552 HELMS v. FRANCISCUS.— 2 BLAND.

upon her, and that in consideration thereof, the trustees had paid
the legacy to the husband; it was held that the settlement of the
whole, by the agreement and consent of the husband, was binding
and good even against his creditors. Moor v. Rycault, Prec, Cha.
22; Wheeler v. Caryl, Amb. 121. And where the husband had
given a note to his wife, that if he should treat her ill, she should
have her share of her mother's estate to her own use. It was con-
ceded that such a consent of the husband would have been suffi-
cient as to the amount; and that the whole might have been
settled upon the wife. Nicholls v. Danvers, 2 Fern. 671; Rodney v.
Chambers, 2 East, 283. And where the property had been be-
queathed* to the wife of the bankrupt for life; and it was
580 claimed by the assignees of her husband; the Court made a
reference to receive proposals from the husband for a settlement on
his wife, and he proposed that the whole should be settled on her,
which was ordered accordingly. It was said that there a want of
form in calling for proposals from the bankrupt husband; because
he, of course, would propose that the whole should be given to his
wife, rather than any part to his assignees, and that the assignees
must have consented to the arrangement. Beresford v. Hobson, 1
Mad. Hep. 363. And it is sufficient that such consent of the hus-
band be expressed in any clear and distinct form, either before or
after the institution of the suit. As where the husband, upon
whose consent the quantum depended, had, in a letter to a third
person, expressed a desire that the whole might be settled, it was
held to be an honest, conscientious, and absolute appropriation of
the whole fortune, and a settlement of the whole was decreed
accordingly. Grosvener v. Lane, 2 Atk. 180.

From all which it appears to be well established that the hus-
band, or his assignees, who stand in his place, may consent that
the whole fortune shall be settled on the wife, and that if such
consent be freely and deliberately given in any form, the Court
will hold the husband's interest bound by it, upon the ground that
such agreement, without at all conflicting with the sacred prin-
ples and policy of the marriage contract, comes in aid of the equity
which gives her a provision out of her own fortune, when she is
not maintained by her husband; and also in aid of " the wife's
equity," which are now admitted, on all hands, to be wholesome
and useful modifications of the rigid rules of the common law, and
because such consent merely reduces to certainty that, as to which
the Court had the power to exercise a just and liberal discretion.
In this case the agreement of the 29th of August, 1823, between
Lewis Helms and Anna his wife, so far as it declares the marriage
contract to be dissolved, must be regarded as a nullity. But it is
now well settled, that agreements of this description may be en-
tirely void as to part, and valid as to the rest. If a husband and
wife enter into articles of agreement to separate, and that she