“If there had been a reference or recital in the original deed as to the subjoined clause there could be little foundation for a doubt ■that the subsequent paper would thereby have been made a part of the original document. The books are full of cases to that effect. Here, however, we have the reverse, the unidentified and unsigned paper containing a recital purporting to connect such paper with the deed. We think however, that is not sufficient. So far as the documents themselves are concerned the subjoined clause is merely a waif upon the doorstep. It has no recognition from within. It cannot, therefore, stand of its own force. This is a case requiring clear and convincing evidence to support the relief and without some legal identification of the subjoined clause we do not see how the same can be enforced.

Upon a consideration of the entire case we are of the opinion that the plaintiffs have not made out the case stated in the petition and that said petition must be dismissed.”