218 HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY.

and of course it does not appear that the land in question was
purchased with the product of the trust estate, and has been
substituted for it.

These lands, therefore, are not shown to have been a part of
the trust estate.

And even if there were grounds for inferring, that the lands
were so purchased, and that they are to be considered as con-
stituting a part of the trust estate of Mrs. Hall, and subject to
her disposition in equity, as a.feme sole, these creditors would
still, in my judgment, not be entitled to be paid out of the pro-
ceeds of their sale, unless they could also prove that she intend-
ed to charge them with the payment of their claims.

Although a married woman having a separate estate, is, with
respect to it, to be regarded as a.feme sole, yet her capacity to
act as such, is to be confined to that very property, and she is
not as to all intents and purposes placed on the same footing
with an unmarried woman. I have not been able to find any
American case in which the power of the wife over her sepa-
rate estate, has been carried farther; and Chancellor Kent, in
the elaborate opinion delivered by him, in the case of the Meth-
odist Church vs. Jaques, 3 Johns. Ch. Rep., 77, over and over
again approves of this limitation upon the power of the wife.
The act, to be binding, must be with respect to her separate
property; and although she may not, in the disposition of her
separate estate, be confined to the particular mode pointed out
in the instrument, yet I apprehend, that before her separate es-
tate can be charged for her engagements, it must be shown, that
her contract was made with direct reference to such separate
estate; and that she is not to all intents and purposes, as to it,
to be regarded as a feme sole, and bound by any form of con-
tract into which she may please to enter, whether made with
respect to her separate estate, or not.

Still, looking to the case of Gray vs. Cook, 12 G. & J., 236,
I am of opinion, that it would be competent for these parties
to show by parol evidence, that Mrs. Hall, when she entered
into the engagements, upon the strength of which they now
attempt to charge the proceeds of these lands, designed to