case shem bridge appellant John hitchcock and another respondent that June in  a lease the lessor covenant that if at the expiration of the term the lessee  shall be desirous of take a further lease the lessor will grant such further  lease without any fine and under the same rend and covenant only as in this  lease a new lease be desire and prepare but it contain a covenant to grant a  further lease at the end of the new term the lessor object to this covenant as  be in the nature of a perpetuity upon his estate but the objection be overrule  decree of the court of exchequer affirm see post can Mews dig viii ten explain  in Iggulden v may east the appellant be seize of a millhouse and  watergristmill call ember mill in the county of Surre which be great out of  repair and one Stapleton be desirous to take a lease of these premise the  appellant by indenture date the that of September demise the mill mill pool  dam bank and water with the appurtenance to Stapleton for year from brown  Michaelmas at the yearly rend of pound S Payable quarterly and by this lease  Stapleton have liberty to convert the say mill into any mill except powder and  paper mill so as at the end of the term they shall be reconverted into corn  mill also to take down the old millhousing so as he do in a year build up  other as good in their stead and in the place where the old millhouse stand he  have likewise liberty of cut a way through a peninsula at Mr Wincopps ground  for the purpose of bring water in a straight course to the mill so as that it  may be always enjoy as a watercourse but if it can not be procure to be so  enjoy then the lessee be to preserve the old watercourse and have it cleanse  at the end of the term and the appellant covenant that if the lessee his  executor administrator or assign or any of they shall at any time thenafter  before the expiration of the term thereby demise be mind to renew and take a  further lease of the say premise that then upon application make at any time  before the last six month of the say term the appellant his heir or assign  shall grant such further lease as shall by the lessee his executor  administrator or assign be desire without any fine to be demand therefore and  under the same rend and covenant only as in this lease by a endorsement on  this lease of even date Stapleton declare it to be for the joint use of  himself and one trummer and by article date the that of February the  respondent become joint concern with they therein and soon afterward the four  partner pull down the corn millhouse and erect a substantial brick millhouse  in its stead and also a millhouse and mill for manufacture of brass and iron  and several other building in the do whereof they expend upward of pound in  December Stapleton dispose of his share in the premise to the respondent  Hitchcock and trummer at the same time dispose of his share to the other  respondent Wetherhed who soon afterward dispose of a moiety of his interest to  one Walter ken of who the respondent Hitchcock purchase it so that he become  entitle to three four of the premise and Wetherhed to the other four in  October the respondent Hitchcock obtain of Mr Wincopp a lease of the peninsula  for a long term of year and make a cut through it in order to carry the river  in a straight course to the mill accord to the liberty reserve in the  appellant lease he also keep the old course open and preserve pursuant to the  covenant therein contain there be about two year rend in arrear the appellant  in Michaelmas term bring a ejectment whereupon in Hilary term follow the  respondent file their bill against he in the court of exchequer for a  injunction as to the ejectment and to compel he to grant a further lease under  the same rend and covenant as in the first lease brown er p brown pen these  proceed the rend in arrear be tender and accept so that the respondent  Hitchcock who have now get the whole interest in the premise reasonable expect  to obtain a new lease without further trouble but in Trinity term the  appellant think proper to file a cross bill suggest that the bank of the river  opposite his dwellinghouse be raise and that by the high pen of the water at  the mill his house and estate be great damage that the old course of the river  be change and that there be not a new millhouse erect in the room of the old  one and therefore pray that he may not be compel to grant any new lease of the  premise till he be relieve in these particular both these cause be hear in  December when the court decree the appellant to execute a new lease to the  respondent Hitchcock for year from Michaelmas then last under the same rend  and covenant as in the old lease which new lease be to be settle by one of the  baron in case the party differ the cross bill be order to stand dismiss and  the cost in both cause be to be pay by the appellant pursuant to this decree  the new lease be settle by the Lord chief baron and contain a covenant to  grant a further lease at the end of the new term the cost be tax at pound S d  and a attachment issue against the appellant for nonpayment of they and also  for nonperformance of the decree in refuse to execute the new lease the  appellant therefore appeal from the decree insist t powys t Lutwyche that it  be erroneous and ought to be reverse for that the covenant for a further lease  after the expiration of the new lease be in the nature of a perpetuity upon  the appellant estate and may accord to the decree be demand from time to time  continual which be contrary to the intent and meaning of the covenant in the  first lease and of the party thereto that Stapleton have only a liberty of  convert the say mill into mill for work copper brass or wire and be to leave  they in the situation of corn mill again at the end of the term but not to  convert they into mill for work of iron which require a great strength and  quantity of water he have liberty also to pull down the millhousing so as he  do within a year build other as good in their room but the millhouse which  have be build have neither chimneys ceiling window partition or floor nor be  any part of it fit for the dwell of a corn miller and yet the respondent  Hitchcock be not decree to finish the same or make it fit for a miller to  dwell in whenever the mill shall be reconverted into corn mill that the new  cut make through the peninsula be only enjoy by a lease for six year which  will determine in a short time whereas by the covenant in the lease it be to  be procure to be enjoy always with the mill but this not be do nor the  respondent decree to cleanse and preserve the old course of brown the river  the same will be choke up and lose before the end of the term and thereby the  mill will be destroy which be express contrary to the agreement by the lease  that although the appellant make full proof of the annoyance by raise the bank  of the river opposite his dwellinghouse and the high pen of the water yet the  decree contain no direction that the respondent shall take down the bank and  make they as they be before nor be any mark order to be fix for pen the water  or provision make respect the damage which the appellant have sustain in his  house and ground and that the appellant be decree to pay cost in both cause  although be offer both by his answer and cross bill to make a new lease for  year and although there be a considerable arrear of rend unpay at the time of  bring the original bill to all this it be answer e Northey r Raymond on the  other side that the covenant enter into by the appellant to grant such further  lease as shall be demand under the same rend and covenant only as in the  original lease be the only foundation and encouragement which the party have  for expend so much money upon the demise premise as they have do and accord it  be the true intent and meaning of the covenant that the lessee shall be at  liberty to renew as often as he shall require that in fact the appellant house  or estate have not be damage by the high pen of the water nor have the bank  brown er p opposite his house be raise since the mill be build which be above  year ago on the contrary the bank be actual wear away and the root of several  tree plant upon they appear above ground and on make a experiment at the  appellant request by pen the water for four day together to overflow his mead  it can not be do the water run through the bank opposite his house in no less  than thirteen different place that the old course of the river be still  preserve notwithstanding the cut through the peninsula that there be a  substantial house build for a corn miller on the same place where the old  house stand which with other building erect on the premise cost about pound  and that as all the pretence of damage sustain by the appellant be mere  fictitious and whole unsupported with evidence he be just decree to pay the  respondent his cost accord after hear counsel on this appeal it be order and  adjudge that the same shall be dismiss and the decree therein complain of  affirm jour vol p