case Bonham versus Newcomb accuracy doubt Trulock v Robey Ph January in court  Lord keeper ante case post case this case come now before the court upon a  demurrer to a bill of review to reverse a decree make in this cause by the  Lord chancellor Nottingham and the error assign be Vernon chancery case that  the defendant Newcomb ought not to be admit to a redemption against his  express agreement in the mortgage deed to redeem within a certain time or  otherwise that the estate shall be irredeemable it be argue for the demurrer  saint that a estate can not be a mortgage at one time and afterward become a  absolute purchase by one and the same deed dly that the mortgagee in this case  have a proper remedy and may have make his estate absolute in a legal course  videlicet by exhibit a bill to foreclose the mortgagor of the equity of  redemption and they cite the case of Yieldmington and gardener where the  mortgagor be to redeem during life only and yet his heir admit to the  redemption Vernon chancery case er p and sir Robert Jason case where a estate  be to go to his wife and her heir unless a sufficient jointure be settle  within such a time limit in the deed and the case of Howard and Harris ante  case but as to that case it be answer though there be a qualify redemption yet  there be a express covenant for repayment of the mortgage money and so it be  in the power of the mortgagee to make it a mortgage at any time in general  this be no rule against redemptions in common and ordinary case though there  be no such covenant Mellor v lees Feb atk and if a man make mortgage and  covenant or even take a oath not to bring a bill to redeem yet he may redeem  arg east India company v atkins comens Rep but the Lord keeper incline to  reverse the decree for that modus assembly vincu law and all conditional  purchase or bargain must not be turn into mortgage and say that where there be  a condition or covenant that be good and bind in law equity will not take it  away Vernon chancery case it be object against the bill of review that they  have assign error collect from the proof in the cause that do not appear in  the body of the decree but the Lord keeper observe that be occasion by the ill  way they have get of late in draw up decree in general without particular  state the matter of fact and say the plaintiff in a bill of review shall not  be conclude by it unless the matter of fact be particular state in the decree  see the last precede case at last it be agree by the counsel to wave the sign  and enrol the decree by consent and to hear the cause again de fresh troops  the order in this case be that the demurrer shall be overrule but without cost  and that the plaintiff shall be at liberty to set down the former cause to be  hear ab origin the enrolment notwithstanding and that in the mean time all  proceed on the former decree and enrolment be thereby suspend Reg lib a fol  vide post S c note a bill of revivor be allow as to matter part of the matter  mention in a previous decretal order but omit in the final decree on a plea  and demurrer William v Arthur Ch can