nished by island officials. 130 The function of the Council at this time would 
seem to have been to move tiie court below or insular commissioners to a 
rehearing—if allegations made before the Board proved true. Probably no 
attempt was made by the Board "to bolt out the truth" of a cause. 131 It is also 
likely that the Council Board did not encourage importunate suitors from 
the Channel Islands by elaborate hearings any more than they encouraged 
the domestic variety. 132 The attitude displayed indicates preoccupation with 
more important matters 133 and irritation with the recurrent applications to 
it by the litigious islanders. 134 Of a piece with this conciliar attitude is the 
deterrence of appeals by the infliction of imprisonment upon unsuccessful appellants 
13 ° or by awarding costs to respondents. 130 
It would be a jurisdictional distortion to leave an impression that Channel 
Islands conciliar jurisdiction was limited to judicial appeals. Many letters 
issued from the Council in a variety of fields upon petitions of complaint, 137 
since Channel Islands jurisdiction was essentially a microcosm of the conciliar 
jurisdiction exercised in domestic matters. The Board did not endeavor 
to entertain all complaints and give definitive orders therein. 138 Customarily 
130 In setting forth the contents of petitions 
in conciliar letters much use was made of 
such phrases as "if his informasion be trew," 
"as he informeth," etc. For a good example 
see 19 APC, Dotn., 139-40. In de la March 
v. Gosselin (27 ibid., 12) a sentence was declared 
void and of no effect, "we having asked 
the opinion of the Baillif and Jurats doe find 
that the said allations [sic] was true;" cf. 28 
ibid., 36. In Sare v. Lempriere (29 ibid., 584- 
85) the Council was moved by petitioner's 
suit and the representation of Governor Paulet. 
131 Cf. Pollard, Council, Star Chamber, and 
Privy Council under the Tudors,-}& EHR 58-59. 
132 See 21 APC, Dom., 240; 23 ibid., 82. Cf. 
on the disposition of conciliar causes, Select 
Statutes and Constitutional Documents (ed. 
G. W. Prothero, 1906), 167. 
133 See 13 APC, Dom., 103, where a certificate 
of Guernsey commissioners "which their Lordships 
have no tyme to peruse by reasons of 
other accions of service to her Majesties" was 
referred to the Master of the Rolls and Dr. 
Dale to consider. 
134 Many directions to island commissioners 
contained clauses enjoining settlement of 
causes, "so that their Lordships be no furder 
trobled therewith," or similar sentiments. See 
12 ibid., 187; 14 ibid., 47; 15 ibid., 427; 26 
ibid., 347. 
135 John de Carteret was committed by the 
Board to the Marshalsea as well for soliciting 
a petition to overthrow an ancient Jersey court 
as for appealing without cause from a just 
sentence (16 ibid., 4). 
136 Beauvoir v. De Vicke, 15 ibid., 336 (respondent 
to be satisfied for expenses put to by 
appeal); Perin v. Perin, 19 ibid., 35 ("we think 
it meete that he having appealed without cause 
(as it is certified) should paie the defendance 
such costes as you shall thinke meete to 
award"). 
137 The subject matter of these complaints 
was varied, including: debts owing (8 ibid., 
113; 31 ibid., 342); disseisin (7 ibid., 364- 
65; 8 ibid., 146; 14 ibid., 174); delay in execution 
of sentence (10 ibid., 276); wrongful 
detention of evidence of title (12 ibid., 16); 
rent disputes (13 ibid., 102); wrongful dowry 
detention (15 ibid., 48); judicial delays (19 
ibid., 250, 330; 22 ibid., 434; 28 ibid., 386); 
denial of insular privileges (24 ibid., 220); 
grievous tax burdens (19 ibid., 249, 262); 
fear of hard measures (19 ibid., idi\ 24 ibid., 
222); maladministration of island officials (20 
ibid., 118); illegal assumption of Admiralty 
jurisdiction (21 ibid., 427); wrongful imprisonment 
(22 ibid., 227); unconscionable 
practices (25 ibid., 378); fraudulent concealment 
of property (28 ibid., 286); breach of 
contract to marry (29 ibid., 728). 
138 The Council restricted itself to hearing