Page:The English Reports v1 1900.pdf/537

In the month of July 1720, the appellant being at Chester, the respondent proposed to sell him an estate, lying at Huntington, in the county of Chester, which he represented to be of the yearly value of £146 10s.; and to induce the appellant to believe such representation, and treat for the purchase, the respondent produced to him a counterpart of a lease, then lately made by the respondent to one Thomas Wilkinson, for the term of seven years, at the reserved rent of £146 10s. per ann. upon which lease a receipt for £10 was indorsed, whereby it appeared to the appellant, that £10 in part of the first year's rent, had been paid by the tenant, and that the full rent of £146 10s. per ann. was to be paid without any deduction, allowance, or abatement, during the said term of seven years.

The appellant, relying on the fairness of the respondent, and not suspecting any fraud in granting the said lease, nor in the least doubting, but that the estate was of the full yearly value of £146 10s. was unadvisedly drawn in to contract for the purchase there-[212]-of, at the price of £4750, which was forty-one years purchase and upwards; and a memorandum was thereupon reduced into writing, in the following words, viz. "July the 22d 1720, It is agreed, that Mr. Brereton shall give to Mr. Cowper, for his estate in Huntington, £4750." This being signed by both parties, the appellant paid the respondent £50 in part of the purchase-money.

On the next day, articles were prepared and executed by the appellant and respondent, whereby the respondent agreed, within one month then next, to convey the premises to the appellant and his heirs, free from all incumbrances, except a yearly rent of £12 17s. 4d.; in consideration whereof, the appellant agreed to pay the respondent £4200 upon his executing the conveyances, which, with the £50 before paid, and a note given for £500 made up the said £4750.

The appellant's affairs soon after. calling him to London, before any thing further was done, the respondent drew a bill upon the appellant for £1000 on account of the said purchase; which bill the appellant answered accordingly, and afterwards paid him other monies, amounting in the whole, together with the said note for £500 to £1602 10s. or thereabouts.

Soon afterwards, the appellant discovered that he had been grossly imposed upon by the respondent, in misrepresenting the yearly value of the said estate; for that until the time of the said louse, so pretended to be made to Wilkinson, the estate had not been let for above, nor was really worth more than £104 per ann. out of which was issuing a chief rent of £12 17s. 4d. besides taxes and repairs; and that the indorsement of the receipt of £10 on the lease, in part of the reserved rent, was with design to deceive a purchaser; for that no part of that sum was ever paid or advanced by the tenant, but was deducted out of the rent, and as an encouragement for the tenant, to covenant to pay for the subsequent years, more than the estate was really worth: and as a further encouragement, Wilkinson was to have £100, or a year's rent, given or allowed him by the respondent, in consideration of his taking the said lease.

On discovering these frauds and impositions, and in regard of the extravagant price, the appellant, as he apprehended he had great reason, refused to proceed further in his said purchase. Whereupon, in Michaelmas term 1721, the respondent exhibited his bill in the Court of Exchequer at Chester, against the appellant, to compel him to pay the residue of his purchase-money, with interest.

The cause being at issue, and witnesses examined, was heard on the 21st of October 1723, before the Chamberlain of the county palatine of Chester and his Vice-Chamberlain, when the Court decreed, that the appellant should, on or before the first day of May next, pay to the respondent, the sum of £2147 10s. in further part of the said purchase-money, without interest, and that the appellant