case OKELL against SUDLOW power of a rural dean to grant administration this  be a action of debt upon a bind for forty pound wherein the plaintiff declare  as administrator to Thomas rider and set forth that administration of all the  good c not exceed above the sum of forty pound be grant to he by dr Cartwright  dean rural of Fradsham within the diocese of Chester who have a peculiar  jurisdiction c the defendant plead that Thomas rider have good c to above the  value of forty pound videlicet to the sum of fifty pound at Fradsham within  the diocese of Chester and that the bishop official have grant the  administration of all the good c of Thomas rider to Sarah Dutton and traverse  without hoe that dr Cartwright the dean rural of Fradsham have any power to  grant the aforesaid administration to the plaintiff as he have declare c  modern to this plea the plaintiff demurrer and show for cause that it be  double holt chief justice you show for cause of demurrer that the plea be  double and want form c now let they show that the plea be not double nor want  form answer then with submission it do not appear that this bind of forty  pound be out of the peculiar jurisdiction at the time of rider death it be say  indeed in the plea that he die at Fradsham but it be not say where this  Fradsham be whether within the diocese or not holt chief justice it do not say  that it be out of the archdeaconry answer it be a dean rural holt chief  justice but you shall have show some special matter to oust the peculiar  modern er p answer the peculiar have only jurisdiction of forty pound and we  have show that the testator have above forty pound when he die and traverse  that the dean rural have power to grant administration which be the gist and  material part of the declaration holt chief justice it do not appear he have  above that value within the peculiar jurisdiction then this plea contain  double matter it be say that Thomas rider at the time of his death have above  forty pound at Fradsham and also that administration be grant by the bishop  official so that he be jumble all together and therefore the inducement be ill  with these several fact jumble together when either of they alone may have be  a good plea and a sufficient answer to the declaration then the traverse be  ill for it be matter of law whether the peculiar have a right or not which can  be try by the jury answer it be a matter of fact whether the peculiar have  power to grant this administration or not which we be Willing to have try and  we have no other way to try it modern the case of price v Simpson a Jackson  lessee for year by several lease of land some in the diocese of York and some  in another peculiar in the same diocese devise these land to his son and make  his daughter a minor executrix the mother administer durante minoritate and  per curian administration shall be grant in two place videlicet one within the  peculiar and the other by the archbishop of York for the archbishop shall not  have any prerogative here because this peculiar be first derive out of his  jurisdiction there this case be express that both these jurisdiction be  consistent and that the peculiar and the bishop too may at the same time grant  out two administration and so it be resolve in that case of price v Simpson  but it be dispute whether this peculiar have any jurisdiction at all holt  chief justice not say that it be out of the archdeaconry make the plea  immaterial let it stay