2140. Old Antithesis.-Formerly all the disabilities of marriage fell upon the wife, and nearly all the liabilities upon the husband; at present,

MAINTENANCE.

2141. Of Wives.—A man is bound under the poor law (2150) to maintain his wife; and

2142. Of Wives' Children.—A man is bound to maintain his wife's children (whether they are his or not), up to the age of sixteen, with certain modifications (3060-5).

2143. Former Immunity of Wives.-Formerly a married woman was under no sort of legal obligation to contribute to the maintenance of either her husband or her children, unless she had separate settled property; but,

2144. Immunity Extinguished.-As the disabilities of wives are now considerably modified, their liabilities have acquired more than a corresponding development; thus,

2145. Maintenance of Husbands.-A wife who has any kind of separate property is liable for the maintenance of her husband, should he fall into poverty; and

2146. Maintenance of Children.-A wife who has any kind of separate property, and whose husband is in indigent circumstances, is liable for the maintenance of her children up to the age of sixteen, just as if she were a widow, with certain modifications (3060-5); notwithstanding,

2147. Separate Property an Essential Condition.—A wife who has acquired no separate property distinct from her husband's, is not liable for the maintenance of either her husband or children; though,

2148. Wages. A married woman in receipt of wages on her own account is liable, as having separate property therein, to the law of maintenance; but,

INDULGENT INTERPRETATIONS.

2149. The law as to compulsory maintenance is interpreted with great indulgence towards the parties liable; so that,

PAUPERISM ESSENTIAL.

2150. A husband is not liable for the direct maintenance of his wife;

2151. Nor a wife for her husband;

2152. Nor either for their children, until the person or persons in respect of whom maintenance is claimed, is or are chargeable to the parish under the poor law.

2153. Notwithstanding the numerous provisions of the Married Women's Property Act, it leaves untouched a large proportion of the old law as it stood before; for,

GENERAL LEGAL STATUS.

2154. In every other respect, except as provided by the Act, husbands and wives stand in precisely the same legal relationship to themselves and to the public as if the Act had never been passed; because,

2155. Excluded Wives.-As a large majority of married women do not possess, and are not likely to possess, precisely the kinds of separate property, in precisely the circumstances contemplated by the Act, it must in those cases be a dead letter; therefore,

UNIVERSAL LAW.

2156. The law as it stood, and as it still stands, independently of the Act, forms the most universally applicable part of the law relating to husband and wife.

ABSENCE OF SETTLEMENTS.

2157. If a single woman is possessed of personal property not included in the kinds expressly referred to in the Act, and marries without effecting a formal settlement, she is precisely in the like position as she would have been prior to the passing of the Act; and

2158. Real Property.—If a single woman is seized of real property, and marries without effecting a formal settlement, she can obtain no relief from the provisions of the Act; for,

PERILS OF SINGLE WOMEN.

2159. So far as real property and miscellaneous personal property are concerned, the Act applies only to women already married, it in no regard protects single women irom the pecuniary perils of thoughtless matrimony; therefore,

2160. Necessary Caution.-Single women, with real or miscellaneous property, stand in need of caution, lest they should rely upon the protection supposed to be extended to all women alike by this too-much-vaunted Act; in short,

2161. Only Reliable Security.-Formal settlements (2518) are still the only reliable means for securing women in the control of their own property in case of marriage; for,

GENERAL CONDITIONS OF MARRIAGE.

2162. In addition to the circumstances of marriage with which the Act expressly deals, there are many which it entirely leaves alone. 2163. Ante-Nuptial Wills.—Since 1837, marriage renders absolately void any and every will of either husband or wife, if made previously to the marriage.

2164. Increased Stringency.—Under old marriage laws the effect of marriage upon wills applied only to the ante-nuptial wills of wives: the rule now applies equally to wills of husbands.

2165. Partnership.—If a woman, up to the time of her marriage, is a partner in any business or undertaking (other than in the nature of joint stock), her marriage is a dissolution of the partnership, unless it is continued under a formal settlement.

2166. Bonds.-Bonds given by a husband to his wife before their marriage, become void by their marriage; but,

2167. Bonds to Trustees.-Bonds given by a husband to a trustee of wife, before marriage, are binding after marriage, so far as the trustee is concerned.

2168. Administrations.—If a wife previously to marriage was executrix or administratrix in respect of any estate, her marriage is no bar to any obligation or debt due to the estate by the husband previously to the marriage.

