2o. The principles to be observed in respect to the transactions of Married Women; W. C. 1o. Statute applies only to Conveyances of Lands or Chattels. It is not, therefore, applicable to any power of attorney, nor to any executory contract. (Shanks v. Lancaster, 5 Grat. 111; V. C. 1873, c. 117, § 7.) 2P. The Husband must be a Party. Sexton v. Pickering, 3 Rand. 468. 3P. Both Husband and Wife must sign it. Tod v. Baylor, 4 Leigh, 498; McClanehan v. Siter, 2 Grat. 280. 4o. It must appear that there was a privy examination, &c., of the Wife. Healy, &c., v. Rowan, &c., 5 Grat. 431. 5P. It must appear that there was an explanation of the writing to the Wife. Hairston v. Randolph, 12 Leigh, 445; Harkins v. Forsyth, 11 Leigh, 294. 6. No prescribed requisite must be omitted in the certificate. Hence, to omit that "she does not wish to retract it," is fatal. (Grove v. Zumbro, 14 Grat. 516.) 7o. No other disability is obviated save that of Coverture. The statute declares that when duly executed and recorded, the deed shall convey the estate of the wife "as effectually as if she were an unmarried woman." (§ 7.) Hence, as no other disability but coverture is removed, infancy will invalidate the deed, as in other cases. (Thomas v. Gammel & ux, 6 Leigh, 9.) 3. Persons wanting in complete Ownership of the Subject-Matter; W. c. 1. Persons Attainted of Treason or Felony. These, at common law, are incapable to convey from the time of the offence committed, because from that time the lands are liable to be forfeited to the Crown. (2 Bl. Com. 290-'91.) In Virginia, as no such forfeiture ensues, no such disability exists. (V. C. 1873, c. 105, § 5.) 21. Aliens, 67 At common law, aliens may take lands by purchase, or act of the party, but not by descent, which is an act of the law; nor can they, although they may take by purchase, hold even in that case. In Virginia," any alien, not an enemy, may ac- In England, corporations acquiring lands without (2 Bl. In Virginia, the same result is supposed to follow in case of lands acquired by a corporation in excess of the quantity allowed by the charter, or if the charter is silent, in excess of the quantity required by the objects of the corporation (Ante p. 523), sed quære. (V. C. 1873, c. 56, § 2; 1 Lom. Dig. 14.) 2h. Persons to whom Lands may be Aliened; W. C. 1. The General Doctrine as to the Persons to whom lands may be aliened. In general lands may be aliened to any person whom soever, the exceptions being fewer than in the case of persons aliening; because every conveyance is supposed to be for the benefit of the grantee. (2 Bl. Com. 292-3; 2 Th. Co. Lit. 214; Sheph. Touchst. 235.) 21. Exceptions to the General Doctrine; W. C. Such persons may take as alienees, and as it is C.E. §360. Law will coverture ended may be avoided or confirmed by her or her heirs. (2 Bl. Com. 292-3; 2 Lom. Dig. 24, 377-'8; 2 Th. Co. Lit. 214-'15; Sheph. Touchst. 235.) 2. Persons insufficiently Designated. Persons insufficiently designated, so that it is not reasonably certain who is intended, can take nothing by any sort of conveyance. So if the beneficial object for which the conveyance is designed be undefined, the conveyance is void. Hence, a conveyance to an unincorporated association (as a religious congregation, &c.), or to the unborn bastard child of such a man, or for an object of general philanthropy (as the establishment of a place of education, or the benefit of the trade of a town), is inoperative and void. Literary charities, however, for educational purposes are, with some qualifications made valid in Virginia by statute, and so, to a very limited extent, are conveyances for the benefit of religious and benevolent associations. (Baptist Association v. Hart, 4 Wheat. 372; Gallego's Ex'ors v. Atto. Gen'l, 3 Leigh, 450; 1 Rop. Leg. 80, &c.; Lit. Fund v. Dawson, 10 Leigh, 148; Wheeler v. Smith, 9 How. 55; Maund's Adm'r v. McPhail, 10 Leigh, 199; Vidal v. Girard's Ex'ors, 2 How. 127; 3 Lom. Dig. 181, &c., 189, &c.; V. C. 1873, c. 77, § 2 & seq; Id. c. 76, § 8 & seq, 13 & seq; Kelly v. Love, 20 Grat. 124; Kinnaird v. Miller's Ex'or, 25 Grat. 119-20 & seq; Roy v. Rowzie, 25 Grat. 599.) supply a trustee. The certainty or uncertainty of the trustee is wholly immaterial, for however vaguely or obscurely he may be designated, or although none be designated, yet equity will supply a trustee in pursuance of its maxim, never to suffer a trust to fail for want of a trustee." (Charles & al v. Hunnicutt, 5 Call. 312.) 3. Persons who, by law, cannot hold Lands. 