case lee against libb Hilary term James roll if a devise be make by a will  attest by two witness and the testator afterward make a codicil in which he  confirm the devise and this codicil be attest by two witness one of which be  not a witness to the will the devise be void for the execution of the will by  which the devise be make be not attest by three witness as require by car c SC  post SC Eq Abr SC Mod SC salk SC comb SC Carth SC Rep Eq SC holt ejectment by  lessee of the heir at law the defendant claim by a devise find in a special  verdict thus that John Denham make his will in January that there be two  witness to it who subscribe their name in the presence of the testator that he  make a codicil December and by that confirm his will in what be not alter and  give away somewhat otherwise than in the will and there be two witness to it  one of those to the former and one more the quaere be if these make three  witness to the will Thompson the clause of the Act be thus all devise of land  shall be void unless attest and subscribe by three witness in the presence of  the testator now here be not three witness to either as these be two distinct  write shower KB so there be a year distance of time between they the will have  but two witness who subscribe to the will then the three that be to the  codicil he do not subscribe to the will so he never see the testator sign his  will his hand which be subscribe to the second write be not a subscription to  the will Treby e contra the first be subscribe by two witness as in the case  of Woodroff v brown he make a addition to his will and declare that he have  make it and do testify it and declare this to be a part and then brown and one  head subscribe it this be a subscription by three witness the first and second  write be to be take together and do make but one will a man may make his will  in several write and those write may be make at several time no man can think  all his think much less write they all at once and if tack by the mind of the  testator these several write do make his entire will suppose he publish it  before two witness who do subscribe and then afterward be republislies before  a three witness this be a will attest by three witness though at several time  it be true the paper be not affix together and there be no necessity by the  law that they shall be so suppose in several lose sheet one witness subscribe  to one sheet and another to another and a three to a three that be good if all  be present to the last sheet publication if several sheet be wrap up in a  paper and all superscribe the cover paper will not that be good be compare it  to mollineux case cro James Noy two thing together may make that good which  several they can connected in space to help both together be plain the intend  will of the party dolbin justice the sign of the will be not necessary to be  in the presence of the witness but their subscription must be in the testator  presence holt chief justice the testimony of the witness be to be to all that  the statute have make necessary and the sign of the party be one thing  necessary and in the seal be a sign dolbin justice in the earl of essex case  before this statute agree that one sheet be find in Essex and another in  Staffordshire and make but one will eyres justice take exception to the  verdict it be not find that the three witness to the codicil do subscribe in  the presence of the testator but only that he do subscribe ut testis and not  say express in present time testator but per shower KB er p Treby shower KB  the fact be so and that be amend by consent afterward c Adjornatur a