becomes such after the date of the alienation, unless it be proved to have been made with an intention to defraud future creditors. (a)

In Connecticut it has been held, that if the creditor's demand at the time of the voluntary conveyance consisted of unliquidated damages for a tort which had not then been ascertained, and made certain by a judgment, yet he is entitled to the benefit of his character as a creditor, as against the conveyance. (b)

The court of Chancery will assist a creditor to reach personal property which the debtor had previously conveyed away in trust. (c) The language of the court of Errors was, that a court of equity would assist a judgment creditor at law, in discovering and reaching personal property which had been placed in other hands, and that it made no difference, whether that property consisted of choses in action, or money, or stock. (d)

The New York Revised Statutes (e) have adopted this doctrine, and given jurisdiction to the court of Chancery to satisfy debts at law out of debts due to the defendant, after a fieri facias at law has been returned nulla bona.

In Ohio, and probably in other States, a judgment creditor is authorised by statute to apply for the aid of Chancery to reach property or money in the hands of third persons, when the debtor has not property sufficient to satisfy the judgment which can be reached by execution. (ƒ)

Settlements made before or after the marriage, must be recorded within the time prescribed for that purpose. The necessity of recording them, if they relate to lands, exists in all the States.

In South Carolina, by the statute of 1823, settle

(a) Hesser v. Black, 17 Martin's Louis. Rep. 96.

(b) Fox v. Hills, 1 Conn. Rep. 295. Jackson v. Myers, 18 Johns. Rep. 425. (c) Spader v. Davis, 5 Johns. Ch. Rep. 280. 20 Johns. Rep. 554.

(d) Donovan v. Finn, 1 Hopkins' Rep. 59.

(e) Vol. 2, 173, § 38.

(f) 2 Kent's Com. p. 443, 4.

ments are to be recorded within three months after their execution, and any settlement of property by the husband on the wife, after marriage, is a post-nuptial settlement within the rule. In default of such record, the marriage settlement is declared void. (a)

In Virginia, deeds of settlement upon marriage, wherein personal property, as well as lands or slaves, are settled, or covenanted to be left or paid at the death of the party, or otherwise, are void against creditors and subsequent purchasers, for valuable consideration without notice, unless acknowledged or proved and recorded, &c. (b)

In Louisiana, according to their new civil code, as amended and promulgated in 1824, (c) the partnership or community of acquêts or gains arising during coverture, exists by law in every marriage, where there is no stipulation to the contrary. This was a legal consequence of marriage, under the Spanish law.

All the property left at the death of either party, is presumed to constitute the community of acquêts and gains, and this presumption exists, until destroyed by proof to the contrary.

But the parties may modify or limit this partnership, or agree that it shall not exist. They may regulate their matrimonial agreements as they please, provided the regulations be not contrary to good morals, and be conformable to certain prescribed modifications. (d)

In the case of married persons removing into the State from another State or from foreign countries, their subsequently acquired property is subjected to the community of acquêts. (e) This very point was decided at New Orleans, in 1827, in the case of Saul v. his Cre

(a) 2 Kent's Com. 163.

(b) 1 Rev. Code, c. 99, § 4.

(c) Art. 2312, 2369, 2370. 17 Martin, 258. Cole's Wife v. his Heirs, 19 Martin, 41.

(e) Art. 2370.

Christy's Dig. tit. Marriage. (d) Art. 2305.

ditors, and was founded on the law of the Partidas which has been already referred to. (a)

