case sir richard MEADE Appellant daniel WEBB Respondent that April Mews dig  seven in treaty for a agreement a wilful and industrious concealment of a  material fact by one of the party in order to keep the other in ignorance and  to profit by that ignorance be a gross fraud and will in equity set aside  though contract the appellant be seize in fee of the town and land of  Kilcoleman and other land in the barony of Fermoy in the county of cork and  intend to set the same for life or for year some time in June or jul publish a  advertisement for that purpose and that proposal will be receive by himself at  Ballintober by the reverend dean mead at dean court or by John mead esquire at  cork the respondent in consequence of such advertisement some time in the say  brown er p month of July come to the appellant house and propose to take the  say land by lease whereupon the appellant brown tell the respondent that the  assize of cork be fix for August follow and that he will then meet the  respondent at cork and treat with he about set the say land and accord at the  say assize the respondent come to the appellant and offer to give he pound per  and rend for the say land which the appellant reject and then propose to the  respondent to set they by the acre which he absolute refuse insist not to take  they by the acre but at a rend in gross and have soon after propose to give  pound a year for the same and the appellant be much solicit by the dean and Mr  John mead on the respondent behalf at last agree to set the say land to the  respondent for forty one year to commence from the that of march at the yearly  rend of pound and upon the appellant so agree to the respondent proposal the  respondent insist that a lease or article shall be immediate draw and execute  in pursuance of such agreement but the appellant be then in a great hurry of  business desire that as the lease be not to commence till upward of six month  after the execution of it or the article may be postpone to some more proper  opportunity when it may be do with more deliberation and the appellant assure  the respondent that he will perform the say agreement but the respondent not  be satisfy with such assurance and be very importunate to have something in  write under the appellant hand to show for his bargain before he go home  instruction be give by the appellant and respondent to the say John mead to  prepare a draft of a lease or article pursuant to the say agreement and he  have prepare such draft the same be deliver to the respondent who immediate  procure it to be engross and a blank be leave in the draft and engrossment for  the number of acre the respondent propose that the same shall be fill up with  one thousand to which the appellant make answer the land do not contain so  many acre but that he may put down what number of acre he please for that he  the appellant will not warrant the number of acre from to and that whatever  number shall be mention the word more or less shall follow for that he have  not set the land by the acre but in gross whereupon it be agree that the say  blank shall be fill up with the word about nine hundred acre be the same more  or less the appellant tell the respondent he can not be certain as to the  number of acre not have his map about he and the blank be so fill up the  indenture purport to be article of agreement or a demise of the premise for  forty one year to commence from the that of march at the yearly rend of pound  be duly execute by the appellant and respondent on the saint of August the  respondent on the that of march be the day of the commencement of the term  enter upon the premise and continue in possession and receive the profit  thereof and half a year rend have afterward become due and be in arrear the  appellant distrain for the same brown whereupon on the that of January a year  and five month after the perfection of the article and ten month after his  actual entry on and enjoyment of the land the respondent exhibit his bill in  the court of exchequer in Ireland against the appellant and against the say  dean mead and John mead and thereby suggest that he have apply to the say dean  mead and John mead for a lease of the say land and be inform by they that they  contain or acre and that although the appellant have a map of the premise  whereby he know the same contain less than acre yet that he do not contradict  they but assent to and affirm the say representation in order to deceive the  respondent that although he be well acquaint with the quality yet he be  ignorant of the quantity of the say land and take the say lease upon  confidence that the land contain the number of acre so represent and that he  be defraud in the agreement and induce to take the same at a gross rend by  such misrepresentation of the appellant and of the say dean mead and John mead  the appellant agent and that thirty acre part of the say land have be detain  from he by person claim a title thereto and that he have be hinder from the  enjoyment of a turf bog or common contiguous to the say land by the Lord  viscount doneraile who claim a exclusive right thereto and withhold kishes of  turf which have be cut and save by the respondent on the say bog and therefore  pray a injunction to stay the appellant proceed at law on account of the brown  er p rend and to be release from the say