Case Name: Butler v. M'Cann and Others
Court: Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia
Jurisdiction: Virginia
Decision Date: 1833-12
Citations: 4 Leigh 631
Docket Number: 
Parties: Butler v. M’Cann and Others.
Judges: 
Reporter: Virginia Reports
Volume: 31
Pages: 1061–1061

Head Matter:
Butler v. M’Cann and Others.
December, 1833.
Marriage Settlement —Construction—Liability (or Beneficiary's Debts. — By deed of marriage settle-men c, slaves of the feme are conveyed to a trustee, in trust to permit tbe husband to take the profits during the joint lives of himself and his wife; remainder, if the husband should first die, to the wife; and if she should first die, to such persons as she should appoint; with an express declaration, that the properly should not be subject to the husband's debts: Hki.d, the husband’s interest in the profits during the joint lives ot himself and his wife, is subject to his debts; and provision should be made for satisfaction of a creditor, by hiring the slaves out, or otherwise, as most convenient.
By deed of marriage settlement between Edward Eenieve and Jane M’Cann, executed before the marriage, certain slaves, the property of the wife, were conveyed to Richard M’Cann, upon trust, from and after the intended marriage, to permit Edward, the husband, during the joint lives of himself and Jane his wife, to take and enjoj' all the profits of the said slaves to his own use and benefit; and from and after the decease of the husband if he should first die, to transfer and convey the whole of the slaves to the wife; and from and after the decease of the wife, if she should first die, then to such person or persons, in such manner and proportions, as she should appoint. The wife relinquished all right of dower of the real estate of the husband, *in case she should survive him, and all right to any portion of his personal estate, and to administration thereof. And it was expressly declared to be the intent of the deed, and agreed by and between the parties, that the slaves thereby settled should not be at the disposal, or subject to the control, debts, forfeitures or engagements, of the husband.
A.fter the marriage, the appellant Butler, having recovered a judgment against Edward Eenieve, the husband, sued out a fieri facias thereon, which was levied on one of the slaves settled by the deed.
Whereupon, M’Cann, the trustee, and Eenieve and wife, exhibited a bill against him in the superiour court of chancery of Richmond, setting forth the deed of marriage settlement; insisting, that the slaves thereby settled, were nowise subject to the debts of Eenieve, the husband, and praying an injunction to inhibit the sale of the slave taken on Butler’s execution. An injunction was awarded. Butler, in his answer, insisted that Eenieve, the husband, was entitled to an interest in the property, namely, to all the profits thereof during the joint lives of himself and wife, which was subject to execution for his debts. The chancellor held, that the. property, under the provisions of the settlement, was not liable for the debts of the husband; and therefore, perpetuated the injunction. Erom this decree, Butler appealed to this court.
Spooner, for the appellant.
Ho-counsel for the appellees.
See monographic note on “Husband and Wife” appended to Cleland v. Watson, 10 Gratt. 159.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
The appellee Edward Eenieve, the husband, had an equitable interest in the slave, on which the appellant's execution was levied, which is liable-for his debts ; and the decree is erroneous in perpetuating the injunction unconditionally, instead of providing for subjecting that equitable interest of Eenieve, to the charge of the debt due the appellant. Therefore, it is to be reversed, and the cause remanded to the court of chan-eery, with instructions *to provide for subjecting Eenieve's interest in the slave to the payment of the debt due the appellant, by hiring the slave out, or otherwise, as shall be found most convenient.
Decree reversed, and cause remanded &c.