case dame Dorothy blunt vers japhet crook and thomas Hawkins before the  delegate where party be dissatisfy with what two delegate do in act regular  such as settle allegation c the matter may be bring under the consideration of  the Condelegates on a appeal to the delegate the case be that John Hawkins  make his will in favour of the appellant his niece and afterward make another  will as pretend in favour of Japhet crook and Thomas Hawkins and a libel be  exhibit to discover the fraudulent contrivance of crook to obtain the last and  to set it aside and establish the first will crook make a evasive and  insufficient answer to which exception be take but overrule by the judge of  the prerogative court and thereupon a appeal to the delegate the delegate  reverse the former decree and retain the cause and order crook to answer de to  make new who put in another evasive answer upon which the appellant before  sight of any deposition give in further allegation to explain fact which crook  have not clear answer and contain fact discover pen the suit in Trinity term  these allegation be reject by two of the delegate at doctor Commons on which  the appellant apply that the matter may be reheard before all the delegate  comens but it be object that no such rehearse be ever allow that the delegate  be all in equal authority and their meeting at doctor Commons make as much a  session as at sergeant inn and the other delegate may have be present if they  have please that by the commission the delegate be authorize so that in act  regular two in opinion definitive five concurrent so that the determination by  two in this matter which be a ordinary act be final and conclusive on the  other side it be insist and so determine by the delegate that admit general  two of the delegate may settle the allegation upon which the proof in the  cause may be take and this may be well if all the party acquiesce in what they  think proper but if the party be dissatisfy with it it will be hard to bind  they down to what two shall determine which will in its consequence be to make  they entire judge of the cause for if they reject all the allegation which one  side think most material the other delegate can have no other evidence before  they on which they can form a judgement but such as the two delegate admit it  seem fit therefore that where the party be dissatisfy with what the two  delegate have do that the matter may be bring under the consideration of the  Condelegates which be not to bring a appeal or writ of error on their  judgement as be insinuate before other that be but coordinate in authority  with they but it may be better compare to a court be review or reconsider the  act of one of themselves or their own act as where matter of order or  regularity be settle by a judge at his chamber or in court when but one or two  there it be frequent to draw it into examination again when the court be full  and this may be more proper where allegation be admit than when reject  improper comens er p comens de term sanct trin geo two