case lewis against nangle Nov see Dawson v bank of Whitehaven Ch d marry woman  property Act Vict c S money borrow on the wife estate partly to pay her debt  and partly for the husband use he shall not indemnify her estate against any  part of it where wife join in mortgage of her jointure for money for husband  use her estate be ambler er p creditor on the husband for the sum so where  there be no settlement and wife mortgage her inheritance for money for husband  but if at time of mortgage a settlement be make the husband be not answerable  to the wife estate husband be liable for wife debt contract before marriage  but not unless sue in her lifetime or she have a separate allowance lib Reg b  foe S c hark ms capper a p Ves sen Cox bill to have a sum of pound pay by the  defendant as have be borrow by he on the security of his late wife estate Lord  chancellor the general rule be that where the husband borrow a sum of money  for his own use and the wife join in a mortgage of her jointure for repayment  of it that her estate shall be a creditor on the husband for that sum so it be  where there be no settlement and the wife mortgage her estate of inheritance  to raise money for the husband but there be no instance where at the time of  such mortgage or security make if at the same time a settlement be make either  before or after marriage that the husband be consider as answerable to the  wife estate for the money borrow that be a exception out of the general rule  otherwise it will be very inconvenient to man that be go to be marry and nine  time in ten contrary to the intention of the party beside in the present case  the great part of the money borrow be to pay off a debt due from the wife sola  and it be against equity to say that the husband ought to indemnify the wife  estate against that debt the husband it be say be liable to the wife debt  contract before marriage and so he be but if he be not sue in her lifetime he  be not liable even at law unless she have a separate allowance and leave any  thing behind her which he possess as her executor ambler it be say part of  this money be pay to the husband and wife not in order to discharge the wife  debt but to the husband use that payment to the husband and wife be payment to  the husband but the court will not set up two presumption but adhere to one  only as the great part be manifest not intend to be account for by the husband  to the wife estate so I shall take it that the rest be not it be say the  husband give bind for payment of the money and performance of covenant and  that the creditor may have sue he on this bind and then he must have come as  plaintiff into this court to be repay out of the wife estate which this court  will not have do and there be no more reason for it now but be of opinion this  court will have relieve he therefore decree the defendant only to keep down  the interest for life c Tate v Austen p W Robinson v gee Ves sen Parteriche v  powlett atk Clinton v Hooper bro c c S g Ves jun earl of Kinnoul v money  Swanst see Aguilar v Aguilar mad earl thomond v earl of Suffolk p W hear v  Stamford p W can t Talb Adam v shaw I Sch Lef Bagot v oughton p W Pitt v Pitt  I turn Russ in Clinton v Hooper Ves jun S c bro c c see Evelyn v Evelyn p W  and Mr Cox note there it be observe by Mr roper in his treat on h W I vol p  that if it do not appear from the deed that the money borrow be the debt of  the wife such fact may be prove aliunde the follow note of this case be give  by Mr Cox from lib Reg in his note to the case of Evelyn v Evelyn p W mrs  nangle be before her marriage with the defendant indebt to sundry person and  entitle to the inheritance of land charge with the payment of sundry sum and  before her marriage enter into article whereby the premise be to be settle to  the husband for life sans waste remainder in like manner to the wife remainder  to the issue of the marriage remainder to the wife in fee the marriage take  effect and the husband be press for payment of the wife debt and have also  occasion for a further sum of money they borrow pound of the wife sister the  original plaintiff in the cause and secure it by a mortgage of the wife estate  and the husband covenant for payment of the whole money and also execute a  bind condition for payment of the money accord to the proviso in the mortgage  subject to this mortgage the land be settle to the husband for life remainder  to the wife for life remainder to the issue of the marriage remainder to the  wife sister the mortgagee in fee mrs nangle die without issue and the present  plaintiff be the devisee of the sister who ambler er p bring his bill against  Mr nangle for payment of the mortgagemoney but the Lord chancellor hold that  although part of the money be raise for the husband use yet the mortgage be a  single transaction he must suppose the intention of the party to be uniform  and that such intention be to charge the wife estate with the whole debt and  his lordship dismiss the bill so far as it seek to compel the defendant nangle  to exonerate the land but direct he to keep down the interest during his life  see adney v field post where upon a mortgage of the wife estate there be a  reservation of the equity of redemption to the husband see inn v Jackson Ves S  c Bligh Ruscombe v hare dow broad v broad Ch can Rowley v walley Ch Rep