Widow's Election-testamentary Provision in Lieu of Dower.

In nearly all states, if the husband by his will make provision for his wife expressly in lieu of dower, she must elect which she will take.268 So, too, if the devise is necessarily inconsistent with dower.269 But if the testamentary provision does not show that v. Nutthall, 1 Vern. 427. But not for elopement and adultery, except as changed by statute. Sidney v. Sidney, 3 P. Wms. 2G9; Buchanan v. Buchanan, 1 Ball & B. 203. Jointure is now rare. It is in some states forfeited for the same causes as dower. See 1 Stim. Am. St Law, § 3247 A.

268 In re Johnson's Estate, 10 Pa. Co. Ct. R. 461; Warren v. Warren, 148 111. 641, 36 N. E. 611; Pellizzarro v. Reppert, 83 Iowa, 497, 50 N. W. 19; Newman v. Newman, 1 Brown, Ch. 186. But see Boiling v. Boiling, 88 Va. 524, 14 S. E. 67. By some statutes she is presumed to elect dower; by others, the will. 1 Stim. Am. St. Law, § 3264. And see Doty v. Hendrix (Sup.) 16 N. Y. Supp. 284; Stone v. Vandermark, 146 111. 312, 34 N. E. 150. So there may be a presumption of election from lapse of time. Ir re Gunyon's Estate, 85 Wis. 122, 55 N. W. 152; Pratt v. Felton, 4 Cush. (Mass.) 174; Hastings v. Clifford, 32 Me. 132; Thompson v. Egbert, 17 N. J. Lav., 459; Collins v. Carman, 5 Md. 503; Malone v. Majors, 8 Humph. (Tenn.) 577; Allen v. Hartnett, 116 Mo. 278, 22 S. W. 717. Cf. Stone v. Vandermark, 146 111. 312, 34 N. E. 150; Duffy v. Duffy, 70 Hun, 135, 24 N. Y. Supp. 408; Zimmerman v. Lebo, 151 Pa. St. 345, 24 Atl. 1082. Merrill v. Emery, 10 Pick. (Mass.) 507; Spruance v. Darlington (Del. Ch.) 30 Atl. 663. In order that her election be binding, she must have knowledge of the values of the two estates. Hender v. Rose, 3 P. Wms. 124, note; U. S. v. Duncan, 4 Mclean 99, Fed. Cas. No. 15,002; Goodrum v. Goodrum, 56 Ark. 532, 20 S. W. 353. As to effect of election to take under the will, see Kuydendall v. Deveemon, 78 Mo. 537, 28 Atl. 412; Swihart v. Swihart 7 Ohio Cir. Ct R. 338; Schwatken v. Daudt, 53 Mo. App. 1; Truett v. Funderburk, 93 Ga. 686, 20 S. E. 260. The election must be by the widow herself, Boone's Representatives v. Boone, 3 Har. & Mch. (Md.) 95; Sherman v. Newton, 6 Gray (Mass.) 307; Welch v. Anderson, 28 Mo. 293; unless she is insane, when her guardian may elect for her, Young v. Boardman, 97 Mo. 181, 10 S. W. 48. Contra, Lewis v. Lewis, 7 Ired. (N. C.) 72. If she elects to take under the will, lands aliened by the husband alone are freed from dower. Allen v. Pray, 12 Me. 138; Fairchild v. Marshall, 42 Minn. 14, 43 N. W. 563; In re Machemer's Estate, 140 Pa. St. 544, 21 Atl. 441; Spalding v. Hershfield, 15 Mont. 253, 39 Pac. 88; Stokes v. Norwood (S. C.) 22 S. E. 417. Cf. Chapin v. Hill, 1 R. I. 446.

269 Mccullough v. Allen, 3 Yeates (Pa.) 10; Hamilton v. Buckwalter, 2 Yeates (Pa.) 389; Turner v. Scheiber, 89 Wis. 1, 61 N. W. 280; Lewis v. Smith, 9 N. Y. 502; Church v. Bull, 2 Denio (N. Y.) 430; Jackson v. Churchill, 7 Cow. (N. Y.) 287; Savage v. Burnham, 17 N. Y. 561; Nelson v. Brown, 144 N. Y. 384, 39 N. E. 355; Ferris v. Ferris (Sup.) 30 N. Y. Supp. 982; Corriell v. Ham, it was intended to be given in place of dower, the widow may take both.270

Same - Statutory Provision in Lieu of Dower.

In a few states a widow must elect between dower and an intestate share given her by statute,271 or between dower and homestead.272