firmation subsequently made in the enforcement of such decree. Link v. Connell, 48 Neb. 574 (67 N. W. Rep. 475).

MARRIED WOMEN.

EPITOME OF CASES.

Sec. 475. Contracts and conveyances-Disaffirmance. A married woman making a contract of suretyship is entitled to all the rights and privileges of a surety. Seibert v. Quesnel, 65 Minn. 107 (67 N. W. Rep. 803; 60 Am. St. Rep. 441). The modes of alienation by a married woman prescribed in an instrument creating a separate estate in her are not exclusive of other modes, unless such intention can be clearly gathered from the face of the instrument.

Planters Nat. Bank, 92 Va. 468 (23 S. E. Rep. 887; 32 L. R. A. 214). In Missouri it is held that a mortgage executed by a married woman, her husband joining with her, although on land not her separate estate, is valid and binding, notwithstanding the note, the payment of which is secured by the mortgage, is void because of her coverture. Cockrill v. Hutchinson, 135 Mo. 67 (36 S. W. Rep. 375; 58 Am. St. Rep. 564). The rule requiring a married woman who seeks to disaffirm a voidable contract to restore the consideration does not apply where such consideration was not actually received by her, but was paid over to her husband and she received no benefit therefrom, except indirectly, as his wife. Bradshaw v. Van Valkenburg, 97 Tenn. 316 (37 S. W. Rep. 88).

Sec. 476.

Liability for debts. The law of the state. where the separate real estate of a married woman is situated determines the question of its liability to be subjected to the payment of the claims against her. Wick v. Dawson, 42 W. Va. 43 (24 S. E. Rep. 587). Where a married woman dies ieaving an insolvent husband the necessary expense of her suitable burial may be charged against her estate. Gould v. Moulahan, 53 N. J. Eq. 341 (33 Atl. Rep. 483). A married

woman's separate estate may be subjected to a liability incurred by her on account of her failure to complete a purchase made by her at a judicial sale. Capron v. Devries, 83 Md. 220 (34 Atl. Rep. 251). Under the statutes of Alabama it is held by a divided court that a married woman cannot bind herself by a contract to pay for her husband's support in an insane asylum. McAnally v. Alabama Insane Hospital, 109 Ala. 109 (19 So. Rep. 492; 55 Am. St. Rep. 923).

Construing and applying Sand & H. Ark. Dig., §§ 49454951, providing that property owned by a married woman at the time of her marriage, or acquired afterwards, should be her separate property, and authorizing her to contract and to be sued, in reference thereto, it is held that a married woman has the right to purchase personal property, or borrow money for her separate use, and that the property purchased or money borrowed becomes her separate property. Her contract to pay for the same is a contract in reference to her separate property, and creates a personal obligation, valid in law and in equity, and this without regard to whether she owned any additional property or not. Sidway v. Nichol, 62 Ark. 146 (34 S. W. Rep. 529). Citing, Hays v. Jordan, 85 Ga. 741 (11 S. E. Rep. 833); Arthur v. Caverly, 98 Mich. 82 (56 N. W. Rep. 1102); Russell v. Bank, 39 Mich. 671; Johnson v. Sutherland, 39 Mich. 579; Gaynor v. Blewett, 86 Wis. 401 (57 N. W. Rep. 44); Carriage Co. v. Pier, 74 Wis. 585 (43 N. W. Rep. 502); Houghton v. Milburn, 54 Wis. 564 (12 N. W. Rep. 23; 11 N. W. Rep. 517); Conway v. Smith, 13 Wis. 125; Haight v. Mc Veagh, 69 Ill. 625; Cookson v. Toole, 59 Ill. 515; Orr v. Bornstein, 124 Pa. St. 311 (16 Atl. Rep. 878), Institution v. Luhn, 34 S. C. 184 (13 S. E Rep. 357).

Sec. 477. Estoppels applied to married women. Where her conveyance is void for failure to comply with the requirements of the statute she cannot, "by the indirect medium of an estoppel" created by her conduct, in pais, impart validity to it. Carolina Interstate Bldg. & L. Ass'n v. Black, 119 N. C. 323 (25 S. E. Rep. 975). Applying the statute of Alabama which provides that a married woman can only convey her separate estate by the joint deed of herself and husband,

it is held that a dedication of her land to public use cannot be established against her by the application of the doctrine of equitable estoppel. Vansandt v. Weir, 109 Ala. 104 (19 So. Rep. 424; 32 L. R. A. 201).

