However,  in  a  case  before  Lord  Thurlow  (u)  where  a

(i)  Harris  V.  Graham,  2  Ro.  Abr.        Abr.  427,  pi.  8,  Dom.  Sdaterv.
247,  pi.  6.  Travdl.
(^)  Countess  ofSatherlandv.  North-    (u)  Mac  Adaoi  v.Logah,  8  Bfo.
more,  1  Dick.  66^  S.  C.  3  Via.        C.  C.  310,  vide  supra.
power


AT  WHAT  nils  A  P0WBB  MAY  BB  BBBCUTBD,     317

power  was  giteo  to  the  survivor  of  two  persons^  and?
they  executed  a  joint  appointment^  he  hfld  it  bad ;'
but  it  seems  still  open  to  contend^  that  as  the  power  m^.  j'
be  executed  by  each  separatelj^m  the  life  time  of  the  >
cSKrTlt  joint  appointment  ought  to  be  considered  as
thelqiarate  af^ointment  of  the  one  who  survives^  and
consequently  as  a  valid  execution  of  the  power.  Lady^
Sutfaerhmd's  case  was  not  cited  in  the  case  before  Lord
Thurlow.
Where^  previously  to  marriage^  an  agreement  is  made
generally  that  the  woman  may  dispose  of  her  property^
she  cannot  after  the  agreement^  and  before  the  nuurriage*
make  a  binding  will^  unless  expressly  authorized  to  do
io(y).
