case Hawkins versus croak in court Lord chancellor the defendant be in  contempt to a sequestration for want of a answer the plaintiff obtain a order  to set down the cause on the sequestration the defendant at the day obtain a  order for a week time to answer and the cause to stand over in the mean time  the defendant put in a answer which the master report insufficient and the  cause be order to be set down again the defendant put in a further answer and  a order be make that if the master do not report it sufficient in four day the  cause shall come on again the master report the answer insufficient the  defendant put in a three answer and the cause come to be hear his honour  adjudge that the cause shall be hear on the sequestration and decree the bill  to be take pro acknowledged admitted fact that it be a indulgence in the court  to adjourn the cause till they see whether the defendant will put in a answer  and that he have abuse this indulgence by put in answer that be insufficient  and which strict speak mosely report be no answer and that the cause be first  set down regular on the sequestration and only wait to see if the defendant  will make a proper use of the time the court have give he a order be make on  the motion of the defendant that it shall be refer to a master whether the  decree be regular or not and the plaintiff move to discharge this order the  council for the defendant insist that this decree be irregular because they  have be serve with a subpoena to put in a better answer and have pay the cost  and if a defendant will not answer a plaintiff bill be take pro acknowledged  admitted fact because he have no opportunity to put the matter in issue but he  may join issue on our answer and several thing in the bill which by this  decree be to be take pro acknowledged admitted fact be mosely report er p  express deny in the answer and no precedent can be show that a bill be ever  take pro acknowledged admitted fact after the come in of a answer a  insufficient answer can be say to be no answer it be a good answer in those  point it be not insufficient or it ought to be take off the file and the  proper officer will be oblige to certify that a answer be file and shall the  court contrary to that record decree the bill to be take pro I acknowledged  admitted fact but the answer be in the plaintiff ought to have take the usual  course of the court to oblige the defendant to put in a sufficient answer Lord  chancellor this decree bind the right as well as any other decree and  therefore the order of reference must be discharge for if there be any error  in the decree it be a error of the judgement and the defendant must petition  to rehear it post Cas Monday February the that