a _feme sole_. In Hauptman _vs._ Catlin,
20 N. Y., 248, the Court of Appeals says:

Even before the late statute respecting married women, they
were regarded as _femes sole_ in respect to their separate
property, and were as to such property liable on their
contracts respecting the same, to the same extent and as
though they were not under the disability of coverture. It
was held by Lord Mansfield and his associates, in Corbett
_vs._ Poelnitz, 1 T. R., 5, that if a husband and wife
choose to separate, and the husband allows the wife a
separate maintenance, she may contract and be sued as though
she were unmarried, and may be held to bail and imprisoned
on a _ca. sa._ without her husband. The court made this
innovation on the ground that "the times alter new customs,
and new manners arise, which require new exceptions, and a
different application of the general rule.

IV. UNDER THE RECENT STATUTES.--In Conway _vs._ Smith and Wife,
13 Wis., 125, the court held that "the statute gives to married
women, as necessarily incidental to the power of holding property
to their own use, the power of making all contracts necessary or
convenient to its beneficial enjoyment, and such contracts are to
be regarded as valid in law, and may be enforced by legal
remedies." Cole, J., dissenting.

In Barton _vs._ Beer, 35 Barbour, 81, the court, in treating of
the liability of a married woman, says:

If she acts as a _feme sole_, she ought, in justice to the
public, to be subjected to all the duties and liabilities of
a _feme sole_.

In Emerson _vs._ Clayton, 32 Ill., 493, this honorable court
held, that a married woman might bring replevin in her own name,
for her separate property, against a third party, or even against
her own husband, and that the act designed to make and did make a
radical and thorough change in the condition of a _feme covert_;
that she is to be regarded as unmarried, so far as her separate
property is concerned.

In Pomeroy _vs._ Manhattan Life Insurance Co., 40 Ill., 398,
Walker, C. J., in delivering the opinion of the court, says:

Under the statute she is entitled to the benefits it
confers, and must be held liable for her act