McWilliams v. Cornelius Bros. & Co.

Citations

• 66 Tex. 301
• 17 S.W. 767
• 1886 Tex. LEXIS 509

Syllabus

<p>1. Deed of assignment—Language—Construction—A deed of assignment was expressed to be for the benefit of all the assignor’s creditors, or such of his creditors only as would accept their dividends and discharge the debtor. Held:</p> <p>(1) Under the law a debtor can make an assignment for the benefit of all his creditors, or for the benefit of those who will accept their dividends and discharge the debtor. He must choose which course he will follow, and the law does not authorize him to assign for the benefit of all and a part, or for the benefit of all or a part.</p> <p>(2) The instrument did not settle the uses to which the assigned property was to be applied. (Catón v. Mosely, 25 Tex., 378.) The law could make no-election for the assignor; the deed was not susceptible of any interpretation that would make it effectual, and the assignment was void.</p>