atkins case benjamin charlewood plaintiff the duke of bedford smith and beaver  defendant march the d the bare entry of a steward in his lord contract book  with his tenant be not a evidence itself that there be a agreement for a lease  between the lord and a tenant the plaintiff as assignee of a lease be entitle  during the remainder of a term therein to a house in coventgarden with office  and also to a stable and coachhouse with a room over the same and to the use  of the yard adjoin to the coachhouse the defendant smith the late duke of  Bedford steward and the plaintiff who be desirous to continue in the house  beyond the term in the say lease on the that of may come to a agreement that  in consideration of the plaintiff surrender the stable and coachhouse with the  room over the same and his right to the yard in order to accommodate Mr rich  who be then building a new playhouse he shall have pound allow he for the then  remainder of the term therein and have the same term in the residue of the  premise make up to he year from that day at pound per and and that a lease  shouldbe execute to the plaintiff accord and for which lie shall pay the duke  pound which agreement he deliver smith to be enter in his grace contract book  with his tenant that some short time after Mr rich enter atkins into and  possess the stable coachhouse c and take down and demolish part thereof to  build his playhouse smith on the death of the late duke be continue steward  declare to the atkins er p plaintiff that he must stand to the agreement and  shall have a further lease accord to the term of that agreement on which the  plaintiff begin to repair and fit up the house and lie out several hundred  pound in needful repair and alteration beyond what he be oblige to by any  covenant in the old lease at lady day the lease expire and no new one have be  make to the plaintiff accord to the agreement though he have offer to pay the  fine but the defendant the duke of Bedford do not only refuse to make a new  lease to the plaintiff but have actual make a lease of the say premise to the  defendant beaver and give the plaintiff notice to deliver the possession or to  pay double rend the bill therefore be bring to have such further lease decree  he and the sum of thirty pound pay he and that if the defendant smith make the  agreement without sufficient authority that he may make satisfaction to the  plaintiff for the damage he may sustain thereby the duke of Bedford by his  plea which on argue be order to stand for a answer insist that by the statute  of fraud and perjury all lease c or term of year or any uncertain interest in  any message land c make by parole and not put in write and sign by the party  so make the same or their agent lawful authorize by write shall have the force  and effect of lease at will only and shall not either in law or equity be deem  or take to have any other or great force or effect any contract for make any  such lease or any former law to the contrary notwithstanding and aver that the  pretend agreement for a lease to be make to the plaintiff of the premise be  not put into write and sign by the defendant and do also aver that the same be  not sign by his late brother in his lifetime or by any agent of his brother or  himself thereunto lawful authorize by write and that if the agreement be make  by smith the same be never approve of by his brother the duke admit that his  late brother by write authorize smith and another to manage and let his estate  they acquaint and lie before he such transaction for his approbation Reg lib a  fol nor himself nor do the plaintiff make any application for the lease till  the defendant have direct a lease to be make to beaver and which he admit he  make in June to commence from the expiration of the former lease at ladyday  last and the defendant the present duke by his answer insist that the  agreement though reduce into write yet be make subject to the late duke be  approbation and have be never approve by he or sign by he or any agent of his  lawful authorize nor by the plaintiff or the defendant Lord chief baron comens  sit for Lord chancellor I can see that this agreement shall be carry into  execution though to be sure there be case where agreement have be atkins carry  into execution which have not literal pursue the statute of fraud and perjury  in this case there do not appear to be any certain agreement between the party  for the bare entry of a steward in his lord contract book with his tenant be  not a evidence of itself that there be a agreement for a lease between the  lord and one of his tenant unless it be support by other proof where the  plaintiff have bring a bill for a specific performance of a agreement and  decline as the present do read the answer of the defendant it be a strong  suspicion that the answer do not come up to the case he will make by his bill  it do not appear whether this be a true copy of the write that be enter in the  contract book but may be only head for a agreement and in a case a lessor by  write a agreement for a lease in a book shall be say to substantiate the lease  it will be give too large a power to he and will entire frustrate the design  of the statute of fraud c for it will be too great a temptation to perjury but  in Allan v bower bro Charles Rep a lessor make a verbal promise to his lessee  to secure he in the possession of the premise during the lessee life in  consequence of the promise the lessee make considerable alteration and  improvement after the lessors death a memorandum of this promise be find among  his paper wherein he hope the same will be observe Lord Thurlow hold that the  memorandum take the case out of the statute of fraud and direct a lease to be  make to the lessee for year determinable on his life it be urge by the  plaintiff counsel that if a agreement be make in part and execute on one side  see attorney general v day Ves potter v potter Ves Whitchurch v Bevis bro  Charles Rep vide post vol note that this be a foundation for equity to  establish the agreement especial where there have be a expense to one of the  party so Allan v bower bro Charles Rep but in all case where there be a  performance only of one side that be not a manage cion of the statute but  casus to let go against which there be no provision make the court declare  that the plaintiff ought to be relieve against the payment of the double rend  and order the injunction grant for stay of the defendant proceed at law for  double rend to be continue and that the plaintiff bill as to all other matter  be dismiss without cost except as to the defendant beaver and as to he with  forty shilling cost Reg lib a fol atkins er p