 The chancellor decided that the giving of a priority of lien to the water rents over the mortgages pursuant to the statutes did not deprive the complainant of its property without due process of law and did not otherwise conflict with the Constitution of the United States or with that of New Jersey, and he decreed that for the purpose of raising the money due on the mortgages, the mortgaged premises must be sold subject to such lien, and that the bill must be dismissed as against the city.This decree, being appealed from, was affirmed by the New Jersey Court of Errors and Appeals and the record was remanded to the Court of Chancery.The case is brought here by writ of error, and the errors assigned resolve themselves into the single error of sustaining the priority of the lien of the water rents over that of the complainant's mortgages.