case hear et ux v stamford see bell v Stocker Q b d beck v pierce Q b d see  now marry woman proper Act pound Vict c Lord chancellor Talbot can tempt Tal  Eq can ab pl a woman indebt dumb sell marry and bring a portion to her husband  and die equity will not help the creditor against the husband to the value of  what he receive with the wife a feme sole be indebt to her sister in pound by  note she marry and bring a personal estate to the value of pound to her  husband with who she live about a year and a quarter and then die the creditor  by note never recover judgement against the husband and wife and the debt  remain unpay the husband on the wife death administer to the wife the sister  marry and with her husband bring a bill against the defendant and find that  the choose en action of which the wife die possess be not sufficient to pay  the pound debt which the wife owe dumb sola it be pray that the defendant the  husband for so much as he have receive out of the clear personal estate of the  wife upon his marriage shall be make liable to answer the plaintiff demand and  it be insist to be but common reason and justice peer William that as the wife  be the owner of a visible estate upon the credit of which the plaintiff may  have entrust her so he that have such estate shall pay the debt which he may  well afford to do that it will be a case full of hardship if a feme sole who  in ready money good jewel term for year c may be worth pound and may owe pound  if such woman shall afterward marry and die that on her death her husband  shall go away with the pound and not be oblige to pay one farthing of his wife  debt this will prove of the most pernicious consequence to the creditor  whereas on the other hand the husband can have no reason to complain of be  liable to answer their demand as far as he have receive a fortune with his  wife that the author of a book entitle the office of executor a book well  esteem chap touch a feme covert be executrix take notice of this case as a  very hard one and indeed recommend it as proper for the consideration of a  court of equity that accord the court have grant relief under such  circumstance as appear from the chancery report freeman v Goodham where a feme  dumb sola buy good but do not pay for they and afterward marry and die have  bring a good portion which come to the hand of her husband who on the creditor  fill a bill against he to be pay for the good demurrer the Lord chancellor  Nottingham overrule the demurrer say with some earnestness that he will alter  the law in that point so in the case of Powell v bell abridgement of case in  equity pl precedent in chancery it be decree that the wife who have contract  debt dumb sola be dead the husband shall account for what he have receive with  her and shall be so far liable to her debt and there Mr Vernon be say to have  inform the court that he have often know it so hold it be moreover peer  William insist that one precedent relieve a creditor be more to be regard than  three to the contrary Lord chancellor it be extreme clear that by law the  husband be liable to the wife debt only during the coverture unless the  creditor recover against he in the wife lifetime and I do not see how any  thing less than a act of parliament can alter the law the wife choose en  action be asset and will be liable but these it seem be not sufficient in the  principal case to answer the demand in the case of freeman v Goodham there be  some reason for the court to be provoke when the good themselves continue  after the death of the wife in the hand of the husband who notwithstanding  refuse to pay for they it be true it appear the then Lord chancellor overrule  the demurrer but what be do afterward what decree his lordship make whether  the cause be ever hear or whether the bill be not dismiss do not appear  neither peer William in the case of Powell v bell be any notice take what  estate the wife have in her own right and what as administratrix to her former  husband if I relieve against the husband because he have sufficient with his  wife wherewith peer William er p to satisfy the demand in question by the same  reason where a feme indebt dumb sola afterward marry bring no fortune to her  husband and judgement be recover against the husband after which the wife die  by the same reason I say ought to grant relief to the husband against such  judgement which yet be not in my power consequent there can be no ground for a  court of equity to interpose in the present case if the law as it now stand be  think inconvenient it will be a good reason for the legislature to alter it  but till that be do what be law at present must take place the next morning  the case of the earl of thomond v earl of Suffolk vol be cite to have be  adjudge by the Lord Macclesfield wherein this be one of the very point in  question and the Lord Macclesfield for much the same reason m have be give by  the Lord Talbot deny to relieve a creditor of the wife dumb sola against the  husband who survive and on the marriage have sufficient personal estate  wherewith to answer her debt whereupon the Lord chancellor take notice that  although the matter now in question be inconsiderable in value yet the case  itself be of great consequence for which reason if the counsel for the  plaintiff be dissatisfy he will he say hear they again to it but the above  mention case of the earl of thomond be insist on as in the very point the  counsel acquiesce and do not stir the matter again note the same point have be  determine by the Lord king in the case of jordan v Foley Trin g upon search  the register book it appear that in the case of freeman v goodland et e  content not Goodham the defendant have marry the testator widow who have buy  good of the testator executor that after the widow death the executor bring  their bill inter all to be satisfy for these good the defendant demurrer which  demurrer be on the that of December overrule by the Lord chancellor that  afterward on the hear of the cause the d of December the defendant insist that  his wife have a property in these good at the marriage which be part of her  portion but nevertheless to avoid further trouble and in case a assignment of  some leasehold estate mention in the cause be make to he though he be not  liable by law so to do yet by his counsel he offer to pay for the good  whereupon the decretal order run thus that the defendant goodland do pay to  the say executor the sum of pound report due to they on account of the say  good accord to his offer aforesaid so that this be a decree in consequence of  the defendant offer there appear to be no express determination in the point  however it be very probable that the defendant perceive which way the opinion  of the court incline on argue the demurrer be induce to make the above mention  offer