MANTZ VS. BUCHANAN. 205

The claim of a widow for dower is a highly favored one, and
with respect to a devise, accepted by her in lieu of it, she is, by
the terms of the act of assembly, and by judicial decision, re-
garded as a purchaser for a fair consideration. Act ofl'798, ch.
101, sui-ch. 13, sec. 5; Gibson vs. McCormick, 10 Gill &
Johns., 67.

Suppose in this case it had happened, that a title paramount
to the title of the mortgagor had been outstanding in some third
person, and after the assignment of the dower, this title had
been successfully asserted, and the doweress turned out of pos-
session, would she not have had a right to be compensated out
of the other lands other husband, if he left any? It is suppos-
ed she would, and that the rule applicable to jointures made
subsequent to the marriage, from which the widow has been
fairly evicted by law, would extend to a doweress legally dis-
possessed of the lands assigned to her in dower.

It does not clearly appear in this case, of what other lands
the mortgagor died seized, though from the language of the
mortgage, in describing the premises, as all the lands of the
mortgagor lying "south-east of Hagerstown," it is fair to be
inferred that he held other lands. Now, presuming such to be
the case, and that the widow, by a defect in the title of her
husband, had been deprived of the lands assigned her in dower,
would not justice require, that some compensation should be
made her out of those other lands, or must she be held rigor-
ously to the assignment, be the consequences what they may?
There cannot be a question, that, under the act of assembly of
1818, chap. 193, sec. 10, Mrs. Buchanan, would, but for the
proceedings on the equity side of Washington County Court,
be entitled to dower to some extent in these lands; because,
notwithstanding the mortgage, the equitable title was in the
husband, and the act in terms declares, that widows shall be
entitled to dower in lands held by such title, and the question,
therefore, is, whether this proceeding in Washington County
Court, shall deprive her of this right, when it is obvious, her
title to the lands assigned her in that proceeding, must yield to
the subsequent sale, to satisfy the mortgage.
VOLI.—18