11  Cent.  Rep.  xi8.  The  opinion  is,  that,  if  any  balance  re-

The  Wisconsin  statute  empowering  an  mains  in  the  hands  of  the  representation

administrator,  in  case  of  a  deficiency  of  after  the  payment  of  debts,  and  expenses

assets,  to  sue  for  property  conveyed  by  the  of  administration,  it  goes  to  the  grantee  or

intestate  with  intent  to  defraud  his  cred-  donee  of  the  decedent,  and  not  to  the  next

itors,  confers  on  the  administrator  no  power  of  kin ;  for  the  revocation  of  any  gift,  trans-

to  maintain  a  bill  quia  timet  to  prevent  one  fer,  or  conveyance,  for  the  benefit  of  cred-

alleging  herself  to  be  the  intestate's  widow  itors,  is  only  pro  tanto.      Schoul.  Exrs.  &

from  claiming  dower  on  the  ground  of  the  Admrs.  §  220;  2  Schoul.  Pers.  Prop.  §§

invalidity  of  the  marriage.    F^ige  z'.  Fagan,  112,    113;    Burtch  v.  Elliott,  3  Ind.  100;

61  Wis.  667.  Reade  v.  Livingston,  3  Johns.  Ch.  (N.  Y.)

An  executor  or  administrator  may  main-  481 ;  Abbott  v.  Tenney,  18  N.  H.  109;  Ro-

tain  an  action  at  law  or  suit  in  equity,  to  chelle  v,  Harrison,  8   Porter  (Ala.),  352;

set  aside  a  conveyance  by  the  deceased  in  2   Sugden   V.  &   P.   (8th  Am.  ed.)    713,

fraud  of  creditors,  although  the  deceased  note  (1*) ;  McLean  v.  Weeks,  61  Me.  277.
himself  could  not  do  so.    Tenney  v.  Poor,  But  see  Martin  v.  Root,  17  Mass.  222,  228;

14  Gray  (Mass.),  500;  McLane  v,  Johnson,  Holland  v.  Cruft,  20  Pick.  (Mass.)  321,  338.
