SCOTT v. CROSDALE

Serjeant, for the plaintiff, contended that there was a distinction as to the effect of a sale under a Fi. Fa. and a Levari Facias. cias. That, in the latter case, the act (1 Vol. Dall. Edit. p. 71. 2.) directs that no greater estate shall be conveyed than the lands are mortgaged for: And in this case the woman had not done any act to bar her estate in the lands. He added that in New-Jersey, where the act of Assembly was very similar, the wife was always held to be entitled to dower. Wilcocks, after stating that at Chester, in the case of Howell versus Laycock, it was determined that a sale by an Executor, to whom lands were devised for the payment of debts, barred the widow's dower, would have proceeded; but,