The judgment under review herein should be affirmed, for the reasons firstly and secondly expressed in the opinion delivered by the Chancellor in the ease of Davis v. Mial, at the present term of this court, ante p. 167.

For affirmance — Ti-ie Chancellor, Chief Justice, Swayze, Trenchard, Parker, Bergen, Minturn, Kalisch, Bogert, Vredenburgh, Congdon, White, Heppen-HEIMER, JJ. 13.

For reversal — Hone.