66 The common law makes a merit of allowing lepers, bastards, and persons however deformed, yet having human shape, to take and hold lands like other persons, whilst it denies the right either to take or to hold to those whom it designates as monsters, not having human shape, a sort of being which, we have seen, to be purely imaginary and impossible. There are, however, several classes of persons who are admitted freely to take, but whose capacity to hold requires some exposition, namely: (1), Aliens; (2), Corporations; and (3), Persons attainted; W. C. 11. Aliens. The common law, under no circumstances, permitted aliens to hold lands, save that persons engaged in trade might hire habitations and houses of business; and any alien who presumed to acquire any permanent estate in real property, whether in fee-simple, for life, or for years, was liable to have the same immediately escheated to the crown. (Ante, Vol. I, p. 143 to 145.) This rigor, however, is with us confined to alien enemies, it being enacted that "an alien, not an enemy, may acquire by purchase or descent, and may hold real estate in this State; and the same shall be transmitted in the same manner as real estate held by citizens." (V. C. 1873, c. 4, § 18.) 21. Corporations. C.C.671 The restrictions upon the power of corporations, at common law and by statute, to hold lands (there is no restriction upon their taking them) has been fully explained in Vol. I, 547, & seq, and Ante, 517, & seq, and 523-24. It will be remembered that the doctrine in Virginia, as declared by statute, is that "No incor- Ce360 porated company shall hold any more real estate than is proper for the purposes for which it is incorporated." (V. C. 1873, c. 56, § 2.) And although no express provision is found enacting that any excess shall be forfeited to the commonwealth, yet that conclusion seems to be the result of the several provisions upon the subject. (Ante p. 524; Vol. I, 548.) 31. Persons Attainted of Treason or Felony. A person attainted of treason or felony may, at common law, before or after attainder, be a grantee; but he cannot hold the thing granted; for if the king or lord will, he may have it from him by forfeiture or escheat. (2 Th. Co. Lit. 214; Sheph. Touchst. 235; 3 Prest. Abstr. 407; Ante, p. 485, 516, & seq.) In Virginia it is enacted (V. C. 1873, c. 195, § 5) that no "attainder of felony shall work a corruption of blood, or forfeiture of estate;" and thus persons attainted may not only take, but may hold and dispose of lands as freely as others. (Ante, p. 516.) 4. Persons occupying Fiduciary relations. Trustees, agents, attorneys, and other persons occupying a fiduciary relation, cannot lawfully deal for their own benefit, touching the subject-matter committed to them; and any such transactions are regarded as constructively fraudulent (however transparently fair they may actually be), and are voidable at the election of the beneficiary, (Fox v. Mackreth, (2. Bro. C. C. 400; 2 Cox, 320), 1 Wh. & Tud. L. C. 105, 126, & seq.; 1 Stor. Eq. § 311, & seq; Buckles v. Lafferty, 2 Rob. 294; Bailey's Adm'x v. Robinson, 1 Grat. 9; Howery v. Helms, 20 Grat. 7; Michoud v. Girod, 4 How. 554; 3 Sugd. Vend. 225.) 45. The Modes of effecting the Alienation of Lands. The modes of effecting the alienation of Tands are known as common assurances, whereby every man's estate is assured to him. They are of four kinds: namely, (1), By matter in pais; (2), By matter of record; (3), By special custom of particular places; and (4), By devise. (2 Bl. Com. 294.) W. C. 1. Alienation by matter in Pais. The development of the subject of alienation by matter in pais will lead us to inquire into (1), The doctrine as to the matter in pais necessary for the convey'ance of lands; (2), The general nature of deeds; and 3, (3), The several species of conveyances. W. C. 1. Doctrine as to the matter in Puis, necessary for the conveyance of Lands; W. C. 1. Doctrine at Common Law, as to conveyance of real property by matter in pais. No writing was in any case required, save for the conveyance of incorporeal rights, which being incapable of actual delivery, could pass only by deed, and were, therefore, said to lie in grant. For the transfer of terms for years, nothing was required but a verbal agreement, consummated by the lessee's taking possession, whether the lessor were present or not, or whether he were living or not; for the transfer of freeholds, there must have been an agreement in presenti, and an actual delivery of the possession of the freehold by the vendor to the vendee, i. e. a livery of seisin. Hence, lands, as to the immediate freehold thereof, were said to lie in livery. (2 Bl. Com. 144; Ante 157-'8.) 2k. Doctrine by Statute, as to Conveyances of real property, by matter in pais; W. C 11. Doctrine by Statute in England; W. C. 1. Doctrine by Statute of Frauds and Perjuries, 29 Car. II, c. 3, § 1 to 4. All estates of freehold, and for a term exceeding three years, can be conveyed only by deed or |