Sec. 478. Equities of married women as against creditors of the husband. A wife who permits her hus band to hold the title to her land, and upon the strength of his apparent ownership of it credit is extended to him by others, cannot assert her equitable title to their injury. George Taylor Com. Co. v. Bell, 62 Ark. 26 (34 S. W. Rep. 80). The wife's equitable title to real estate, the legal title to which is held by her husband, will prevail over the claims of his creditors which were contracted before the husband took such title. Clowser v. Noland, 133 Mo. 221 (34 S. W. Rep. 64). In Pennsylvania the rule is well settled that in a contest between a married woman and the creditors of her husband concerning the ownership of property which she claims to have purchased during coverture she must prove distinctly that she paid for it with funds which were not furnished by her husband." Jack v. Kintz, 177 Pa. 571 (35 Atl. Rep. 867).

SEPARATE REAL ESTATE.

[In Vol. II, §§ 381-428; Vol. III, SS 470-493; Vol. IV, §§ 466-492, will be found a compilation of the statutes and decisions of the several states and territories on the subject of Separate Real Estate of Married Women. Below we give such amendments, changes and additional constructions as have been made.]

Sec. 479. Alabama. (See Vol. II, § 381; Vol. III, § 470; Vol. IV, § 466.) Under § 2343 of the Code she can only convey by her husband's joining with her in the deed and he must be named in the granting part of the deed. Davidson v. Cox, 112 Ala. 510 (20 So. Rep. 500). She cannot mortgage her separate property to secure her husband's debts. Giddens v. Powell, 108 Ala. 621 (19 So. Rep. 21); Clements v. Draper, 108 Ala. 211 (19 So. Rep. 25); Elston v. Comer, 108 Ala. 76 (19 So. Rep. 324). She cannot bind herself by a contract to pay for her husband's support in an insane asylum. Code, §§ 2341, 2346, 2348, 2350, discussed. McAnally v. Alabama Insane Hospital, 109 Ala. 109 (19 So. Rep. 492; 55 Am. St. Rep. 923). She cannot be deprived of her separate estate by the application of the doctrine of equitable estoppel. Vansandt v. Weir, 109 Ala. 104 (19 So. Rep. 424; 32 L. R. A. 201). A wife's dis

tributive share in an estate should, upon distribution thereof, be decreed to her in her own name, and not in hers and her husband's for her use. King v. Brown, 108 Ala. 68 (18 So. Rep. 935). Code, § 2346, applied— subjecting married women's property to mechanic's lien. McAnally v. Hawkins Lumber Co., 109 Ala. 397 (19 So. Rep. 417).

Sec. 480. Arkansas. (See Vol. II, § 383; Vol. III, § 471; Vol. IV, § 467.) Her power to dispose of her separate estate extends to her interest in an estate by entirety, subject to her husband's right of sur vivorship. Branch v. Polk, 61 Ark. 388 (33 S. W. Rep. 424; 54 Am. St. Rep. 266; 30 L. R. A. 324). She is personally liable for money borrowed by her whether she owns any additional property or not. Sidway v. Nichol, 62 Ark. 146 (34 S. W. Rep. 529).

Sec. 481. California. (See Vol. II, § 384; Vol. III, § 472.) She may sue alone to enforce or protect any right she may have in real property. Prey v. Stanley, 110 Cal. 423 (42 Pac. Rep. 908). The presumption created by Civ. Code, § 164, is not conclusive. Santa Cruz Rock Pav. Co. v. Lyons, Cal. (43 Pac. Rep. 599).

Sec. 482. Connecticut.

(See Vol. II, § 386; Vol. III, § 474; Vol. IV, § 468). For statute validating conveyances executed by a married woman to her husband, and conveyances executed by her without his joinder, see Pub. Acts, 1897, p. 962.

