case more versus black all July a die seize of land which descend upon b and c  in coparcenary b before receipt of rend or partition make die his widow bring  a bill to have dower assign suggest that c have all the titledeed upon  demurrer resolve that this court will relieve in such case the demurrer  overrule the plaintiff by her bill charge that Mr Rawlinson die upon the that  of July seize of several estate which upon his death descend as to one moiety  upon the plaintiff husband in fee who die the that of march after before any  partition make and that the defendant have get possession of all the titledeed  whereby she be disable from sue for dower at law and therefore come into this  court to have her dower assign of what land descend to her husband the  defendant demurrer for that the plaintiff right of dower be a right mere at  law and triable by a jury and that no impediment be suggest why she can not  recover at law Mr attorneygeneral and Mr forester insist for the plaintiff  that she be proper to come into this court both by reason of the deed be in  the defendant hand without which she can not prove her title at law and also  for that the estate be in coparcenary and no partition make the sheriff can  upon recovery in a writ of dower put her into possession but of a three of a  undivided moiety and that still recourse must he have to this court for a  certainty and not to set out a part to her the judgement in dower not reduce  it to more certainty than it be before accord to entry sec and that by bring  this bill the plaintiff have only do at first what she must have do at last  case tempt Talbot Mr fazakerley insist on the other hand for the defendant  that though the plaintiff may be entitle to a discovery she can not be so to  have dower for if there shall happen to be a mortgage or term of year in her  way she will be defeat at law and liable to cost assign her that be a title  mere at law and for a detainer of which damage be to be assess by a jury and  that she be not entitle to the possession of the deed but that they belong to  the defendant the Lord chancellor overrule the demurrer upon both point say  that there be no possibility for the plaintiff as appear to he to recover  without the assistance of the deed for the estate descend upon her husband in  July and he die upon the that of march after before any receipt of rend or  partition make she can not prove a seize at law to entitle herself to dower  second that she lie under another difficulty as her husband estate be  complicate and that she must come here for a partition otherwise the  consequence will be that after judgement and execution she must at the end of  every six month be drive to her action against such as hold joint with her and  who receive the profit for her share and also for her damage for the detainer  which will be absurd and unreasonable so Curtis v Curtis bro Charles Rep which  establish the doctrine that a widow may in all case sue for dower in a court  of equity case tempt Talbot er p