Court Opinion

ID: 9810806
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 22:00:03.452601+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:40:14.690021
License: Public Domain

Clark, J.,
concurring : The deed is a conveyance in fee simple to the son-in-law. The recital relied on to have it decreed a conveyance in trust for his wife as to one-half is “In consideration of the sum of four hundred dollars, as an advancement to his wife, Polly Cornelia, and also for the further consideration of four hundred dollars in hand paid by said William S. McLean ” — here follows the conveyance in fee simple to McLean. From this it will be seen that the intention was to convey the whole tract to him, and remit half the purchase money as a gift to the wife. The advancement to her is not “one-half of the within conveyed land,” but “four hundred dollars” of the purchase money, and, as the law stood at that time, money given to the wife became eo instanti the property of the husband. The deed on its face not only does not warrant the allegation of the trust for the wife as to one-half, but in fact negatives it. The transaction was as if $800 had been paid by McLean, the deed made to him, and then $400. thereof immediately handed back as an advancement to the wife for the advancement to her is $400 — money, not land.