210 HANNAH K. CHASE'S CASE.—1 BLAND.

These circumstances and this letter fortify the construction I
have put upon the agreement S. M. The plaintiff 's agreeing to dis-
miss her bills, as to the Fountain Inn, and also to submit to the pay-
ment of costs, is satisfactorily accounted for. It thus clearly ap-
pears, that so far from relinquishing any right, she then merely
withdrew from before the tribunal, with a fixed resolution to re-
turn to the contest at a more convenient season; unencumbered
with matters which might be then disposed of and finally ad-
justed.

It is, therefore, my opinion, that neither the institution and ter-
mination of those suits, nor the agreement S. M., can in any manner
whatever be considered as a bar, or release of the right now asserted
by this plaintiff'.

The next question is, whether the late husband of the plaintiff
had an estate in the Fountain Inn during their marriage, of which
she is dowable. It is admitted on all hands, that the legal estate
in fee simple of this property was originally in Harry D. Gough;
all who are any way concerned in this controversy deduce their
interests from him; and, consequently, the only question now is,
whether James Clarke, to whom Gough conveyed, and the late
Samuel Chase, to whom Clarke conveyed, held as mortgagees from
Bryden, or any one else; or whether Clarke, and from him Chase,
obtained an absolute indefeasible legal estate in fee simple, or
only an equitable interest.

It appears, by the recitals in the conveyance, dated the 4th of
February, 1806, from James Clarke to the late Samuel Chase, that
Harry D. Gough, who was seized of an estate in fee simple in the
land covered by the Fountain Inn, had agreed to sell it to Daniel
Grant, and give his bond with a condition to convey it to him
when he paid the purchase money. Grant sold his interest, and
assigned this bond to James Bryden; and James Clarke and John
Smith became Bryden's sureties for the payment of the balance of
the purchase money due to Gough, and also for the sum which he
had agreed to pay Grant. Bryden paid and satisfied Grant in full.
Then Clarke, it is said, at the request of Bryden, paid Gough
$7,216.42, the amount then due to him; who thereupon conveyed
the fee to Clarke; and Bryden delivered to Gough his bond. After
which, at the request of Bryden, the late Samuel Chase paid Clarke
the sum he had paid to Gough, and also paid to Bryden the sum
of $10,283.58; amounting altogether to the sum of $17,500.
224 * Whereupon Clarke conveyed to Chase an absolute estate
in fee simple. On the twenty-sixth of the same month, in which
Chase had obtained this conveyance, he leased the property to
Bryden for the term of fifteen years, reserving an annual rent of
$2,000; to which lease Chase's wife, the present plaintiff, added
her relinquishment of dower in the usual form. And on the same
day on which the lease bears date, Chase executed his bond to