case the whole of this case be deny to be law by buller justice in t Rep where  upon it be be refer to he say I think it carry it be own death will on the  face of it he examine minutely and with much ability the two point include in  it and determine that they be both improper decide anonymous disapprove Allen  v dundas t r a executor may traverse the devise of a executorship to another  payment to a executor have a probate if the probate be afterward repeal do not  discharge the party against the legal executor this be a action on the case  upon a indebitatus assumpsit by the plaintiff as executor of for money due  from the defendant to his testator the defendant plead that a b be appoint  executor to the testator and prove his will and that the defendant afterward  pay he so much money be part of the debt in satisfaction of the whole and that  he on the receipt discharge the defendant the plaintiff reply that the probate  grant to a b be afterward upon appeal annul by the sentence of the  ecclesiastical court and the will by which a b be make executor be adjudge to  be forge and the will by which the plaintiff be appoint executor allow without  hoc that the testator make such a will by which a b be appoint executor and  upon this replication a demurrer comens er p in this case two point be argue  by the sergeant at the bar first if the traverse be good for that the  defendant have plead that the testator make a will by whichA b be appoint  executor which be prove in the spiritual court the probate there be conclusive  and can be traverse as be resolve side lev in the case of Noel and well that  if the probate of a will be give in evidence that conclude the party that  nothing can afterward be give in evidence in contradiction to the probate as  that comens there be no such will or that the testator be not compos but only  matter consistent with it as that the party have good notabilia that the  probate be forge c second if the payment to a executor who be executor de  facto and have a probate of the will be good to bind the rightful executor and  judgement be give upon both point for the plaintiff and Trevor c j give the  reason of the judgement for the whole court and as to the second point he say  that a executor derive all his authority from the testator himself and that he  of himself as be executor without any thing more have the power of dispose of  the estate of the testator of release a debt due to the testator c true it be  before a action bring a probate be necessary but that be only requisite to  ascertain the court that the plaintiff be executor and have a right to bring  his action not to give the plaintiff any title or interest to the estate of  the testator if the testator appoint no executor or die intestate the  administrator be appoint by the ordinary and derive his authority from he and  therefore if administration be grant all act by he as long as the  administration continue in force be good and even though it be afterward  repeal but there be a difference take when a administration be repeal upon a  citation or upon a appeal   b packman case cro Elizabeth SC more SC Bac Abr  Com dig t Rep lev keb SC raym SC I Str b if it be upon a appeal which suspend  the administration all act after such suspension be void if it be repeal upon  a citation all the act of the administrator till the repeal be good for by the  citation the grant of the administration be not suspend therefore if the  administration be repeal all act do by a administrator which a rightful  administrator may have do shall be allow for in they he act in the place of  the rightful administrator but it be otherwise in the case of a executor for  the probate of the will give no authority at all to he and therefore if he be  not the rightful executor he have no authority at all comens and it will be  unreasonable that a person who have no authority shall dispose of the interest  of another the rightful executor have not only a trust or authority to  administer the good of the testator but also a interest annex to the trust and  therefore the property of all the good after administration be complete vest  in he and consequent the disposition of the good of the testator or release of  his debt be a disposition of the interest of the rightful executor and  therefore such disposition do not bind he and so it be resolve roll Abr grieve  v Weigham Bac Abr a which case be never deniedThe authority of this case in  roll be destroy because the doctrine contain in it be contradict in lev and  lev vide t Rep that I hear of and this case be not like the case of a officer  who officiate without legal authority as the deputy of the deputy of a steward  c for rightful act do by he be good above p b for he be a officer de facto and  in the immediate and open execution of his office and the party do not know  whether he have authority or not in this case of a executor some mischief may  possible happen but it will be a more general inconvenience if a tortuous  executor shall be allow to dispose of the right and interest of a rightful  executor as to the traverse I think it good for whether a will or no will be a  question triable by a jury as be agree in   a Brownl S c c   mere Treshams  case     a d abbot de Strata marcellam case and the reason be because the  spiritual court have not the original jurisdiction of the probate of will and  because as to trial the Temporal Courts have quasi a concurrent jurisdiction  and this be not like the case side and lev that the probate of a will conclude  a person from say that there be no such will but notwithstanding this matter  may be bring to trial for the produce a will under a probate be only evidence  that there be such a will and though it be evidence of so strong a nature that  no evidence shall be admit against it yet to plead that such a writ be prove  be no reason why this matter shall not be try therefore judgement be give for  the plaintiff comens er p comens de boundary pasch whether in c b