As to chattels real and personal property of the wife in general, courts of equity adopted a rule that, when a husband sought their aid in reducing such property to his possession, they might compel him to settle a reasonable amount for the support of the wife and her children. This was called her "equity to a settlement."20 So courts of equity allow a wife to own and manage her land as if she were unmarried whenever it is settled on her in trust for her "sole and separate use."21 Other expressions are also adequate to effect the purpose.22

15 Davis v. Gilliam, 5 Ired. Eq. (N. C.) 308; Babb v. Perley, 1 Greenl (Me.) 6. Cf. 1 Bish. Mar. Warn. 393.

16 See Mellen, C. J., in Babb v. Perley, 1 Greenl (Me.) 9. Cf. Stroebe v. Fehl, 22 Wis. 337.

17 Stroebe v. Fehl 22 Wis. 337; Davis v. Gilliam, 5 Ired. Eq. (N. C.) 308; Dejarnatte v. Allen, 5 Grat (Va.) 499. Cf. Ware v. Ware, 6 N. J. Eq. 117.

18 Trask v. Patterson, 29 Me. 499; Butterfield v. Beall, 3 Ind. 203; Cole man v. Satterfield, 2 Head (Tenn.) 259.

19 Butterfield v. Beall, 3 Ind. 203; Coleman v. Satterfield, 2 Head (Tenn.) 259.

20 Barron v. Barron, 24 Vt. 375; Hall v. Hall, 4 Md. Ch. 283; White v. Gould-ln's Ex'rs, 27 Grat (Va.) 491; Beeman v. Cowser, 22 Ark. 429; Kenny v. Udall 5 Johns. Ch. (N. Y.) 4G4. Cf. Wiles v. Wiles, 3 Md. l. See, further, Scbouler, Husb. & W. § § 160-162; Fetter, Eq. 37.

21 Brandt v. Mickle, 28 Md. 436; Beeman v. Cowser, 22 Ark. 429; Pollard v. Merrill, 15 Ala. 169; Morrison v. Thistle, 67 Mo. 596; Porter v. Bank, 19 Vt 410.

22 Prout v. Roby, 15 Wall 471; Brandt v. Mickle, 28 Md. 436; Stuart v. Kissam, 2 Barb. (N. Y.) 493; Flournoy v. Flournoy, 86 Cal. 286, 24 Pac. 1012; Atwood v. Dolan, 34 W. Va. 563, 12 S. E. 688. Cf. Buck v. Wroten, 24 Grat (Va.) 250; In re Quinn's Estate, 144 Pa. St 444, 22 Atl. 965. But for expressions which are not sufficient, see Scott v. Causey, 89 Ga. 749, 15 S. E. 650; Hart v. Leete, 104 Mo. 315, 15 S. W. 976; Warren v. Costello, 109 Mo.