courts, it is necessary to turn back to the remote past. At the time of the 
Norman conquest of England the Channel Islands formed part of the duchy 
of Normandy. 9 After the Conquest and prior to the loss of Normandy by 
King John, in 1204, it appears that the islands constituted an integral part of 
the Norman itinerant judicial system, 10 although in addition a local court or 
courts were held in the King's name. 11 With the loss of the Norman mainland, 
the locus for insular supervision was of necessity shifted to England, although 
this removal did not serve as a de jure or de facto incorporation of the islands 
into the Kingdom of England. In terms of feudal relations the King retained 
his status of duke as to the islanders. 12 In terms of judicial practice there was 
no serious cleavage with the past, the royal administrator, the warden, being 
directed to hold assizes according to insular laws and custom. 13 Royal courts, 
distinct from the assizes and restricted in jurisdiction, were seemingly kept 
by the warden or his lieutenants in the early part of the thirteenth century. 14 
Toward the close of this century these royal courts of Jersey and Guernsey 
assumed a form that was to be permanent, being held by a bailiff and twelve 
jurats. 15 In summary, it can be said of the thirteenth century that, as a result 
of various strategic and political considerations, a policy was adopted in insular 
administration which tended to the preservation of local laws, institutions, 
and customs. In the last quarter of the century the assizes underwent 
certain transformations preliminary to conversion into general eyres. 16 Simultaneously 
an additional manifestation of the royal judicial power appeared in 
the issuance of commissions to hear complaints against administrators. 17 Triennial 
assizes were held until 1299, when they were superseded by general 
eyres, which were held in 1299, 1304, 1309, 1323, and 1331. 18 After 1331 the 
eyres ceased to visit the islands. 19 
The large degree of judicial autonomy then and later attained in the Chan- 
9 Coke, Fourth Institute, 286; Hale, History of 
the Common Law (4th ed., 1779), 191; First 
Report of the Commissioners Appointed to Inquire 
into the State of the Criminal Law in the 
Channel Islands, Jersey (1847), in 8 State 
Trials (n.s.) Appen. C, 1127. 
10 J. H. Le Patourel, The Medieval Administration 
of the Channel Islands, ngg-ijgg 
(i 937), 26-28, 37, 42; The Extentes of Guernsey, 
12.48 and' 1331 (Soc. Guern. Pub., 1934; 
ed. H. de Sausmarez), 27. 
11 Carudaire des lies Normandes (Soc. Jer. 
Pub., 1924), 220-21; T. W. M. de Guerin, 
Notes on the Early Constitutional History of 
the C.1., 9 Soc. Jer. Bull., 270-71; G. F. B. de 
Gruchy, The Entries Relating to Jersey in the 
Great Rolls of the Exchequer of Normandy of 
A.D. 1180, ibid., 20-21; C. H. Haskins, Norman 
Institutions (1918), 185. 
12 Le Patourel, op. cit., 29, 37, 
13 Ibid., 41-42. 
1,4 Ibid., 42-44 
15 Ibid., 48-49, 50-51; 2 Dupont, Histoire du 
Cotentin et des lies (1873), 56-58. For discussion 
of the various theories held on the 
origin of the jurats see Le Patourel, op. cit., 
113-17- 
16 Ibid., 52-53. 
17 Ibid., 53-54; Havet, Les Cours Royales des 
lies Normandes, 39 Bibliotheque de l'Ecole des 
Chartes (1878), 204-6. 
18 The Extentes of Guernsey, 6; Havet, he. 
cit., 7. 
19 Le Patourel, op. cit., 64-65