1. Equity does not interfere to set aside a transaction merely because a party made an unwise deal.
2. Representations by a seller as to the value of his property are not usually a basis for a claim of fraud. Value is a matter of opinion.
3. There is not fraud or such overreaching in the transaction involved in this case as would have justified a cancellation or reduction of the purchase-money mortgage, even if application had been made to this court promptly.
4. Defendant mortgagor managed the property for more than four years before this suit for foreclosure was brought. Almost from the beginning she became aware of the exact income from and value of the property in question. She paid interest and installments of principal on the mortgage for over three years. Defendant is guilty of laches and may not now set up fraud in the transaction.
5. Defendant's delay in asserting her claim, together with payments made by her after she learned the true situation, operated as a waiver and as a ratification of the transaction.
PER CURIAM.
The decree appealed from will be affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion filed in the court below by Vice-Chancellor Bigelow.
For affirmance — THE CHIEF-JUSTICE, TRENCHARD, PARKER, CAMPBELL, LLOYD, CASE, BODINE, DONGES, VAN BUSKIRK, KAYS, HETFIELD, DEAR, WELLS, KERNEY, JJ. 14.
For reversal — None.