
    Baker v. The City of St. Louis, Appellant.
    
    .1. Covenant: specific performance. The representatives of the covenantee may proceed in equity to compel specific performance, where the covenant is one which runs with the land.
    2. -, running with the land. A covenant in a conveyance of realty to a city for a street and market house, that the lot shall revert and the grantee re-convey wrhen the ground ceases to he used for a market, runs with the land, the grantors retain the fee subject to the easement, and abandonment gives a right of re-entry.
    
      3. -, to re-convey in case of breach. The covenant to re-convey relieves the grantors from the rule which requires that the reversioner shall enter before he can maintain a claim of forfeiturefor a breach of a.condition subsequent.
    •4. Streets: partition of abutting lands : rights of partitioners in street. Where the grantors have made partition of the ground bounded on one side by the dedicated street, the deeds carry the fee, subject to the easement, to the center of the street, and each grantee takes in severalty a reversionary right in so much of the street as pertains to the lot acquired by him in partition, which he may assert against the city.
    5. Equity judgment for possession. Judgment for possession may follow the final ascertainment of a party’s title as against his adversary in possession in a proceeding in equity.
    
    
      Appeal from St. Louis Court of Appeals
    
    Aestrmed.
    
      Leverett Bell for appellant.
    
      Garland Pollard for respondents.
    
      
       These syllabi are taken from 7 Mo. App. 429.
    
   Ray, J.

Tbis ease involves a number of points, all of which are elaborately discussed and decided by the St. Louis court of appeals in its opinion in this case, reported in 7 Mo. App. 429. We have. carefully considered that opinion together with the record in the cause, as well as the briefs and arguments of counsel in this court, and as we concur with that court, not only in the result reached, but also in the treatment and disposition of the several points involved in the case we deem it sufficient to refer to that opinion as containing the law of the case, well considered and correctly decided. The judgment of the St. Louis court , of appeals , is, therefore, affirmed.

All the judges concur.  