23.  That  the  endorsement  pour  aval  of  a  wife  siparSe  quani  aux  biens  ftora
her  husband,  on  a  promissory  note  signed  by  him  for  goods  sold  and  delivered  to
him  and  charged  to  him  alone  in  the  vendors  books,  and  given  in  renewal  of  a
note  of  the  h  isband,  not  bearing  her  endorsement,  is  null  and  void  notwithstaad-
ing  that  the  goods  so  sold  and  delivered  may  have  contributed  to  the  support  of
the  wife  (C.  C.  1453) — Q.  ^.^Bruneau  &  Barnes,  25  L.  C.  J.,  p.  245, 3  L.  N.,  p.  301.
24.  DoRioN,  C.  J.  loq — A  married  woman,  separate  as  to  property  could  give
to  a  creditor  of  her  husband  priority  over  her  own  claims  on  his  property,  but,  in
this  case,  the  transaction  was  one  prohibited  by  law  between  the  husband  aad
wife,  and  therefore  null  and  void.  There  is  nothing  in  the  law  to  prevent  a  wife
from  paying  the  debts  of  her  husband  or  from  disposing  of  her  property  to  do  so.
(C.  a  1265.)— Q.  K—Bank  of  Toronto  is  Perkins,  1  Q.  B.  R.,  p.  357,


Digitized  by


Google


Of  comw  unity  of  jyroperti/, — Art  130:^  581

25.  A  transfer  of  a  claim  or  of  money  made  by  a*  wife,  sipar^  de  biens  to  a
creditor  of  her  husband,  in  payment  or  part  payment  of  her  husband's  debt,  is
valid  and  the  wife  is  not  entitled  to  have  such  transfer  or  payment  set  aside.— X^.
B^^—Oorrie  vs  OgilvUj  5  L.  N.,  p.  26 1  .—Torrance,  J. — i  L.  N.,  p.  228.