agreement as be obtain on false and  fraudulent suggestion on the that of April the appellant put in his answer to  this bill and thereby set forth the several transaction and circumstance  beforementioned and deny he know of any representation make of the number of  acre by dean mead or John mead or that they or either of they be his agent or  agent or have any power to treat for the set the say land and deny he ever  acquaint the respondent that the land contain any certain number of acre but  admit that after the first application to he by the respondent for a lease and  before the second when the agreement be conclude a survey have be make and  return to he whereby it appear that the land contain acre rood perch but deny  he intend at the time of the agreement to deceive the respondent by any  knowledge he have of such survey for that he offer as well before as at the  time of conclude the agreement to set the land at a rend by the acre which the  respondent refuse and declare that he be as well acquaint with the land as  with his own and propose to take they at a gross rend and the appellant by his  answer offer at his own expense to support and defend the respondent right and  possession to every part of the demise premise and insist that the agreement  be fair enter into and that the respondent ought to perform the same brown the  other defendant also put in their answer and deny have represent the land to  the respondent as contain any certain number of acre whatsoever on the d of  July the respondent amend his bill and thereby set forth that he be advice  that the article execute by he ought in a court of equity to be look upon as a  agreement to be carry into execution with the usual clause and covenant if the  representation make of the number of acre shall not be consider as a fraud so  as to set aside the agreement and that it be a usual clause that a tenant may  surrender on give six month notice to the landlord of such his intent and pay  all rend and arrear he therefore by his bill give notice that on the that of  march he will surrender and pay all rend and arrear due to that day and waive  all other allowance if such surrender be accept he also suggest that there be  forty acre of common in the centre of the land on which the tenant of the  adjacent land have a equal right of commonage with the tenant of Kilcoleman  and which the appellant during the treaty have conceal and therefore the amend  bill pray that if the appellant do not accept of the surrender offer the  respondent may be discharge from the say article and have a allowance for the  acre which the land fall short of the number represent and for the common and  detain acre and bog to which amend bill the appellant on the that of November  follow put in his answer and thereby insist that the say lease or article  ought not to be consider in a court of equity as a agreement to be carry into  execution but as a actual demise of the land and that the clause of surrender  mention in the bill be not a usual clause and be never insert except by  particular agreement he deny there be any such clause of surrender in any of  his lease or that any mention be make thereof during the treaty and therefore  refuse to accept the surrender he say he be inform and believe that there be a  common adjoin to or belong to the say land on which the tenant of the adjacent  land have a equal right of commonage but whether such common be in the centre  of the land or what number of acre the same contain he do not know but deny he  conceal any such right of commonage from the respondent or that he know or  believe that the respondent take the say common as part of the say land and  the appellant insist on his right to the rend without any abatement whatsoever  the cause be at issue several witness be examine on both side and the  appellant have examine the say dean mead and John mead they full prove the  several transaction relate to the say agreement as beforestated and the cause  be set down to be hear as against the appellant only on the that of may and  that of June the cause be hear and on the that of July follow it be order and  decree that the say lease or agreement shall be set aside and that the land  shall be forthwith surrender and that the respondent shall account for what he  make or may have make brown with brown er p out wilful default from the time  he enter into the land to the time of the surrender and that a account shall  be take of what have be pay on account of rend and it be refer to the chief  remembrancer or his deputy to state the account accord from this decree the  appellant appeal insist d rider W Murray that in make the agreement there be  not the least surprise fraud misrepresentation or concealment of any fact  which the respondent require to be inform of and that the number of acre be  not insert in the lease as matter of substance it not be then in the appellant  power to ascertain the same for want of his survey but the number of acre be  apprehend to be altogether immaterial because the appellant refuse to  ascertain the rend by that mode but proceed upon his own knowledge of the  nature and quality of the land and fix the rend upon the gross value only and  the respondent be so far from desire any further time for his information that  he be very press for the immediate execution of a lease and which