Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1879-04-22

not extend TO her separate real estate,
and the common law disability to make
any contract or incur any debt during
her coverture which will in any manner
effect or change the corpus of her real
estate, is declared to be still in force.
We are not certain but that the second
point referred to in the decision will be
a surprise to the legal profession, or at
least, TO many parties outside OF the
profession, who have been acting upon
a different Interpretation Of the law. In
fact, we think the decision will be re-
garded throughout, as making very rad
ical inroads upon the accepted theories
of this branch of our law. We may take
occasion hereafter, to review it in con-
nection with previous decision of our
Court of Appeals upon the same sub
iect. Following, we give the full sylla-
bus:
/. A married woman as TO property
settled 10 her separate use is 10 be re-
garled as a fcB,s sole, and has right TO
dispose of all her separate personal es
tate and the rents and profits other real
estate accruing during the coverture, as
ii she were tele sole; unless her power
OF alienation is restrained by the in
strument creating the estate.
.. Such restraint upon her power of
alienation will not be implied from her
being authorized to dispose of the prop
erty in a specified manner. Such re-
straint must be either expressed or so
clearly indicated as to be equivalent to
an express restraint.
3. This jus dispORSndi is an incident TO
the ownership OF a separate estate, and
il can only be taken away or limited by
express words, or by an intent so clear
as to be the equivalent Of express
wOrdS
4. The liability Of the separate estate
of married woman to the payment of
all debts incurred during coverture is
also an incident 10 the ownership OF
such separate estate, and it, too, can
only be taken away by express words or
by an intent so clear as to be the equiv
alent of express words.
.. But these incidents, liability 10 the
payment of her debts, and her jas DIS
pORslidi, extend no further than 10 all her
separate personal property and the rents
and profits of her separate real estate
sccruing during the continuance of the
COyerture.
6. Thecorp,SOf her separate real estate
is in no manner affected by the equitable
doctrine OF a separate estate which is de-
viSed TO prevent the acquisition by the
husband Of his marital rights to all her
personal property, and the rents and
profits OF her real property during the
overture.
Z. The common law effectually protected
the corpus Of her real estate against her
husbands control and against his debts.
And her common law disability 10 make
any contract or incur any debt during
her eoverture which will in any manner
affect OF change the corpus of her real
estate, whether such real estate De
separate property or not, is still in full
force. The corpus Of her real estate can
only be affected or changed by the
vendors lien when il has been reserved,
or by conveyance or specific
lien created by deed, in
which her husband has united
with her, and which she executed after
priyy examination.
5. The debts OF a married woman for
which her separate estate is liable are
such as arise out Of any transaction out !
OF which debt would have arisen IL /
she were fcRs sOlS, except that her sep
arate estate is not bound by bond or |
covenant under seal on no considera- /
ton. Such bond or covenant being /
void at law and she not being estopped /
from showing in court of equity that
II was bond on no consideration.
3. The consideration which will sup (
port the debt or contract so as TO make /
her separate estate liable need not enure
10 her own benefit or that Of her separ-
ate estate, but il may enure 10 the bene-
nj Of her husband or any third party, or
may be that II isa mere prejudice to the /