
    GENERAL COURT,
    OCTOBER TERM, 1795.
    Samuel Lane and Providence his Wife against William Gover.
    THIS was an action of dozver, for the third part of a tract of land called Homisham, lying in Calvert county, and 300/. current money rent, which the plaintiffs claim as the dower of the said Providence, of the endowment of her former husband, Richard Lane, deceased. The defendant pleaded that Richard Lane was never seised, See.
    The following case was stated for the court’s opinion, viz.
    It is agreed that Benjamin Lane was seised in fee-simple of a tract of land called Homisham, lying in Calvert county, containing 307 acres; and being so seised, became bound to the commissioners of the loan-office for the sum of 375/. current money, in the year 1774, under the act of assembly passed in 1773, for the emission of bills of credit, whereby the real estate of the said Ben« jamin Lane became bound in the manner in and by the said act expressed.
    The said Benjamin Lane, being so seised,, departed this life in 1780, after having duly made his will, which was executed and afterwards proved as the law directs; by which he devised the said land to his brother, Richard Lane, who entered into, and was seised in fee of, the said land under the said devise, and sold a part of the same, to wit, 183 acres thereof, to William Gover, the present defendant, and conveyed the same to him in fee-simple. Providence Lane, one of the present plaintiffs, was, before the said devise, lawfully married to the said Richard Lane, and continued to be, and was, at the time of the said sale last mentioned, the lawful wife of the said Richard Lane. The said Providence Lane relinquished to the said William Gov^r, the defendant, "her right of dower in the said 183 acres of land so sold as aforesaid. The said Providence never has relinquished her right of dower in the said 124 acres of land, which is the same in the declaration in this cause mentioned.
    The said Pickard Lane departed this life in the year 1784, seised in fee of the said 124 acres of land.
    
      William Gover,
    the defendant, who purchased the above mentioned 133 acres of land, has since, to wit, on the 31st of July, 1780, installed agreeable to law for the sum of 875/. current money, with interest thereon, front the 1st of December, 1789, on account of the money borrowed as aforesaid by the said Benjamin Lane, for which, and for all the interest due prior to the 1st of December, 1789, the account of the said Benjamin Lane is credited in the books of the treasurer of the Western Shore, The said Gover, after having so installed, a writ of fieri facias issued at his instance in the name of the commissioners aforesaid, from the general court, on the 39th of December, 1790; by virtue of which said writ, the said 124 acres of land in the declaration in this cause mentioned, was seized and sold by the sheriff of Calvert county, in February, 1791, to satisfy the debí aforesaid, created by the loan to the said Benjamin Lane$ and at the said sale, the said 124 acres of land was purchased by the said William Gover, the defendant, for the sum of 230l. current money, which sum appears to have been paid in the treasury. A deed was afterwards made by the sheriff on account of the said sale, by which the said 124 acres of land were conveyed to the said William Gover, the defendant, in whom the legal title still remains.
    If upon the above facts, the court should be .of opinion that the plaintiffs are entitled by law to dower in the said 124 acres of land, then judgment to be entered for one' third of the said 124 acres, above demanded in the declaration aforesaid, and 30/. current money damages, for the detention of the said dower, and costs of suit; if otherwise, judgment of nonsuit to be entered.
    Kilty, for the plaintiff.
    Duval, for the defendant.
   By the act of November session, 1773, c. 26. bills of ( credit were directed to be issued and loaned to the inhabitants, and that the bonds which should be taken by the commissioners for the sums of money loaned, should be a lien upon, and bind, the real estates of the obligors and their securities; and if the security paid the debt, the bond was to be assigned to the security; and if any real estate bound as aforesaid, should, by will or by deed,, executed by the obligor, be devised or conveyed, the heirs, devisees, &c. should be entitled, upon payment of the debt, to an assignment.

The Court

gave judgment, on the case stated, for the defendant.  