2169. Joint Tenancies and Reversions.-If a husband and wife are joint tenants (247), or have reversionary interests of any kind in right of the wife, their joint consent is necessary and effectual for the disposal or anticipation thereof.

2170. Securities.-Acceptances, notes of hand, and other negotiable securities belonging to a wife before her marriage, if not duly paid on maturity or on demand, must be sued for in the joint names of the husband and wife.

RESTRICTIONS.

2171. Husbands' Wills.—A husband may will his property or any portion of it to his wife; but,

2172. Conveyances.-He cannot sell or convey to his wife any property or interest whatever, during his life; consequently,

2173. Settlements.-It has been held that a post-nuptial settlement must be effected through the intervention of a trustee or trustees; but,

2174. Contrary Dictum.-The validity or otherwise of a postnuptial settlement without a trustee is open to some dispute (2632-6); and

2175. Custom.-Sometimes custom is allowed to intervene in particular localities, as at York for instance, where a man may convey or settle by deed any property direct to his wife's separate use; and

JOINT AND SEVERAL LIABILITIES.

HUSBAND'S PERSONAL ACTS.

2176. As a general rule, a husband is solely liable for all his own contracts, defaults, acts, or crimes, without involving his wife in the direct consequences thereof.

WIFE'S PERSONAL ACTS.

2177. Criminal Acts.-Criminal acts, in the strictest sense, such as arson and theft, the wife is solely responsible for, just as if not married, unless under the control of her husband, who is then solely responsible; but if independent of his control she is liable to penal punishment accordingly, her husband, when not participating in her guilt, being perfectly free from legal responsibility, and unable to interfere or substitute himself; but,

2178. Semi-Criminal Acts.-Acts of moral turpitude, of what may be considered a semi-criminal character, committed by a wife, the husband is jointly responsible for; thus,

2179. If a wife commits a fraud; or,

2180. Publishes a libel; or,

2181. Is guilty of slander; the husband is jointly responsible with her; and

2182. Penal Punishment.-In such cases they are both equally liable to penal punishment, unless the aggrieved party receives satisfaction enough to stay proceedings or to discharge damages awarded; though,

2183. Joint Proceedings.-When a wife commits an act which involves her husband in joint liability with her, the plaintiff in any proceedings should proceed against both, the husband being the primary defendant; then,

2184. Wife's Surviving Liability.-If a husband fails to recompense a party aggrieved by his wife's turpitude, she may afterwards be proceeded against separately; for instance,

2185. Death of Husband.—If a husband is defendant in an action for slander or libel committed by his wife, and he dies during the proceedings, the action then lies against her with equal effect; or,

2186. Imprisonment for Contempt.-If an action for damages instituted against a husband for an offence committed by his wife results in a verdict against the defendant, and he is unable to pay costs and damages, she as well as he is liable to imprisonment for contempt.

2187. Case of Separation.-In an action against husband and wife for defamatory words spoken by the wife, she (having remained separated from her husband seven years) was taken in execution, but applied to the Court to be discharged on affidavit, stating that she had not the means of satisfying, nor any expectation of being able to satisfy, the damages or costs. It appeared, however, by affidavit on the other side, that her son, in consideration of the husband (his father) giving up to him a certain business, had covenanted to maintain his mother (the wife) during her life, provided she would reside with and assist him therein. It also appeared that, when arrested, the wife was accordingly residing with the son, and assisting him in the business. It further appeared that no goods of the husband were to be found; and it was alleged that he had gone abroad to avoid arrest. It was moreover alleged, that the wife, when separated from him, took with her £500, which she had kept, and that she had since received divers sums in payment of money lent by her while living with her husband. The Court of Queen's Bench refused her application to be discharged out of custody, Lord Denman observing that, on motions of this sort, the Court had a discretionary power.

WIFE'S AGENCY.

2188. Implied Agency.—An advertisement appeared in a newspaper, stating that a baker's shop, with the good will of his business, was for sale, and that the house was doing twelve sacks a week. The advertisement had been inserted by a broker in consequence of a conversation with the baker's wife, who managed the business for her husband, in which conversation she told the broker that they did between nine and ten sacks a week; upon which he said, "We must make it twelve for the paper." Attracted by this advertisement, a person proposing to purchase said to the wife, "Are you really doing anything like this business?" To which she replied, "Yes; doing eleven sacks;" appealing likewise to the man in the shop, who confirmed her statement. The baker himself did not

we are