670 FBDBBi.Ii BBPOBTEB. �was honest and hona fide, when we find that it was followed within a moath by the inauguration of a scheme to dispose of what remained for the purpose of defrauding creditors^ The intent may be collected from the circumstances, and need not be shown by direct and positive proof . Bump on Fraud- aient Conveyanoes, 309. And among the prominent badges of fraud are the "immediate engagement in hazardous bus- iness, and the contracting of debts immediately after the transfer," To which we may add, in this case, the frauda- ient disposition of the remaining estate of the grantor very soon after the conveyance. �2. The well-settled rule is that where a conveyance ia intentionally made to defraud ereditors, it is void as to all sub- sequent as well as prior ereditors; and it is certainly within the rule to say that if the conveyance is made with a vicw to defrauding subsequent ereditors, it is as to them void, although all prior ereditors are paid in full. Story's Eq. Jur. 362 et seq.; Bump on Fraudulent Conveyances, 311; Sexton V. Wheaton, 8 Wheat. 229; Kerr on Fraud and Mis- take, 206, 207; 1 Am. Lead. Cases, Hare & Wallace's notes, (5th Ed.) 42, and cases cited in note 2. The general doc- trine asserted by these authorities is not questioned, but it is insisted that the complainant must show not only the intent to defraud subsequent creditera, but that such ereditors have actually been injured thereby. It is insisted that the intent to defraud is not enough, if no one is, in fact, injured. I do not find that this distinction ia noticed in the books ; but, even if Sound, I do not think it can avail respondents in thia case. �If a person, when about to contraot debts, makes a volun- tary conveyance, with the actual intent to deprive bis future ereditors of the means of enforoing collections of their debts, and this purpose is aocomplished, I am very clearly of the opinion that such subsequent ereditors are injured and defrauded. A creditor has a right, when. extending credit, to rely upon the honesty and good faith of the debtor. He may assume, without inquiry, that the debtor has made no fraudulent conveyances of property, The debtor cannot be ��� �
