case can versus can Lord chancellor Macclesfield see more relate to this cause  ante where matter have be examine n equity and determine the court be cautious  of unravel former decree agreement or release sir Robert Cann have a wife and  two son William afterward sir William his old son and Thomas afterward sir  Thomas Cann sir Robert Cann be seize in fee of diverse manor message and land  in or near Bristol in somersetshire make his will date the that of Aug whereby  he devise the bulk of his estate to his lady for life remainder to his young  son Thomas in tail remainder over and give only a annuity of pound per and to  his old son William on condition that he shall release his right to every  other part of his father estate and make his wife executrix the that of Nov  sir Robert Cann die when his wife enter upon the estate and prove the will in  the spiritual court and in the same term she and her young son Thomas bring  their bill against sir William Cann the old son and heir to establish the will  hill term sir William Cann put in his answer to the bill insist that his  father the testator have after the make the will of videlicet the summer  before he die make a latter will and have himself tell the defendant of his  have do so call the former his mad will the same term also sir William bring a  cross peer William er p bill against his mother the lady Cann and his young  brother Thomas for the discovery and set up of this latter will to which  crossbill both the defendant answer and deny any knowledge or belief of any  latter will peer William pasch the lady Cann exhibit another bill against sir  William to compel he to make his election whether he will accept the annuity  devise to he and release his title to the estate or waive his legacy to which  latter will sir William answer again insist upon the latter will and that he  have see it whereupon witness be examine on both side in all these cause and  the that of November the two last cause be hear together the bill of sir  William Cann the heir as to such part of it as seek to impeach the validity of  the will of or to set up the subsequent will be dismiss April the lady Cann  die have make her will and Thomas her young son executor thereof who enter  upon the bulk of his father estate so devise to he the that of April sir  William Cann and his brother Thomas come to a agreement for conclude all  matter in difference between they and for establish peace in the family and by  indenture of that date recite the will of sir William Cann in consideration  that his brother Thomas bad agree to convey to he the say sir William and the  heir of his body with remainder to the right heir of sir Robert Cann the  father the manor of Breane in somersetshire be part of the estate devise to  Thomas by the will of do grant and release to Thomas in special tail all the  rest of the estate devise or mention to be devise to the say Thomas by the  will of and accord Thomas convey the manor of Breane to sir William Cann in  special tail who give he a general release whereupon sir William take  possession of the manor of Breane and enjoy it to his death peer William hill  after all these transaction sir William Cann exhibit a new bill set up a  latter will which he insist the lady Cann have burn and examine his witness de  bene be Thomas Cann the second son plead as to all relief seek by this bill  the several suit and proceed decree article the conveyance of Breane and the  release the that of November it be refer to the master to see whether the  former suit be for the same matter who upon the that of the same month report  they to be for the same matter but that the plaintiff sir William Cann have  make far charge in his bill call they new discovery though they be but new  evidence of the pretend latter will the that of the same November the plea be  argue before the Lord summer who order the party to attend he with the proceed  in the former cause and with the bill and plea in this cause which he will  consider of and the that of July the plea be reargued the Lord summer order  the defendant Thomas Cann to answer the new matter but no far proceed to he  have without leave of the court the defendant answer accord but deny every new  charge in the bill the that of July on sir William can petition for liberty to  reply to the answer and to examine the witness in chief it be order that the  defendant by Bartholomewtide shall give his answer whether he will consent to  the hear of the cause and have a issue direct whether peer William sir Robert  Cann do make a will subsequent to that of but the defendant be advice not to  consent to this the d of October upon sir William can motion it be order that  the examiner shall attend the ford chancellor with the deposition and leave  they with his lordship and that on consideration thereof the court will give  further direction the d of July sir William Cann die and in Trin term the  plaintiff his son and heir upon come to age bring his bill of revivor and  after examine witness on both side the cause come on to hear before the Lord  Macclesfield who have take time to consider thereof now give judgement and  dismiss the bill his lordship say that this cause be of great consequence to  the coart for which reason it ought though on the strong proof to be very  cautious of give relief in a case where the matter have be examine and  determine where after that there have be a full agreement of the party to  release this suit and where there be a conveyance of land make by the  defendant to the plaintiff father accept by he in satisfaction of all his  demand and the plaintiff himself still in possession of the peer William er p  land thus give in satisfaction that at the same time there be no charge of any  fraud in the defendant and the plaintiff whole equity be deny by the answer  that beside this it be observable when the plaintiff at the hear of the cause  be ask whether he will reconvey this manor of Breane which have be give in  satisfaction of the plaintiff right and demand he decline render it back again  peer William his lordship observe the prudent method of this court be that  after publication be pass and the purport of the examination know to the party  neither side be allow though they come recent to enter into a fresh  examination of the matter in question since otherwise there will be no end of  thing and such a proceed will tend to perjury as well as vexation but the  principal case be much strong for here the party have not only on each side  examine witness those examination have be publish but the court upon those  examination have make a decree since which the party have come to a agreement  and in consequence thereof a conveyance of land have be make by the defendant  to the plaintiff father in satisfaction of his pretend right and the land thus  convey enjoy to this time by the plaintiff that nothing like this have ever be  attempt by any person and if the last bill shall prevail there will be two  inconsistent decree of the same court one in favour of the will of and another  against it that where two party be contend in this court and one release his  pretention to the other there can be no colour to set this release aside  because the man that make it have a right for by the same reason there can be  no such thing as compromise a suit nor room for any accommodation every  release suppose the party make it to have a right but this can be no reason  for its be set aside for then every release may be avoid beside this release  be very particular it be of all land devise or mention to be devise indeed if  the party release be ignorant of his right or if his right be conceal from he  by the person to who the release be make these will be good reason for the set  aside of the release see Broderick v Broderick ante Osmond v Fitzroy post Vol  III but no such thing be pretend in this case and solemn conveyance release  and peer William agreement make by the party be not slight to be blow off and  set aside then his lordship repeat the proof make in this cause on the part of  the plaintiff which be but dark and doubtful say he do not on the whole  believe that sir Thomas Cann the testator do actual make a latter will though  there may be some intention and preparation for that purpose and it be not  clear how the court can have come at it even if there have be full proof of a  latter will as to this vide Harwood v Goodright Bla Rep will Cowp and bro p c  and Edward bro p c however there be no such proof that be not the present  question but here have be a decree a release and a recompense for such release  there can be no colour for relief so the bill of revivor be dismiss with cost  see gage v hunter dick whitelocke v baker Ves Conethard v haste mad Purcell v  MNamara Ves wood v Hammerton Ves buller v Bulkeley swan so stapilton v  stapilton atk Cory v Cory I ves pullen v ready atk Wycherley v Wycherley Eden  Stockley v Stockley v b Roche v obrien ba V b Leonard v Leonard ba pound b  dunnage v white I swan Gordon v Gordon swan Naylor v winch S S hotchkis v  Dickson Bligh peer William er p peer William de term S michaelis