
    Mary H. Mullen, appellant, v. Mary Serefin Mullen et al., respondents.
    [Argued May term, 1925.
    Decided October 19th, 1925.]
    On appeal from a decree of the court of chancery advised by Vice-Chancellor Fielder, whose opinion is reported in 98 N. J. Eq. 90.
    
    
      Mr. Merritt Lane, for the appellant. •
    
      Messrs. Wall, Haight, Carey & Hartpence, for the respondents.
   Per Curiam.

The decree appealed from will be affirmed, for the reasons stated in the opinion filed in the court below by Vice-Chancellor Fielder.

For affirmance — The Chiee-Justice, Parker, Minturn, Kalish, Black, Katzenbach, Campbell, Lloyd, White, Van Buskirk, Kays, JJ. 11.

For reversal — Tone.  