ART. 16] FRAUDULENT CONVEYANCES. 361

commissioners to assign and lay off the same, subject in either case to
confirmation or rejection by the court.

This section referred to in construing section 44—see notes thereto. Stein
v. Stein, 80 Md. 300.
See art. 46, sec. 62.

Fraudulent Conveyances.

1904. art. l6, sec. 46. 1888. art. 16. sec. 46. 1860. art. 16, sec. 35. 1835. ch. 380.

sec. 2. 1898, ch. 254.

47. In no case of a proceeding in equity to vacate any conveyance
or contract, or other act, as fraudulent against creditors, shall it be
necessary for any creditor or plaintiff in the cause to have obtained a
judgment at law on his demand, in order to the relief sought in the
case, either in his own behalf or in the behalf of any other creditors
who shall claim to participate in the benefit of the decree in the case;
but when the debt of such plaintiff shall not be admitted by the plead-
ings in the case on the part of the defendant interested in contesting
the same, the court shall, on application of any of the parties, send to
any court of law an issue for determining the fact of such indebtedness,
subject to the rules usually applied to issues out of chancery; provided
this section shall not apply to any case pending in court in this State
on April 7, 1898.*

Application of this section.

This section has no application where the thing complained of has not
been executed, but rests merely in contemplation or intention. Balls v. Balls,
69 Md. 389; Frederick Bank v. Shafer, 87 Md. 57; Hubbard v. Hubbard, 14
Md. 360; Uhl v. Dilion. 10 Md. 503.

This section applies only in equity, and does not remove the disability of a
non-judgment creditor at law. Wanamaker v. Bowes. 36 Md. 56.

This section only removes the disability of non-judgment creditors in case
of a fraudulent conveyance, but leaves the law in other cases wholly unaf-
fected. Morton v. Grafflin. 68 Md. 563.

This section applied. Flack v. Charron. 29 Md. 323; Sauderson v. Stock-
dale. 11 Md. 573; Wylie v. Basil. 4 Md. Ch. 329.

Generally.

While the bill must allege an existing indebtedness, the evidence or proof
of the debt need not be set out. Before relief can be granted, the claim
must be proved. Sinclare v. Auxiliary Realty Co . 99 Md. 230.

Object of this section. The findings of a jury as to the alleged indebted-
ness, are entitled to great weight and should prevail unless the equity court
is clearly convinced that they are erroneous. Goodman v. Wineland. 61 Md.
452.

This section referred to in deciding that a simple contract creditor can
not Interfere in litigation in which the party in possession of property, or
claiming title to it, is engaged. Postal Co. v. Snowden. 68 Md. 123.

The comprehensive language of this section, both as to what may be
vacated, and who may institute the proceeding, commented on and applied
in a partnership case. Sanderson v. Stockdale. 11 Md. 573.

This section does away witli the necessity of a lien by judgment or other-
wise, against the property, as preliminary to equitable relief Schaferman v.
O'Brien, 28 Md. 574.

*No attempt is here made to collect or annotate cases involving fraudulent con-
veyances apart from the particular application of this section—see Brantly's
Digest. See also, note to Swan v. Dent. 2 Md. Ch. 111.