Merwin v. Merwin , 140 N.J. Eq. 104 ( 1947 )

Per Curiam.

The decree under review will be affirmed, for the reasons expi-essed in the opinion filed in the Court of Chancery.

For affirmance — The Chief-Justice, Bodinb, Donges, Colie, Wachbnfeld, Eastwood, Wells, Dill, Freund, McLean, JJ. 10. For affirmance on the result — Heher, Eafferty, JJ. 2. For modification — McGeehan, J. 1,