1. In the absence of actual intent to defraud, the primary inquiry is whether at the time of the conveyance without consideration the donor was insolvent or thereby rendered insolvent.
2. A person is insolvent within the purview of section 2 (1) of the Fraudulent Conveyance act, when the present fair salable value of his assets is less than the amount that will be required to pay his probable liability on his existing debts as they become absolute and matured.
3. The conditions existing at the time of the questioned transaction control. Held, that at the time of the gift, the donor was insolvent within the meaning of the Fraudulent Conveyance act.
4. Advances to a son by the father on account of the son's inheritance in his father's estate at his father's death, are uniformly regarded as pure and irrevocable gifts.
5. If a transaction between father and son amounts to an advancement at the time it takes place, it cannot afterwards be converted into a debt without the intervention of some new consideration. Held, the mortgage given in this case to the father by the son and his wife is void as against complainant judgment creditor.
PER CURIAM.
The decree appealed from will be affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion filed by Vice-Chancellor Leaming.
For affirmance — THE CHANCELLOR, TRENCHARD, PARKER, LLOYD, CASE, BODINE, BROGAN, VAN BUSKIRK, KAYS, DEAR, WELLS, KERNEY, JJ. 12.
For reversal — None.