HELMS v. FRANCISCUS. 583

to be made upon his mother. Because it is evident, from the
general spirit of the cases in relation to this subject, that the for-
tune of the wife is settled upon her and her children, looking to
her blood, and confining the descent or distribution to those who
would lawfully take from her as her immediate descendants, This
bastard son Frederick is a child who, upon those principles, would
take according to our law; and consequently, the settlement upon
the plaintiff Anna must be extended to her son Frederick, and
to any other child or children of her's, who may, by the law of
Maryland, take, as such, from her.

A settlement of this kind, is the peculiar creature of equity;
the chief purpose of it is to save a married woman from the evil
consequences of the misconduct, negligence, or misfortune of her
husband. And, as in this instance, there is much reason to be-
lieve, that the wife may stand in need of all the safeguards the
court can place about her; I shall limit her power of alienation,
during coverture, by directing the rents and profits or income only,
of the amount to be invested for her separate use, to be paid to her
from time to time, and not by anticipation; so that she may not,
by any undue influence, be deprived of that means of support, which
it is the intention of the court to have most effectually secured to
her.(x)

The claims of Sumwalt and McFarren, and of Flagler, only
remain to be disposed of.

It is well settled, that a married woman is fully competent to
come into this court and make a valid release of whatever she may
be entitled to have awarded to her, upon the ground of 'the wife's
equity;' and consequently, this plaintiff Anna, must be held, by
this her bill, to have completely released all her claims and pre-
tensions to the full extent of the mortgage or assignment of such
her interest to Sumwalt and McFarren; and her husband Lewis
Helms, having by his answer expressly admitted the validity of
their claim, the whole of it, principal and interest, must be decreed
* to be paid to them, when the amount shall have been stated by the
auditor.

With regard to Flagler's petition, as he does not pretend to give
his claim any other or stronger foundation, than that of an assign-

(x) Parkes v. White, II Ves. 210; Brandon v. Robinson, 18 Ves. 429; Jackson
v. Hobhouse, 2 Meriv. 486; Barton v. Briscoe, 4 Cond. Cha. Rep. 283; Wood-
meston v. Walker, 6 Cond. Cha. Rep. 457; Jones v, Salter, 6 Cond. Cha. Rep. 463;
Brown v. Pocock, 6 Cond. Cha. Rep. 464.