In  the  first  place,  as  to  the  relation  of  parent  and
child,  all  contracts  and  conveyances  whereby  bene-
fits are  secured  by  children  to  their  parents,  or  to
persons  who  stand  in  loco  parentis,  are  the  objects
of  the  court's  jealousy,  and  if  they  are  not  entered
into  with  scrupulous  good  faith,  and  are  not  reason-
able under  the  circumstances,  they  will  be  set  aside,
unless  third  parties  have  acquired  an  interest  under
them.^  And  where  a  child,  shortly  after  attaining
his  or  her  majority,  makes  over  property  to  his  or
her  father  without  consideration,  or  for  an  inade-
quate consideration,  equity  will  require  the  father
to  show  that  the  child  was  really  a  free  agent,  and
had  adequate  and  independent  advice.^  And  con-
versely in  a  recent  Canadian  case,  a  deed  of  gift,
executed  by  a  father  infirm  in  mind  and  body  in
favor  of  one  of  his  sous,  was  ordered  to  be  given
up  and  cancelled.'

In  the  next  place,  as  to  the  relation  of  guardian
and  ward.  During  the  existence  of  guardianship,
the  relative  situation  of  the  parties  imposes  a  gen-
eral inability  to  deal  with,  each  other.  But  courts
of  equity  proceed  yet  further  in  cases  of  this  sort.
They  will  not  permit  transactions  between  guard-
ians and  wards  to  stand,  even  when  they   have   oc-


1  Wright  V.  Vanderplank,  2  K.  &  J.  1 ;  8  De  G.  M.  &  G.  133 ;
Baker  v.  Bradly,  7  De  G.  M.  &  G.  597 ;  Kempsen  v.  Ashbee,  L.
K.  10  Ch.  App.  15.
''  Savery  v.  King,  5  H.  L.  Oas  627,  Davies  v.  Davies,  4  Giff.
417;  Hannah  v.  Hodgson,  30  Beav.  19.
'  Mason  v.  Seney,  11  Grant,  U.  C.  Chanc.  447.
