The Express.
London, England, 1851-11-11 00:00:00

or MARRIED WOMAN,
This was an appeal from a decree by Vice-Chancellor
Knight Bruce. The bill was file,! for the purpose of charg-
ing the separate estate of Mrs. IliuTiet Frankum, a married
lady, living apart from her husband, with a sum for rent,
alleged to be due to the plaintiff for a house in Upper
Baker-street. In 1843, the house being to let, Mrs.
Frankum entered into correspondence with the plaintiff
(Mr. Gaston) as to the terms; and, ultimately, she agreed
with Francis, the agent, to take it far seven or fourteen
years at 90/. a year rent, and to pay 501. fur fixtures.
Francis drew up an azreement, which he took to the soli-
citors of Mrs. Frankum, in which it was stated that 101.
deposit was to be paid to Mr. Francis. After some objec.
Lion as to the authority of Mr. Francis to receive this de-
posit, he took the agreement to Mrs. Frankum, siued by
him as agent for Mr. Gaston, and received the 101. deposit
from her. Before the house was let Mrs. Frankum told him
that she was separated from her husband, and that she
had a separate income, which would enable her to pay
the rent. On the 12th of June Francis met Mr. Bridges,
the agent of Mrs. Frankum, and after comparing with him
the inventory of fixtures, gave him posse,eion of the pre-
mises fur Mrs. Frankum. The plaintiff and his solicitor,
before the possession of the house was delivered, called on
Mrs. Frankum and informed her that as elle was a married
lady, she must procure some person to guarantee the rent;
and she replied that either her trustee or solicitor would do
so. The plaintiff's solicitor drew up another agreement, leav-
ing a blank for the name of the guarantee, and sent the same
to Mrs. Frankum's solicitor, who, however, replied that Mrs.
Frankum must rely on the old agreement. Shortly after-
wards the defendant paid the plaintiff's solicitor 401. on ite- '
count of the premises, and the solicitor refused to become
guarantee for the rent, but raid that the lady had an
ample separate income to pay it, and that she would be a
good tenant. In December following he sent to the plaintiff
• notice of Mrs. Frankum's intention to quit at Midsummer,
1814, and it letter stating that as Mrs. Frankum could not
get a guarantee, her only alternative was to give up posses-
eMn. In a correspondence between the solicitors, it
i was asserted on the one side and contradicted

ontheother, •That—ihe plaintiff had accepted the
defendant's notice. The rent was paid, but in Jane,
1811, the defendant agreed to let the house to Mr.
Ilindges, and then another correspondence took place re-
specting • grant of a lease direct from the plaintiff to Mr.
llridgea. In April, 1815, and January, 1846, distresses
were pat in for rent. The bill was tiled against Mr. and
Mrs. Frankum and Mr. Hutton, a truitee, and it prayed a
_ .

declaration of the court that the wife's separate property
was liable to pay the ill. la. 6d. emit due for the house.
There were four grounds of defence : first, that the agree-
ment was not a concluded one ; that the memorandum in
writing of the alleged agreement was not signed by Mrs.
Frankum ; that her separate property was not bound; and
that the court could not decree a specific performance of the
agreement; and that the house was uninhabitable on ac-
count of the chimneys being smoky. The Vice-Chancellor
was of opinion that the waivJr not being alleged and not
being charged, he could not look at the evidence for that
purpose, and directed a reference for the title, if oar could
be shown.

Mr. Tripp and Mr. Speed now supported the appeal, but
the argument was not concluded when obi lordship rose.

Baron TIM ?Horan or rat PALI,.
FLIGHT C. THE DUKE OP BUCILINOU.V.I.

This ease Stood for judgment this morning._._.
The Master of the Rolls said be retained the opinion Oat
he expressed at the conclusion of the argument, that he
thought it not desirable to go into any of the circumstances
which struck him on the subject of the plea. lie was of
opinion that he could not properly dee:de the validity of
the deed in this stage of the cause ; that there were variow
pains of assistance which the court might require which it
could only obtain by a suit. Under these circumstances he
should direct the plea to stand over for an answer, with
leave to except.