HUSBAND AND WIFE 1989

The words, "other liens," refer to liens so created. Lynn v. Gephart, 27 Md. 563. See
also Bowie v. Berry, 3 Md. Ch. 363; Mantz v. Buchanan, 1 Md. Ch. 208.

Prior to act of 1898, ch. 457, wife was not entitled to dower in equitable estate
of her husband unless he died possessed thereof. Act of 1898, ch. 457, sec. 6, will not
be given a retroactive effect so as to affect marriages solemnized and property acquired
prior to such act. Slingluff v. Hubner, 101 Md. 657. See also Safe Deposit Co. v.
Gittings, 103 Md. 496; Harris v. Whiteley, 98 Md. 441; Rabbitt v. Gaither, 67 Md. 98;
Glenn v. Clark, 53 Md. 604; Bank of Commerce v. Owens, 31 Md. 324; note (a) to
Miller v. Stump, 3 Gill, 304; Purdy v. Purdy, 3 Md. Ch. 547; Bowie v. Berry, 3 Md.
Ch. 361; Bowie v. Berry, 1 Md. Ch. 452.

Where a husband who holds an equitable title to land executes a bond of convey-
ance and then acquires legal title and subsequently dies, the purchase money not
having been paid, wife is entitled to dower. It may be that a different rule would
apply if contract to convey were made before dower had once attached. Dower is
regarded as a continuation of husband's estate, and there is no mesne seisin. Where,
however, a part of the money received by husband from vendee is applied in part
payment for land, this sum must be deducted from value of land before dower is
assigned. Improvements put upon land by vendee must also be excluded in assignment
of dower. Bowie v. Berry, 3 Md. Ch. 361. And see Bowie v. Berry, 1 Md. Ch. 452.

Where the equitable title was mortgaged prior to adoption of this section and
property sold in husband's lifetime, the widow is not entitled to dower. This section
could not operate to prejudice of creditors and heirs who became such prior to its
enactment. Hopkins v. Frey, 2 Gill, 363. And see Stelle v. Carroll, 12 Pet. 211.

Where a husband has an equitable interest in land subject to payment of certain
sums, a judgment subsequently obtained is subordinate to wife's dower, though latter
is subordinate to purchase money of land and to money secured by deed creating
equitable interest. Steuart v. Beard, 4 Md. Ch. 321.

Widow is entitled in equity to her dower in lands conveyed to a third party instead
of to husband, with intent to defraud her. Rabbitt v. Gaither, 67 Md. 94.

In assigning dower, the land is valued as of time of husband's death, and not as
of time of a prior conveyance of land without wife's consent, unless increased value
arose from labor and money of purchaser. Bowie v. Berry, 1 Md. Ch. 454.

What kind of lands a widow is dowable in. Act of 1818, ch. 193, sec. 10, held to
have no application. Spangler v. Stanler, 1 Md. Ch. 37. And see Marbury v. Brien,
15 Pet. 38.

Cited but not construed in Vogel v. Turnt, 110 Md. 201.

Cited in Safe Deposit & Trust Co., 3 F. Supp. 151.

As to how dower may be relinquished, see sec. 12.

See art. 16, sec. 46, et seq.; art. 46, secs. 1-4; art. 93, sec. 128, et seq., and sec. 313,
et seq.

As to the assignment of dower and a sale of the land with the widow's consent, see
art. 46, secs. 38 and 39.

An. Code, 1924, sec. 7. 1912, sec. 7. 1904, sec. 7. 1898, ch. 457, sec. 7. 1904, ch. 151.
1914, ch. 516. 1918, ch. 410, sec. 7.

7. Every husband shall acquire by virtue of his marriage an estate for
his life in one-third of the lands held or owned by his wife at any time
during the marriage, whether by legal or equitable title, or whether held
by her at the time of her death or not, but such estate shall not operate to
the prejudice of any claim for the purchase money of such lands, or other
lien on the same; nor shall any conveyance of such lands by the wife alone
bar such estate of the husband therein, and this estate shall be known as
the husband's dower, and the statute and common law of this State as to
the wife's dower shall be construed to be applicable to this estate unless such
construction would be unreasonable.

And this section shall apply to every case where a wife dies after the first
of June, 1918, and her husband survives her, without regard to when the
property was acquired or the marriage occurred.

Sec. 4 removes the limitation on capacity of wife to convey without her husband,
but such conveyance is subject to any rights he has acquired by reason of the marital
relation; if wife takes property title to which is subject to limitations imposed by
a statute, a conveyance by her alone pursuant to a later statute is not void, but
merely subject to conditions in effect during the existence of prior statute. Beinbrink
v. Fox, 121 Md. 112.

Act of 1898, ch. 457 (together with act of 1898, ch. 331), practically made the marital
rights of husband and wife the same so far as respects their property. Collins v. Collins,
98 Md. 480.