case james BRYAN Appellant benjamin woolly et Ux Respondents that February  Mews dig seven a agreement by the husband to sell his wife estate shall not  bind her or be carry into execution without her consent viner vol p can Eq can  ab note to can can Abraham Yarner esquire be seize in fee of a estate in the  county of Wicklow in Ireland of about pound per and and have issue a only son  name Abraham and three daughter jane the mother of the appellant the  respondent mary and Catherine the wife of Richard stone esquire make his will  date the that of April and thereby devise all his real estate to his say son  Abraham Yarner and the heir male of his body and for want of such issue to his  three daughter and the heir of their respective body with several remainder  over after the testator death Abraham the son enter and continue in possession  till when he die without issue but before his death videlicet in the year jane  the testator old daughter who have marry pierce Bryan die leave the appellant  her old son and heir so that upon the death of Abraham Yarner the son the  respondent mary Woolley and her sister Catherine stone become entitle to the  devise estate for their life as joint tenant with several inheritance  videlicet one three to brown the heir of the body of the respondent mary  another three to the heir of the body of Catherine stone and the reversion of  the remain three become vest in the appellant as the old son of his say late  mother jane but pierce Bryan the appellant father and guardian think proper to  enter upon one three part of the estate as be the immediate property of his  son in stone and his wife bring a ejectment to recover a moiety of the three  so take possession of for the appellant whereupon the father enter into a  agreement with they and obtain a releaser of their claim in consideration of  pound he also propose to give the respondent Benjamin the like sum for a  release of his wife claim and in consequence of this proposal some letter pass  between they but nothing final be conclude upon nor be the respondent mary in  any manner acquaint with this treaty however upon the strength of these letter  and under a apprehension that they amount to such a agreement as a court of  equity will carry into execution the appellant soon after he come of age  videlicet in October file his bill in the court of chancery in Ireland against  Woolley and his wife for a specific performance of this suppose agreement the  defendant Benjamin by his answer admit that letter have pass between he and  the plaintiff father which may contain some overture for a sale of his wife  share of the estate but insist that no agreement be ever complete for that  purpose and the defendant mary by her answer deny any knowledge of this  transaction or that she ever intend to part with her share or have ever  consent that any thing shall be do to deprive her of it on the that of may the  cause be hear when the court be please to dismiss the bill with cost but from  this decree the plaintiff think proper to appeal insist p York c Talbot that  the agreement be well prove by letter under the respon brown er p dent  Benjamin hand and therefore the bill ought not to have be dismiss but the  respondent ought to have be decree to perform the say agreement and the rather  because they themselves once think that they be bind in conscience to permit  the appellant to enjoy his mother three part of the estate without any  consideration upon a presumption that the testator intend in case of failure  of issue of his son body his estate shall go to his three daughter as tenant  in common and it can not well be doubt but that he will have express devise it  so have he be well advice at the time of make his will on the other side it be  insist r Raymond t Lutwyche that it do not appear in the cause that any treaty  or proposal make by the respondent Benjamin be ever carry into a agreement or  so much as accept of or acquiesce in either by the appellant father or himself  after he come of age that it be the nature of all agreement to be mutual and  reciprocal so as that each party may be brown equal bind to a performance but  as this pretend agreement be defective in that circumstance a court of equity  ought not to carry it into execution and that the respondent mary who freehold  it be be neither privy or consent to the content of the letter read against  her nor do she ever consent to any agreement for the sale or disposal of her  estate but in her answer positive declare against it and insist on her right  of which by law she can not be divest but by her own free consent signify by  her when examine and by a fine levy in consequence of such consent accord  after hear counsel on this appeal it be order and adjudge that the same shall  be dismiss and the decree of dismission therein complain of affirm and it be  further order that the appellant shall pay to the respondent the sum of pound  for their cost in respect of the say appeal jour vol p