MARGARET HALL'S CASE.—1 BLAND. 193

to her a large portion of his estate, to hold a part during her life,

*and another part for a term of years; that she had elected
to take under the will of her husband, immediately after
his death, when she wasunacquainted with his affairs; but that it is
now ascertained, that the claims against his estate will absorb so
much of it, as, if paid to her exclusion, will deprive her of all
benefit intended by the will; and leave her in a much worse situa-
tion than if she had rested altogether upon her common law rights.
And, therefore, as her election was improvidently made, and at
a time when she was destitute of the information which alone
could enable her to act knowingly upon the subject, she prays
that it may be annulled, that she may be allowed the value
of her dower, or be relieved according to the nature of her case,
&c.

BLAND, C., 5th March, 1827.—This case having been submitted
on the application and petition of Margaret Hall, the proceedings
were read and considered.

The will of the deceased husband of this widow lay before her,
and presented to her a choice between the estate therein bestowed,
and that given by the law. In her election to take under the will,
there is no apparent room even to suspect fraud, nor has the exist-
ence of any been intimated, and it is difficult to perceive how
there could have been any mistake. But, supposing it possible to
show that a mistake occured, I should require from her a strong and
clear case of misapprehension. She has heretofore formally made
her election in the manner prescribed by lawr, and has solemnly
re-affirmed that choice by bringing this suit. An election thus
deliberately made, repeated and adhered to, ought not to be lightly
shaken or easily annulled. This widow must, therefore, be held
firmly bound by her election; and can have no relief, but such
as may be altogether compatible with the choice she has thus
made. Butricke v. Broadhurst, 1 Fes. Jun. 171; S, G. 3 Bro. C.
C. 88; Wake v. Wake, 1 Yen. Jun. 335.

A devise, which is merely of the nature of a donation, or that
appoints persons to take as heirs in place of those designated by
the law, must certainly be considered as void against creditors.
Bat a devise in lieu of dower, is one of a different character, and
of much higher merits. It discharges a highly favored debt due
from the testator; it relieves his real estate from a lien imposed by
the law in favor of his wife, in preference to all others, with which
he himself could have encumbered it, by any contract of his own.
In the language of the Act of Assembly, a widow electing to take

* under the will of her husband, is to "be considered as a
purchaser with a fair consideration." 1798, ch. 101, sub-ch.
13, s. 5; Sug. V. & P. 257. It is clear, therefore, that this devise
is fraudulent, as against creditors, only so far as it exceeds the
13 1B.