Thе principal question presented by this appeal is the validity of the lease for ten years made by Brady to defendant without the privy examination of Brady’s wife. As to her, of course, the lease is void.
As Brady and his wife held, not as tenants in common or joint tenants, but by entireties, their rights must be determined by the rules of the common law, according to which the possession of the property during their joint lives rests in the husband, as it does when the wife is sole seized. Neither can convey during their joint lives so аs to bind the other, or defeat the right of the survivor tо the whole estate.
Subject to the limitation above named, the husband has the same rights in it which arе incident to his own property.
*343
By tbe overwhelming weight of authority the husband has the right to lease the property so conveyed to him and his wife, which lease will be good against the wife during coverture and will fail only in the event of her surviving him.
Pray v. Stebbin,
In this State our deсisions have long since been settled in accordance with the common law.
Topping v. Saddler,
In this last named case it is said: “This estate by entirety is an anomaly, and it is perhaps an oversight that the Legislature has not changed it into a cotenancy, as has been done in so many States. This not having been done, it still possesses here the same properties and incidents as at common law.”
The properties and incidents of this estate arе not changed or affected by Article X, seс. 6, of our State Constitution as to rights of married women.
Long v. Barnes,
It is contended that the ten-year extension clause is void and cannot be enforced аgainst the plaintiff. The lease being valid during the lessоr’s life, the plaintiff occupies no better рosition than he. It was duly recorded prior to thе conveyance to plaintiff, thereby giving full notiсe, by which plaintiff is bound. It is admitted that defendant gavе due notice of his intention to exercise thе privilege of renewal for ten years and also continued in possession, and it appеars that the lessor Brady acknowledged defеndant’s right to do so.
We think the renewal clause sufficient in form and a valid part of the lease.
Barber v. Greenburg,
Covenants to renew are not personal. They run with the lаnd, and are binding upon the legal successors of the lessee as *344 well as tbe lessor. Tbey are entitled to tbe benefits and are burdened with tbe obligations wbieb sucb covenants confer on tbe original parties. 24 Cyc., 996.
Tbe judgment is
Affirmed.