The Court of Appeal has held that she was entitled to this indemnity, and in respect of it the court has given her the usual vendor's lien on the land. This it seems was also right.
. Both Mr. Justice Rose and the Court of Appeal Justice. have held that the mortgage executed by Paul in favour of Hiram Boulton and the conveyance of the equity of redemption to Alexander Boulton were fraudulent as against the respondent's claim to a lien for this indemnity.
The only other matter in question was the damages which the Court of Appeal has referred it to the master to assess.
The appeal must be dismissed with costs.
Solicitor for the appellants: W. J. Clark.
Solicitor for the respondents: F.
*Nov. PAUL LEA (PLAINTIFF).....................RESPONDENT. ON
APPEAL
FROM
THE SUPREME
COURT OF NEW BRUNSWICK.
.
Married woman-Separate property-Conveyance-Contracts-0. S. N. B. c. 72.
Sec..
of C. S. N. B. ch. 72, which provides that the property of a married woman shall vest in her as her separate property, free from the control of her husband and not liable for payment of his debts, does not, except in the case specially provided for, enlarge her power for disposing of such property or allow her to enter into contracts which at common law would be void. Moore v. Jackson (22 Can. S. C. R. 210) referred to. Lea v. Wallace et al., (33 N. B. Rep. 492) reversed.
:-Sir Henry Strong C.J. and Taschereau, Sdgewick, King and Girouard JJ.
38%