Sec. 483. Georgia. (See Vol. II, § 390; Vol. III, § 476; Vol. IV, § 470.) A wife's separate property cannot be subjected to the payment of her husband's debts, although she executed a mortgage thereon under the impression that it was in some way subject to such debt and in fact executed the instrument for the purpose of effecting a compromise of a doubtful claim against her own estate. Bank v. Bayless, 96 Ga. 684 (23 S. E. Rep. 851); Mickleberry v. O'Neal, 98 Ga. 42 (25 S. E. Rep. 933). She may borrow money to discharge an incumbrance upon land purchased from her husband, subject to which she has taken his conveyance. Daniel v. Royce, 96 Ga. 566 (23 S. E. Rep. 493). Particular conveyance held to create a married woman's separate estate. Kimbrough v. Kimbrough, 99 Ga. 134 (25 S. E. Rep. 176).

Sec. 484. Idaho. (See Vol. II, § 391; Vol. III, § 477.) She may charge her separate property with debts contracted for its use and benefit, or for her own benefit, and a complaint to charge her separate estate must allege that the debt belongs to one of these classes. Dernham v. Rowley, Idaho, (44 Pac. Rep. 643).

Sec. 485. Indiana. (See Vol. II, § 393; Vol. III, § 479; Vol. IV, § 472.) She cannot mortgage her separate real estate to secure the debt of her husband. Merchants' & Laborers' Bld'g Ass'n v. Scanlan, 144 Ind. 11 (42 N. E. Rep. 1008). Where a married woman, to obtain a loan from the school fund, complies with all the statutory requirements,

and executes a mortgage upon her real estate to secure the loan so obtained, she is thereby estopped from disputing the validity of the mortgage, on the ground that it was given to secure money to pay her husband's debts, and therefore void as a contract of suretyship. Trimble v. State, 145 Ind. 154 (44 N. E. Rep. 260; 57 Am. St. Rep. 163). See statutes set out in Vol. II, § 393.

Sec. 486. Kentucky. (See Vol. II, § 396; Vol. III, § 480; Vol. IV., § 474.) A married woman's conveyance of her separate estate in contravention of the conditions and limitations of the instrument creating it is invalid. Rev. Stat., ch. 47, Art. 4, § 17; Gen. Stat., ch. 52, Art. 4, § 17, applied. Bell v. Mitchell, Ky. (34 S. W. Rep. 695). She may mortgage her real estate to secure her husband's debt but she cannot make herself personally liable upon such a contract of suretyship. Tipton v. Traders' Dep. Bank, Ky. (33 S. W. Rep. 205); Miller v.

Sanders, 98 Ky. 535 (33 S. W. Rep. 621).

Sec. 487. Louisiana. (See Vol. II, § 397; Vol. IV, § 475.) A widow's separate estate in lands is not established by mere declaration in a deed that they were bought with her separate paraphernal funds. Bartels v. Souchon, 48 La. 783 (19 So. Rep. 941). Where authority has been given to the wife to borrow money by the judge, and she does so, and it reaches its proper destination, she will be liable for the amount, notwithstanding no note or mortgage was given to secure the amount. Pascal v. Folse, 48 La. 1227 (20 So. Rep. 750).

Sec. 488. Massachusetts. (See Vol. II, § 400.) A deed of her separate real estate in which he joins may be acknowledged by the husband alone, no issue being born. Pub. Stat. ch. 3, § 3; ch. 120, § 6, applied. Hayden v. Peirce, 165 Mass. 359 (43 N. E. Rep. 119).

Sec. 489. Michigan. (See Vol. II, § 401; Vol. III, § 482.) How. Ann. Stat., § 6295 (see Vol. II, § 401) does not authorize a married woman to contract to pay a subscription to induce the erection of a building in the neighborhood of her separate land and which would be a benefit to it. Moore and Grant, JJ., dissenting. Detroit Chamber of Commerce v. Goodman, 110 Mich. 498 (68 N. W. Rep. 295). Where she is induced by the fraud of her husband to execute a mortgage on her separate real estate to secure funds to pay his existing indebtedness, it will be declared void. Citizens Sav. Bank v. Darling, 110 Mich. 227 (68 N. W. Rep. 132).

Sec. 490. Minnesota. (See Vol. II, § 402; Vol. IV, § 477.) Under Gen. Stat., 1894, § 5530, she may sue her husband in her own name in any form of action to enforce any right affecting her property the same as if he were a stranger. Gillespie v. Gillespie, 64 Minn. 381 (67 N. W. Rep. 206).