The eastern clarion. [volume] (Paulding, Miss.) 1837-1863, 1861-03-15

the husband toiH tot Be presumed 5eT euero
REASONABLE inteadns~nt viR be INDUCED 10 ne
~coafraTg. Allen, vs. Miles and Adams. &c
Miss. r. p. $40.
The bill states. and the proof shows.
that the land sought to be subjected to the
payment of the purchase money due ,o
the vile. was her separate property, &C
quired since the act of 1916. by gift from
her father. IL is fully alleged and proved
that the notes executed for the purchase
money were made payable 10 the said Mil
ton H.. Burks or bearer. without anv proof
OF consent or agreement on the part Of
Mrs. Susan Z. Burks ttbe compIainant.)
thereto, or even of her knowledge thereof.
Il is further alleged and proved that
ell the parties to this bill were fully cog
infant of these facts, aud especially that.
Loggins and wife knew that these notes
due 10 MIS-. Susan z. Burks. though pay
able to her husband or bearer. were given
for her land and We're still unpaid when
they purchased said land from DtnieI
Jones, her vend-e. and that Loggins and
wife agreed with jones to pay the said
purchase money still due TO said Burks'
wife.
The bill alleges and the proof shows
that the said Loggins and wife have not
paid ono cent either TO cnmplainants or Ia
SAID Jones. and now clam TO hold said
land under y coatrar, Of SaAe with said
MEL ions, without paying for said land.
and without having any valid conveyance
therefor.
The case is a naked one, between Mrs.
Burks rs complainant. and her vpnd-e
and those holding under him. with full
knowledge of her rights. aud without
having paid the purchase money Accord
Ing 70 their agreement, Mrs Bu k seek
ing 10 enforce her equitable lien on said
land as vendor.
Il is insisted that Mrs. Burks has no
lien that the notes are m ule payable t.
her husband and lie having Obtained a
judgment thereon in his name. h. i to
be regarded as he assignee OF said notes.
and such lien does NOT exist in favor of
the vile or the assignee, her husband. un-
der such circumstances
Tine case of Allen rs Miles and Adams
already cited, settles this view OF the
case against app-llees-and shows that
such consent agrrem-nt or contract Of the
wife will not b. presumed. IN the absence
OF proof, but that every reasonable intend
meut will be indulgrd To the contrary -
Aud the case OF Pennington vs. Acker
sbuve cited al>o show the extreme vigi
lfHce Of the Curt OF Equity ia guarding
the rights Of the wife again-t the ir ,ud or
c%uIiiity Ct the husband or 0thers, bg ~
quiriug proof that the Transaction by
which the wife i attempted TO be divest-
81 of her rights or interests. is fair and
honest. aud -uch as in equity and gDpd
conscience. the wife ought To have scc-d
I'd To-
OGreLhA=a--0 pretence that there
was even an und-r~ts-1s~ or agreement
allh tH~ sale that tbs E0teS T~Te 90 I
be taken in the name Of her huSbsDd
much ir~s that she VIA To b. div-sted If
the purchase money FIR her land and The
sam vested in her husband for his own
benefit.
IL Is said the bill IS fled upon the judy
ment. and not upon the nates-thi~ i.n
mistake. As will be seen by reference 10
pSges ! and 5 OF the bill. But il this
we're true, II would not change the result.
regarding the judgment a. hers. and her
but Is her trustee. whose nane
Is Used for her benefit. and whore Iaual
Eifs.
No act OF such trustee preiudie;al N
the rights of the csstze que nuxs VIII be
DEEMED OF any validity. without her law I
tai consent in = Court Of equity, as be- :
tween the husband and wife. or those de- /.
irving title from the husband with
knowledge Of he bad faith or want Of ss-
thorify 20 deal with the trust subject A. I
own. The acts Of the husband ineou- :
-lstent Hi'h the rights and interests IF the J
site in this case airs simply void. and can
DOT deprive her Of her r9Gitable lien on
ae land 20 enforce the payment Of the
purchase money due her. his transfer 4
y this judEmenf-his sale snd purchase !
4 the land for 1880. and indeed every .
lct pT3udIcal 10 Der Interests. not shown .
o have been legally sasstieped by her. q
.rs si voia. u
But Il Is again said, that the lien OF the I
log the purchase money due on the =
sic OF her land cannot b. enf,r,ed :
sa4rst Joue-her vrndee-becauss she :
As tcrced him 20 testify on che very :
soints On which EEs seeks F-iieL. =
Whatever forcs there mzv have baa1 /,
a Thu rule under the English practice :.
uglnHliF, iAnd We eoufezs We arr tn Ia =
.e Impressed with the rea-suit.x ut-p =
'hich IA i fsaud. d. ~e otinIan 1T III. !,
curt Ia Stanton y Green. "a Miss. r. > =
yet 'inoe the Dosage Of our a.. =
s~Fised Code. P SlUl making p4rnes 20 y
BE snit or IN interest coup-senr wtressz
here can De no longer any force in il y
ere -
II i tnsisted lastly that the conduct ~ &,
burks m sun-r1ng n aleaee her hus- A
sna 10 take the notes ia his own name -
- 20 assume Tie ONaership Of them =,
Ie upon them. obtain Judgment g. =.
ers acts Of hsud and neehesues apes