“Words alone are not sufficient to constitute a gift, because mere words, unaccompanied by delivery could only be a promise, and there being no consideration, the promise could not be enforced, and therefore the gift would not be complete, except that, if the subject of the gift is already in the possession of the donee, the delivery may be effectuated by words. To make a valid and effective gift inter vivos there must be an intention to transfer title to the property, as well as a delivery by the donor and an acceptance by the donee. Mere intention to give without delivery is unavailing, and delivery is insufficient unless made with an intention to give. But property expressly delivered as a gift will not be presumed to have been intended as satisfaction of a debt. There must be an intention on the part of the donor to relinquish the right of dominion on one hand and to create it on the other, and the delivery must be not only of possession but also of the dominion and control of the property. To have the effect of a valid gift, therefore, the transfer of possession and title must be absolute and go into immediate effect, so far as the donor can make it so by intent and delivery, and must be so complete that if he again resumes control over it without the consent of the donee he becomes liable as a trespasser.” 12 R. C. L. pp. 932-934.
The order appealed from must be affirmed. It is so ordered.
Robinson, C, J., and Bronson and Birdzell, JJ., concur.
{{sc|Grace]], J., being disqualified, did not participate.
T. O. HUSO. as guardian of KNUT KNUTSON, SVEIN KNUTSON, MARGIT KNUTSON and KATHRINE KNUTSON, minors, Respondent, v. REGINA JASPER and PETER JASPER, her husband, et al., Appellants.
(183 N. W. 366.)
Guardian and ward—mortgaging wards’ estate and maintaining home thereon held not to show attempt to defeat wards’ interests.
1. In an action brought by a guardian of certain minors for the purpose of securing a conveyance of an interest in lands to which one
