P purchased a farm from Pearl Beall. At that time, the property was farmed by Pearl's son, Calvin Beall. P and Calvin were second cousins. Calvin was married to D. P agreed that Calvin could continue to farm the property if he would pay the annual property taxes. Calvin and D owned and resided on a parcel of about one-half acre that was bordered on three sides by the farm bought by P. P obtained a three-year option to purchase Calvin's and D's parcel for $28,000.00. The option recited a consideration of $100.00, which was paid by check. In 1971, the parties executed a new option, for five years, but on the same terms and reciting an additional $100.00 consideration. This 1971 option was never exercised by P, but prior to its expiration the following language was appended at the bottom of the page: 'As of October 6, 1975, we, Calvin E. Beall and Cecelia M. Beall, agree to continue this option agreement three more years -- Feb. 1, 1976, to Feb. 1, 1979. Calvin died in August 1977, and D now holds the fee simple title by right of survivorship. In letters dated May 24, 1978, and September 14, 1978, P advised D that he was electing to exercise the option. D refused to attend settlement, and this suit for specific performance ensued. P presented his evidence. D moved to dismiss the bill of complaint. The chancellor granted the motion because she felt that the option agreements were not supported by consideration in that 'no benefit . . . flowed to Cecelia Beall.' There was no consideration recited in that extension or purported extension of the original option contract. P appealed. P contends that the chancellor erred in dismissing the bill of complaint and in excluding certain testimony relative to oral transactions with Calvin.