There can be no doubt that the negro girl Sarah and the boy Thompson became the property of the defendant Isabella’s intestate by his intermarriage Avith her. They Avere at the house of the said defendant’s mother, Avith Avhom she lived at the time of her marriage, Avere not claimed adversely by her mother *50 or any other person, and, therefore, became the property of her husband jure marito, whether he ever took them home or not. The two cases of Pettijohn v. Beasly, 4 Dev. Rep. 512, and Stephens v. Doak, 2 Ire. Eq. Rep. 348, cited by the plantiffs’ counsel, show that the wife’s being tenant in common with another person, of the said slaves, made no difference. The household furniture which the said Isabella had at her mother’s, at the time of her said marriage, became also the property of her husband, for which she, as his administratrix, is bound to account as part of his estate. But the notes which she held, payable to herself, having never been collected by her husband, survived to her ; and it is now admitted by the plaintiffs’ counsel that she is not bound to account for them.

The plantiffs are entitled to an account from the defendants, of the administration of the estate of the intestate by the defendant Isabella, for which a reference must be made to the Clerk, if the parties desire it.

Per Curiam. Decreed accordingly.