case dubois versus hole ux see case collect in tailor v tailor Bea v n July Eq  can ab pl S c if a bill be bring against baron and feme for a demand out of  the separate estate of the feme and the husband be beyond sea and not amenable  by the process of the court yet if the wife be serve with a subpoena she must  appear and answer the plaintiff bill dubois the defendant first husband in  case of the death of his son without issue devise his real estate and great  part of his personal to the plaintiff his nephew who be then and yet infant  and die in barbados the defendant his widow possess the estate and afterward  marry Mr hold her second husband but before marriage assign and convey Vernon  chancery case over her first husband estate to trustee so as the second  husband may not intermeddle therewith she come over to England and be serve  with a Subpna to answer the plaintiff bill and afterward arrest upon a  attachment but her husband Mr hold be beyond sea and not to be reach by the  process of the court the bill be bring against hold and his wife and mrs hold  appear to the bill and have move for and obtain a order for leave to put in a  separate answer without her husband but be afterward advice by her counsel  that she be a feme covert can not be compel to appear or answer her husband be  never serve with any process and obtain a old to refer the proceed against her  as irregular but per Lord chancellor if the case be as lie by the bill the  wife have a separate capacity and the husband have nothing to do with the  estate and rather than there shall be a failure of justice he hold the process  regular against her alone her husband be beyond sea and not amenable by the  process of the court she be commit to the fleet and stand out to a  sequestration and then after order obtain for habeas corpus more habeas corpus  she in Michaelmas term that December be bring to the bar of the court on a all  more habeas corpus and the bill take pro acknowledged admitted fact against  her and decree accord with cost Reg lib a fol and it seem clear the doctrine  of this court that the wife may be consider as a separate person from her  husband so as to appear and answer without he vide bell v commissary hide wife  pre Ch pale yellow Eq Rep SC cite also in note a to Newsome v bowyer p wms fix  part Halsam atk travers v Buckle ves and in ms note of a case Stansbury v  Watkins July at the roll on a bill of foreclosure sir Thomas jewel make a  order that plaintiff shall be at liberty to sue out attachment against the  wife alone and in another case of casson v Tucker that Aug at the roll bill be  exhibit that the wife may be declare a trustee for plaintiff and a order be  make on petition against the wife alone in that cause on affidavit of service  and sir Thomas Selwell say these order be accord to the course of the court  and perfect agreeable to justice so at law a wife may appear and may be compel  to appear without her husband vide case cite by Hardwicke Chan in his  judgement in travers v Buckle ves where Lord Chan observe on the principal  case that it have always be put upon the ground of the wife have appear not of  her separate property so writ ne exeat royal power may issue against a feme  covert executrix who husband be out of the jurisdiction Jerningham v glass atk  Amb S c doubt at first but grant on the authority of more v Meynell may  therein cite in this case the plaintiff file his bill against Sarah the wife  of Richard Meynell alone which Sarah be the widow and administratrix of one  Laurence Crabb decease for a account of the real and personal estate of the  say Laurence Crabb and it appear that have be arrest on a writ of ne exeat  royal power and give security thereon she on the that Aug prefer her petition  to have the say writ and security discharge and it be order that on the say  Sarah Meynell give the like security which she have give on the writ that she  will put in a full and perfect answer her former answer have be insufficient  she shall be at liberty to depart the kingdom Vernon chancery case er p before  she put in her say further answer Reg lib b fol afterward that may the cause  come on to be hear against her alone her husband not be name as a party to the  suit and a decree for a account make against her Reg lib b fol but see panel v  tailor turner Vernon chancery case de term S michaelis in curian porter