Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 7.djvu/163

 ORANGE NAT. BANK V. TRAVER. 151 �The supreme court of this state bas not passed upon the question. It is obvious that the rule established in New York by the decision in Yole v. Dederer, supra, is a departure from the current of authorities on this subject ; but, as an original and correct exposition of the elementary prinoiples of law applicable to the question, it eommends itself to my judgment. Whoever takes the signature of a married woman to an obligation, given for the beneut of her husband or another, knowing that such signature is void as to her person- ally, but expecting to rely upon her separate estate for its fulfil- ment, ought to have her declaration therein to theefifect that she signs the instrument with such intention and understanding. But, even upon this view of the law, I do not see how the stipulation in these notes can be otherwise construed than as, manifesting the intent and purpose of the wife to charge her separate estate with the payment thereof. It may be admitted that the representation therein that the obligation w^s given for her benefit is f aise, and that she is not estopped to- show it. Big. Estop. 276, 485. �It may also be admitted that the stipulation would have been more explicit and in better form if it had stated that the wife gave the obligation with the intention to -charge her separate estate therewith, rather than that the payee toofcit "oi^ ohe credit" of said estate. But, considered as it is, there can ^e no doubt about its meaning and the intention of. the parties thereto. It is expressed that the payee took the obli- gation "on the credit of the separate estate" of the wife, abd if she, knowing this faet and signing the iustrument Mth this declaration in it, really intended otherwise, as she avers, then she contemplated a fraud which she cannot be heard to allege against the plain import of her own agreement to the fiontrary. There is no set form of words necessary to manifest the wife's intention to create the charge upon hei estate. It is Buffieient if it fairly appears from the language used, uhder the circumstances, that such was her intention, She gave this obligation to pay her husbaiid's debt with the express understanding that it was accepted by the ereditor upon the •credit of her separate estate, and the only inference from this ��� �