feme covert should pass by deed without a previous acknowledgment made by her apart from her husband." 20 From time to time such statute was thereafter re-enacted in New York.21 Finally the abolition of fines and recoveries22 caused deeds separately acknowledged to become the only mode by which a feme covert might convey lands in New York. The statute applied to contracts to convey as well as to conveyances,23 but not to the execution of powers of appointment under a trust.24 Requisites of Certificates. The assent of the feme covert might be implied,25 and if the statute was substantially complied with, it was sufficient;20 but her acknowledgment could not be established by parol by an examination of the officer after his term of office expired.27 The statute did not apply to femes covert residing without the State.28 Where a separate acknowledgment is required by law, the certificate must be in accordance, or it is a nullity.29 Where a married woman was judicially separated from her husband, the necessity of certifying to a separate acknowledgment was not indispensable in some cases.30 The Statute of 1879. The statute of 1879 dispensed with the necessity of a separate acknowledgment on the part of feme covert,31 and in 1880 the proof of her deeds was regulated.82 Even prior to that time, it was held that a separate acknowledgment was not necessary in respect of her separate estates, since the "Married Women's Acts," 33 at least in the conveyance of property acquired 20 Van Schaack, 611, 765; N. Y. Col. Laws (ed. of 1894), V, 202, 534. 21 2 J. & V. 266; 1 K. & R. 478, 82; 1 R. L. 369; 1 R. S. 758, § 10; supra, p. 974. 22 2 R. S. 343, § 24. 23 Knowles v. McCamley, 10 Paige, 342; Bradley v. Walker, 138 N. Y. 291, 298. 24 Richardson v. Pulver, 63 Barb. 67; 142, Real Prop. Law. 25 Rexford v. Rexford, 7 Lans. 6. 26 Sheldon v. Stryker, 42 Barb. 284; Dennis v. Tarpenny, 20 id. 371; Canandarqua Acad. v. McKechnie, 19 Hun, 62; Meriam v. Harsen, 2 Barb. Ch. 232, affg. 4 Edw. 71. 27 Elwood v. Klock, 13 Barb. 50. 441; 1 R. S. 758, § 11; 1 R. L. of 1813, p. 369, § 2; Laws of 1801, chap. 155. 29 See note to 14 Abb. N. C. 463; 31 Laws of 1879, chap. 249. 33 Yale v. Dederer, 18 N. Y. 265, 271; Wiles v. Peck, 26 id. 42; Andrews v. Shaffer, 12 How. Pr. 441; Blood v. Humphrey, 17 Barb. 660; Allen v. Reynolds, 36 N. Y. Super. Ct. 297; Richardson v. Pulver, 63 Barb. 67; and see cases cited, supra, under $203, Real Prop. Law; and Hulse v. Bacon, 26 Misc. Rep. 455: affd., 40 App. Div. 89. after the passage of those acts and by those married subsequently thereto. The statute of 1879, as amended in 1880, was as follows: SECTION 1. The acknowledgment by married women or the proof of the execution by married women of deeds and other written instruments may be made, taken and certified in the same manner as if they were sole; and all acts and parts of acts which require from them any other or different acknowledgments, proofs or certificates thereof are hereby repealed. 2. This act shall take effect immediately.34 34 Repealed, chap. 547, Laws of 1896, and 251 of the Real Prop. Law of 1896, substituted. § 303. Requisites of acknowledgments. An acknowledg ment must not be taken by any officer unless he knows or has satisfactory evidence, that the person making it is the person described in and who executed such instrument. Formerly section 252, Real Property Law of 1896, chapter XLVI, General Laws: 8 252. Requisites acknowledgments.-An acknowledgment must not be taken by any office: unless he knows or has satisfactory evidence, that the person making it is the person described in and who executed such instrument.35 Section 252 was formerly 1 Revised Statutes, 758, section 9: § 9. No acknowledgment of any conveyance having been executed, shall be taken by any officer, unless the officer taking the same, shall know, or have satisfactory evidence, that the person making such acknowledgment, is the individual described in, and who executed such conveyance.36 This section relates not Knowledge of Officer Taking Acknowledgment. to the form or contents of the certificate of acknowledgment.37 but to the knowledge to be possessed by the officer taking such acknowledgment. This knowledge may be the officer's