case stride versus little Eq can ab pl bill for a account of the profit of  Mendip i defendant plead a Act of parliament which have give a exclusive  jurisdiction of all matter arise within the i to the court of a but have not  aver there be a court of equity there plea overrule on a demurrer and plea to  a bill to have a account of the profit of the Mendip i in somersetshire they  plead a special Act of parliament which have Vernon chancery case give  jurisdiction of all matter arise within the i to the court of exclusive of all  other jurisdiction and it be urge that this be like to the jurisdiction of the  sewer where this court can not intermeddle but it be answer it be not like  that case because there be a new jurisdiction create and reserve entire within  itself but here the jurisdiction of determine matter relate to these i be  transfer to the court of which be ancient court in which by the commonlaw this  court do interpose in equitable matter Lord chancellor the plea be not good  because although you plead a exclusive jurisdiction yet you do not aver that  there be any court of equity there it appear that the defendant offer to be  examine on interrogatory as to what over they have take and on such other  matter as the court shall direct be order to answer the plaintiff bill save  only as to the matter of account touch which they be to be examine upon  interrogatory after the hear Reg lib b fol so in a plea to general  jurisdiction of king superior court it must be show what other court have  jurisdiction earl of Derby v duke of Athol ves by as to inferior court you  need only plead thereto and not show where it be earl of Derby v duke of Athol  ves and a inferior court must show jurisdiction king v mayor c of Liverpool  burr Rep W vide also peacock v bell sander Rep and case cite in note there so  where there be a new or summary jurisdiction create the plea must set forth  the jurisdiction particular and that the sentence be accord to the  jurisdiction gage v Bulkeley can tempt hard note the court of the county  palatine of Durham be a original superior court peacock v bell ub sup so the  court of great session in Wales county palatine of Chester and the court of  Ely Pegg v gardener Le v Jennett ux v bishop all post portington v Tarbock  ibidem but a certiorari may be bring to remove a cause out of a palatine court  of equity into chancery portington v Tarbock post executor shall be presume to  take notice of all judgement in the inferior court of law off ex cap Herbert  case p wms Even in the court of pie poudre Searle v lane post vol so where  party insist that the court of chancery have not jurisdiction of the matter in  question it seem he must plead to the jurisdiction and not object at the hear  Trelawney and William post vol p et vide Mitf Tr d edit