child v Comber in chancery to a bill for specific performance a plea that  there be no agreement in write be overrule the defendant be possess for the  remainder of a lease for forty year from the dean of saint Paul whereof about  two year only be to come of a very considerable estate consist in house and  land at Shadwell and she be likewise seize and possess of the market and  profit of the market there which be no part of the dean lease the plaintiff  come to a agreement with her for the purchase of her tenant right in the dean  lease in order to renew with the dean and likewise of her right and interest  in the market for but this agreement be not in write but the plaintiff in  order to his be better recommend to treat with the dean for a new lease desire  the defendant to give he a letter to the dean for that purpose and thereupon  the plaintiff write the letter which the defendant sign direct to dr Godolphin  to this purpose sir I have agree with sir Caesar child for the purchase of all  my right and interest in the lease which hold of you for the remainder of the  term desire you will please to admit he to treat with you which will oblige  your humble servant from Comber upon this the plaintiff go to dr Godolphin  give he the letter and agree with he for pound for a new lease for forty year  on a surrender to be make to he of the old lease and the dean thereupon write  to Mr Gilbert his agent acquaint he with the agreement he have make with the  plaintiff and forbid he to treat with any other person in the mean time a  draft be prepare for the defendant assignment of the residue of her lease to  the plaintiff and be leave with the defendant counsel several alteration be  make in it by he and at length the term and draft be settle by counsel on both  side and the plaintiff give guinea to counsel on that occasion but the  defendant insist upon have pound more in the whole pound before she will  assign her interest to the plaintiff which he be force to comply with and this  be one of the alteration make in the draft after which both the dean and the  defendant be inform that their interest in the premise be much more valuable  refuse to perform their agreement with the plaintiff who have provide his  money for that purpose upon which the plaintiff bring two several bill one  against the dean and the other against the present defendant who both plead  the statute of fraud and perjury and that there be no agreement in write but  the dean plea be overrule upon the letter he have send to Mr Gilbert his agent  wherein he have take notice of the agreement particular and how much he be to  have for the new lease and as to the defendant plea that be order to stand for  a answer with liberty to except and the benefit of it save to the hear both  these be hear by the master of the roll in the absence of the chancellor the  defendant be dissatisfy petition for a rearguing of her plea which now come on  before the chancellor the principal objection be that this letter not mention  any of the term of the agreement will make way for all that perjury which the  statute intend to remedy that one may swear the agreement be for one thing  another for another thing one that it be for so much money another for less  and here it be plain the first agreement whatever it be be raise from pound to  pound and the draft of the ingrossment of the conveyance can be no way bind  upon the party to execute that the agreement be not mutual and if the  plaintiff have refuse to have perform the defendant can have have no remedy to  have compel he to it that this letter be write by the plaintiff himself and  though the defendant sign it yet it be only as a letter of recommendation to  introduce he to treat with the dean that this pound be to be pay for the  interest in the market which the dean have nothing to do with as well as for  the remainder of the dean lease and no notice be take or any distinction make  in the letter concern it that the plaintiff be at liberty to except will  certain except to the plea till they have a answer whether there be such  agreement or not and if the defendant shall be force to own it the court may  decree a performance of it and so the benefit of the statute be whole take  away from the defendant on the other side it be argue that letter write to  three person and not to the party himself have be frequent hold to be a  sufficient write to take the swanston er p case out of the statute that if the  term of a agreement have be certain express that will have be the same as the  agreement itself and there will be no difference between a agreement and a  memorandum of a agreement that its be write by the plaintiff be nothing to the  purpose since the defendant have sign it and the draft be settle by counsel on  both side guinea pay upon that occasion and the purchase money provide by the  plaintiff be as much a execution of it on his part as where a man agree by  parole to let a lease and suffer a lessee to go and build and then refuse to  make the lease this court have frequent assist in that case the Lord  chancellor Macclesfield this be bare a plea of the statute of fraud and  perjury without any denial of the agreement if indeed the plea have be as to  so much as seek any discovery of a agreement that there be nothing reduce into  write and then the answer have deny the agreement this have be direct a plea  within the statute but here it be plain there be a agreement and the plea only  go to the not be compel to a execution or a performance be not reduce into  write without any denial of the agreement the primary intention of the act and  the principal object which the parliament have in view be that no action at  law shall be bring upon a agreement not reduce into write because they can not  suffer or give way to the variety of evidence which may be give at law in that  case and where a action will not lie at law it be reasonable no bill shall be  allow in this court but this be not a general rule as in case where the  agreement be perform in part on a contract for a building lease by parole  though the agreement be deny yet this court have admit parole evidence to  prove it on the head of fraud yet there the building do not in the least show  what the term of agreement be and therefore it lie as much open to fraud as  the present case but where there be fraud this court interpose and be it not  strange to say I will not put it in issue whether any agreement or not but  whether sign or in write or not but here be a note in write own that she have  agree and therefore no colour to say that there be no agreement but if by her  answer she shall deny that there be any agreement it will then be proper to  consider whether the plaintiff shall be admit to give evidence of it and here  the fee pay to the counsel the draw of the draft and engross they and the  plaintiff provide his purchasemoney be as much a execution of it on his part  as the lie out money on the building be in the other case and the circumstance  of his agreement with the dean be in consequence a proof of his agreement with  the defendant which if she own where be the danger of perjury indeed a note or  memorandum a agreement must mention the substance of the agreement in short  otherwise no action can be bring upon it at law but where there be fraud this  court may interpose though the agreement be not reduce to such a certainty and  it be proper for the court to look into it the chancellor therefore confirm  the order make by the master of the roll and say though the defendant can have  no remedy perhaps against the plaintiff on this agreement for want of his have  sign some write or memorandum that be not material for the act do not say  unless both party or unless mutual sign and therefore a action lie against the  party who have sign from Lord Colchesters ms the bill be dismiss on the hear  that December Reg lib a fol