
    Richard Roe lessee of Tusan Lopez and Anne his wife in right of the said Anne against Jacob Mayor and Hugh Henry. Same lessee against George Ludlam.
    In ejectment baron and feme in right of feme, advantage may be taken on tbe general issue of the woman being the wife of another person.
    Ejectments for lands in. the county of Philadelphia, with notices to appear at the last September term. On the 1st December 1794, the tenants appeared, entered their pleas of not guilty, and into the common rule.
    On the 8th April 1795, the following special plea in abatement was filed in the first suit, and verified by the oath of Hugh Henry, which was agreed should extend to both suits.
    “And the said Jacob Mayor and Hugh Henry, executors “of the testament and last will of Joseph Le Blane, deceased, “by Robert Henry Dunkin their attorney, pray judgment of ‘ ‘ the writ aforesaid, because that the said Anne at the time “of suing out the writ aforesaid was and still is the wife of 1 ‘ William Adair, who is yet in full life, to wit, at Philadel“phia, in the county of Philadelphia, and was not neither is “she the wife of Tusan Lopez, as is alleged in the said writ, “and which said William Adair is not mentioned in the writ “aforesaid. They therefore pray judgment of the said writ, “and that the.same be quashed.”
    Robert Henry Dunkin, pro def.
    
    
      Messrs. Ingersoll and Dunkin, pro def withdrew their pleas.
    Messrs. Kewis and Wilcocks, pro quer.
    
    *5521 * ^ie plaintiffs’ counsel excepted to the plea as frivo-J lous, and tending merely to delay. Besides, if there was a necessity of entering such a plea, it should have been done before the joining of the general issue, or at least have been pleaded since the last continuance.
   Per curiam.

There is nothing in the plea in abatement which the defendants could not take advantage of at the trial, on the general issue. If Anne was the wife of Adair and not of Kopez, the latter could not join with her in making the lease laid in the declaration, and consequently, the plaintiff must be non-suited for want of shewing a title in himself. Though the lease to the nominal plaintiff be a fiction, which is admitted by the common rule, yet it must be pursued with correctness and accuracy.  