appease the unpreferred credi-
tors, a circumstance of so much weight, as to be more than
once mentioned by the Court of Appeals in delivering their
opinion. In this, there was not only an effort to adjust their
other debts, but several of the creditors who were not preferred,