The questions involved in this case do not differ from
those which were disposed of in the case of Peters v. Carleton decided herewith (ante, p. 980), except that the clause in the deed discussed in that case does not appear in the deed mentioned in the case at bar.
The same judgment should, therefore, be pronounced, affirming the judgment of the court below, with costs.
Bartlett and Daniels, JJ., concur.