own, or that of some one else. When the officer does not know the person making the acknowledgment, then he must be satisfied of it by evidence of some kind.38 But the evidence so taken is to satisfy the officer's conscience,39 and he does not act judicially.40 Where persons acknowledging the instrument are introduced to him by a common acquaintance, this may be sufficient when coupled with other circumstances tending to personal knowledge. The statute does not undertake to regulate the officer's discretion, but unless he has the requisite knowledge his act is a nullity.42 The contents of the officer's certificate are regulated primarily by subsequent sections of this act.43 35 Repealed by Real Prop. Law of 1909, 460, art. 14, chap. 50, Consolidated Laws. See below, § 460. 33 Repealed, chap. 547, Laws of 1896. 37 Regulated by §§ 306, 307, Real Prop. Law. 38 Chap. 18, Laws of 1797; chap. 155, Laws of 1801; chap. 97, R. L. of 1813; Wood v. Bach, 54 Barb. 134. 39 Wood v. Bach, 54 Barb. 134; Rexford v. Rexford, 7 Lans. 6. 41 40 Lynch v. Livingston, 8 Barb. 463; s. c., 6 N. Y. 422; supra, p. 950; sed cf. Armstrong v. Combs, 15 App. Div. 246. 41 Wood v. Bach, 54 Barb. 134; Rexford v. Rexford, 7 Lans. 6; Dibble v. Rogers, 13 Wend. 536; sed cf. Bidwell v. Sullivan, 17 App. Div. 629, 630. 42 Watson v. Campbell, 28 Barb. 421; Rexford v. Rexford, 7 Lans. 6; Veit v. Schwab, 127 App. Div. 171. 43 §§ 306 307, Real Prop. Law Subscribing Witnesses. The following section" of this act regulates the instance where the conveyance is proved by a subscribing witness and not acknowledged by a party. Forms. For common forms of certificates of acknowledgment, see text under section 306 of this act.45 448 304 45 Infra, p. 988. § 304. Proof by subscribing witness. When the execution of a conveyance is proved by a subscribing witness, such witness must state his own place of residence, and that he knew the person described in and who executed the conveyance. The proof must not be taken unless the officer is personally acquainted with such witness, or has satisfactory evidence that he is the same person, who was a subscribing witness to the conveyance. Formerly section 253, Real Property Law of 1896, chapter XLVI, General Laws: 8 253. Proof by subscribing witness.- Where the execution of a conveyance is proved by a subscribing witness, such witness must state his own place of residence, and that he knew the person described in and who executed the conveyance. The proof must not be taken unless the officer is personally acquainted with such witness, or has satisfactory evidence that he is the same person, who was a subscribing witness to the conveyance.46 Section 253 was formerly 1 Revised Statutes, 758, section 12: § 12. The proof of the execution of any conveyance, shall be made by a subscribing witness thereto, who shall state his own place of residence, and that he knew the person described in, and who executed such conveyance; and such proof shall not be taken, unless the officer is personally acquainted with such subscribing witness, or has satisfactory evidence that he is the same person, who was a subscribing witness to such instrument.47 Origin of this Enactment. This section of the Revised Statute was in turn adopted from "An act concerning deeds," passed April 12, 1813,48 and the latter, from an act of 1801.49 Proof of Subscribing Witness. It is, however, said that the provisions of the Revised Statutes respecting proof by subscribing witnesses were mainly new, and effected radical changes in respect to the laws relating to the proof and the acknowledgment of conveyances.50 A deed in a chain of title must be properly acknowledged or proved to enable it to be recorded,51 or read in evidence. In proving the execution of a deed for the purposes of evidence in an action, a witness to the execution of such a deed must state that he was present at the execution. It seems it is not sufficient that he testify that the parties acknowledged the execution thereof, 4 Repealed by Real Prop. Law of 1909, $460, art. 14, chap. 50, Consolidated Laws. See below, § 460. 47 Repealed, chap. 547, Laws of 1896. 481 R. L. 1813. 49 Chap. 155, Laws of 1801. p. 359. 51 Irving v. Campbell, 121 N. Y. 353, 358. |