The property of married persons is divided into separate property, being that which either party brings in marriage or subsequently acquires by inheritance or gift, and common property, being that acquired in any other way by the husband and wife during marriage.(b) The separate property of the wife is divided into dotal, being that which she brings to the husband to assist in the marriage establishment; and extra-dotal, or paraphernal property, being that which forms no part of the dowry. (c) The husband is the head and master, and the proceeds of the dowry belong to the husband during the marriage, and he has the administration of the partnership or community of profits of the matrimonial property, and he may dispose of the revenues which they produce, and alienate them without the consent of the wife. (d) He cannot alienate the dotal estate, and he is subject in respect to that property to all the obligations of the usufructuary. (e) If the husband and wife stipulate that there shall be no partnership between them, the wife preserves the entire administration of the property, moveable and immoveable, and may sell it. (ƒ) And if there be no agreement as to the expences of the marriage, the wife contributes to the amount of one-half of her income, (g) but a married woman cannot, under any circumstances, become a surety for her husband. (h)

A sale by the husband to the wife, for the purpose of replacing her paraphernal property sold by him, is good. Her land, whether dotal or extra-dotal, is not affected by her husband's debts. (i) If the wife renounces the commu

nity, she in that case has a mortgage on the property purchased by the husband during coverture, which takes precedence of the ordinary creditors of the husband. (a) But she must, as against creditors, produce other proof of the payment of the dotal portion on marriage than the husband's confession in the marriage contract,(b) and she has no mortgage on her husband's estate for the fruits of her paraphernal estate; (c) but she is a privileged creditor, (d) and has a tacit mortgage for replacing her paraphernal effects sold by him. (e) The civil law, in order to protect the wife, would not allow her dotal property to be aliened during the coverture, even with her consent; and the law of Louisiana declares void any contract in which the wife binds herself with her husband, unless the debt be contracted for her particular benefit. (ƒ)

(a) McDonogh v. Tregre, 19 Martin's Rep. 68. (b) Buisson v. Thomson, Ib. 460.

(d) 15 Ib. 239.

(e) 16 Ib. 404.

(c) 18 Ib. 103.

(ƒ) 1 Ib. 296.

SECTION VIII.

THE LAW WHICH DECIDES WHAT INTEREST THE HUSBAND AND WIFE ACQUIRE IN THE PROPERTY OF EACH OTHER, AS THE EFFECT OF THEIR MARRIAGE.

The conflict which may arise between the several laws stated in the preceding sections of this chapter.-The collision between those of the matrimonial domicile, the actual domicile, and the situs.-The question whether the communio bonorum extended to real property, situated in a country where there existed no such provision, has divided Jurists.-Dumoulin, Rodenburg, Voet, Pothier, and others maintain the affirmative; according to their opinion, it extends, not by force of the law, but by the tacit agreement of the parties.-The negative is maintained by Argentræus, Vander Meulen, and others, who consider the law of community a real law, that it does not affect immoveable property in any other country but that in which the law existed, and that the theory of a tacit agreement cannot be sustained.-Another class of Jurists, consisting of Burgundus and Boullenois, also reject this theory, but consider the community a personal law.-The English, Scotch, and American decisions are in conformity with the opinion of Argentræus, and Vander Meulen, that immoveable property will be subject to the community only, when it is situated in a country where that law prevails.-Moveable property, wherever situated, subject to the law of the matrimonial domicile.-Effect of a change of the matrimonial domicile on the interests already acquired under its law, and on those afterwards acquired in the actual domicile.-Husband's and wife's interests in the property of each other independently of the law of community.-Power and capacity to alienate governed by the law of the domicile, if it be moveable property, by the lex loci rei sitæ, if it be immoveable. This rule decides all questions on the wife's equity to a settlement, her separate property, the title to curtesy, viduité, douaire, dower, terce, and the causes for which they are forfeited, satisfied, or barred by settlement, or testamentary disposition.-Husband's liability for debts contracted by the wife before marriage. Whether affected by change of domicile.-How far the lex loci rei sitæ determines the legal operation of dispositions made to the husband and wife, or controls the construction of contracts.-Donations inter conjuges depend on that law, if the subject be immoveable property, and on the law of the domicile, if it be moveable.

It will be perceived, from the summary contained in the preceding sections of this chapter, that there is a great diversity amongst the several systems of juris