be unwilling  yield to mere to gratify he that before the commencement of the term the  respondent survey the land and be thereby well apprise of the nature thereof  and of the number of acre and after such survey he enter into possession and  enjoy the same for ten month before he file his bill that the court ought not  to have decree upon any collateral evidence contrary to the article in write  the number of acre mention therein be only by way of description of the land  and not as a measure for the rend and that if the respondent be entitle to any  decree at all the most he can expect be to have have the lease rectify by a  abatement of the rend in proportion to the deficiency of the number of acre  and not to set the lease entire aside it be therefore hope that the decree  will be reverse the lease or agreement establish and the respondent bill  dismiss with cost on behalf of the respondent it be argue I brown t clarke  that in treaty for a agreement a wilful and industrious concealment of the  truth in a material point by one party in order to keep the other in ignorance  and to profit by that ignorance be a gross fraud and ought in equity to set  aside the contract especial where as in the present case such concealment be  accompany with misrepresentation and a premeditate intention to deceive that  the agent of the appellant represent the quantity of land propose to be demise  to be acre more than it now appear to be and this representation be make in  his presence he by not contradict they in effect confirm the truth of what  they say that this be do before the execution of the agreement and at a time  when the appellant have cause a survey to be take which ascertain the exact  limit and measure of the premise and yet he do not think proper to undeceive  the respondent but purposely conceal the true measure and quantity from he and  for this remarkable reason as state in his answer because he do not think it  prudent to disclose it which afford a more convince proof of a premeditate  intention to deceive the respondent than the brown testimony of many witness  that the garden and meadow part of the premise which the appellant demise as  his own property be when so demise claim and enjoy by one Mr folk and his  tenant and the large tract of bog a very material part of the premise as it  furnish fuel to burn lime for manure the land have since be evict and be enjoy  by Lord doneraile and his tenant and a right of common on other part of the  premise that a privilege of graze and cut turf on part of the bog and also a  right of way or passage over part of the land demise be claim and enjoy by Mr  folk and his tenant and yet all these fact be industrious conceal from the  respondent who never discover the same till after he take possession of the  premise upon the whole as the quantity of land comprise in the article be not  only less than it be represent to be but even diminish by a subsequent  eviction as the possession and enjoyment of the residue be prejudice by  several right which be never discover to the respondent till his take  possession and as the tenant must be perpetual expose to dispute and  controversy in maintain the possession the respondent can not be say to have  the thing he agree for but something so different both in quantity and value  as if represent in its true light and with all its circumstance will have  prevent the respondent from be ensnare into the article by the concealment and  misrepresentation of the brown er p appellant and from which in a court of  equity the respondent ought on that account to be deliver after hear counsel  on this appeal it be order and adjudge that in the say decree after the word  set aside these word shall be insert and that the respondent do execute a  surrender of the say agreement or lease to the appellant and that such  surrender be settle by one of the baron of the say court of exchequer in  Ireland in case the party differ about the same that after the word account  with the say sir Richard mead for these word what he make or may have make  without his wilful default shall be leave out and instead thereof these word  the rend of the say land and premise after the rate of pound per and with such  deduction as be hereinafter mention shall be insert and that after the word to  the time of the surrender thereof these word shall be insert and in case the  respondent shall have surrender and yield up to the appellant the possession  of the say land at any time not be one of the half yearly day whereon the say  rend be by the say agreement or lease reserve to be pay then the say account  of the rend of pound per and be to be carry on to the next half yearly day of  payment after the time of yield up the say possession as aforesaid and that  after the word all just allowance these word shall be also insert and let the  chief remembrancer or his deputy set a yearly value on such part of the demise  land and premise as the respondent can not have the possession and enjoyment  of and make a proportionable deduction for brown the same out of the say rend  and it be further order that the say court of exchequer shall give all such  direction as shall be necessary and proper for carry this judgement into  execution and it be further order and adjudge that with these variation and  addition the say decree shall be affirm jour vol p