In Davidson v. Maguire, 27 Gr. 483, Proudfoot, V.C., doubted whether this decision had not gone too far, as the interest which the assignees were thus allowed to reach was not saleable under execution at law. It was, however, subsequently commented on and approved of in the same case when in this court, 7 A.R. p. 98, where the Chief Justice said: “It is the withdrawing from the reach of creditors that which is exigible at the suit of creditors that is evidently pointed at by the statute. * * It ought to be immaterial, and I think is immaterial, whether that which is withdrawn from creditors is converted into something exigible at the suit of creditors or not. If converted into something not exigible, then the creditors may follow that which has been withdrawn from them into land or stock or whatever else has been purchased therewith.”
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.