HANNAH K. CHASE'S CASE.— 1 BLAND. 215

estate, or relinquish her claim to dower by means of a fine. Fines
were always binding upon married women; though it was thought
proper to make them liable to examination by the statute of the
year 3290; 18 Ed. 1, Stat. 4; Kilt. Rep. 146; but it was not merely
by the examination that the fine had its efficacy. Richards v.
Chambers, 10 Ves. 587. The mode of conveyance by fine is couched
in the form of a suit upon an agreement; as to which the wife is
examined by the Judges of the Court apart from her husband, so
that it may appear to them, that she perfectly understands what
she is about to do, and freely gives her consent to it; and if they
doubt of her age, they may examine her upon oath, before they
pronounce * their judgment. 2 Inst. 515. Upon which a
peculiar efficacy is ascribed to the agreement, so that it is
not open to objections which would be fatal to an agreement of a
married women, authenticated in any other way: for there is no
other form in which a Court of common law can, with the consent
of a feme covert, give validity to her agreement concerning her
estate: and there are few cases in which even a Court of equity
can, with her consent, enable her to dispose of her property real
or personal. Richard v. Chambers. 10 Ves. 580; Ritchie v. Broad-
bent, 2 Jac. & Walk. 456. This solemn and embarrassing mode,
by which alone married women are enabled to dispose of their
rights and interests in real estate may have been, and may yet
be well suited to the circumstances and state of society in Eng-
land; but it is obviously unsuited to the state of things in our
country, and much more so formerly, when land titles were so fre-
quently and informally transferred from one to another as to have
been, for some time, among the most current instruments of traffic
among the colonists; Land H. A. 77; than now when real estates
have become better settled and more permanently held.

In Pennsylvania, and many of the other colonies, it had become
usual for married women to dispose of their lands or to relinquish
their right of dower by a common deed, or instrument of writing
executed and authenticated as if they had been sole; which con-
veyances were afterwards confirmed, and the custom of making
such deeds, with their consent, taken on a private examination,
was adopted by legislative enactments. Darey v. Turner, 1 Dal.
11; Lloyd v. Taylor, 1 Dal. 17; Watson v. Bailey, 1 Binn. 470;
Jackson v. Gilchrist, 15 John. 89. In Virginia, where the mode
of conveyance by fine was never in use, following, as it would
seem, a local custom of Wales, or of London, Dyer, 363, b; Crui.
Dig. tit. Dower, c. 4, s. 15, it had become usual for married women,
in order to effect a valid conveyance of their lands, or reliuquish-
ment of their dower, to make an acknowledgment of the deed in
private examination before the General or County Court, 1 Virg.
Stat. 45, note, which mode of conveyance was afterwards confirmed
and adopted by the colonial Legislature. 2 Virg. Stat. 217

.