The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1879-02-14
The Law of Married Women.

The following bill has been introduced into
the State Senate, and the Judiciary Commit
tee has made favorable report upon IT:
"sFc T. A.mArried woman may enter into any en-.
gagemcnt transaction, contract with any other per
son respecting property the same As she mightn she
were unmarried.
src 2 This act shall take encct Immediately
Tho adoption OF some measure which shall
place married women upon the same footing
as other persons in respect to their con-
tracts is much to be desired Under the ex-
listing law in this State they frequently
escape liability upon their agreements, al
though owning separate property out of
which the debt or damages might be col
lected. A married woman is held not to be
bound by her contracts unless they are
made in her separate business, or relate TO
her separate estate. or unless an intent on
her part to make that estate liable is ex-
pressed in the contract or implied In its
very terms.
In England the courts Of equity enforce
the contracts OF married women in such
way that n wife Is practically liable for the
debts she iucurs, up to the amount OF her
separate property; but under the stricter
principles applied by tho courts in New
York this just and satisfactory result is not
always reached.
The rule which prevails In this state was
originally laid down eighteen years ago 10y
the Court Of Appeals, and has ever since
been reluctantly but consistently enforced
by that tribunal although there have been
frequent limitations on the part Of the
Judges themselves that the precedent they
were compelled to follow was one which
ought not to have been established. In
1874, Chief Judge CHURCH, in expressing the
opinion that it was now better to adhere 10
it until a change should be effected by the
Legislature, said that If the courts had first
adopted the reasonable rule that a married
woman had the capacity to contract debts
as II unmarried, restricted only TO their
collection from separate property, "it
might well be claimed that the rights Of
married women would have been as we'll If
not better protected practically, sound pub
lie policy and business morality more pro-
NOTED, and food of expensive and vexa-
tious litigation prevented"
II is settled law in New York, however,
that a contract concerning property, 10 be
enforceable against a married woman, must
be made in her separate business, or must
relate TO her separate estate, or must mani
fest by its terms an express or implied in
tonton TO charge her separate estate. The
inadoquacy Of this liability is forcibly Illus
trated by one Of the latest reported cases in
which the Court Of Appeals has defined II.
The defendant, n married woman, was sued
upon n bond which she had executed as
surety for person since deceased, condi-
toned for the faithful performance OF his
duties as guardian OF the plaintiffs, who
were minors at the time In her affidavit,
attached TO the bond, she sworc that she
was worth ten thousand dollars over and
above all debts and liabilities. In conse-
Quoncc Of the execution Of this instrument,
the guardian was duly appointed. He
proved unfaithIul, and converted to his own
use thousands Of dollars belonging TO his
wards. When they endeavored to recover
some Of the money from the defendant upon
her contract OF suretyshp, without which
the delaulting guardian would not have Oh
tanned possession Of their property, they
were met by the objection that the bond did
not fall within any OF the classes Of con-
tracts enforceable against married women,
and the Court of Appeals SO held.
Many other cases might be cited from tho
law reports to show the necessity and pro-
prioty Of a change in the law on this sub
ject, and the enactment Of the bill now be-
fore the Legislature will be n long step in
the direction of the needed reform.