Per Curiam.
The judgment under review herein should be affirmed, for . the reasons firstly and secondly expressed in the opinion delivered by the Chancellor in tile case of Davis v. Mial, at the present term of this court, ante p. 167. For affirmance — Tite Chancellor, Chibe Justice, Swayze, Trenchard, Parker, Bergen, Minturn, Kaltsch, Bogert, Yredenbuegi-i, Congdon, Teri-iunE, Heppeni-ieimer, JJ. 13. For reversal — Hone.