made to decide causes on their merits, untrammeled by legal rules of appellate 
procedure. However, the Council for Trade and Plantations did not always 
prove an efficient agent for the determination of these causes; 450 the King in 
Council, in one case, was compelled to assume the determination of an appeal 
after an attempted reference had failed. 451 
As we have stated, all these causes are not essentially "appeals"—they are 
rather "petitions in the nature of appeals." They can be regarded as an intermediate 
step between the petition of complaint and the true appeal. The initial 
case in which a genuine appeal can be said to be found is Rodney v. Cole. In 
this cause Rodney complained via a petition to the King of the proceedings of 
Governor Russell of Nevis whereby petitioner was disseised of a plantation 
and Cole placed in possession for certain pretended debts. 452 The petition was 
referred to the Council for Trade and Plantations to call in the parties, examine 
the matter, and report the state of the case and what should be done 
for the petitioner's relief. 453 This referee ordered Russell to answer in writing, 
to which answer the petitioner replied; 454 depositions were submitted, 455 and 
the parties were heard by their respective counsel. 456 The report of the Council 
for Trade and Plantations was referred by the Council Board to the Committee 
for Grievances to consider; 45r this committee ordered the former 
referee to send it all the papers in the matter and one of their number to inform 
in New York, that the condemned ship was 
English built, and that the master and a 
requisite number of sailors were English. 
Furthermore, Lieutenant-Governor Lynch in 
a letter to Slingesby, the Secretary of the 
Council, termed the sentence severe. The report 
found the sentence illegal and that the 
vessel, etc., or the value thereof, ought to be 
restored. For the proceedings in this cause see 
MS journal Council for Trade and Plantations, 
1672-74, 13, 16-21. 
450 In Smith v. Smith petitioner John Smith 
alleged that he had long attended the sitting 
of the Council and could not hear of any 
fixed time, their meetings being seldom (CSP, 
Col., 1669-74, #1146; cf. ibid., #1155). 
The ineffectual character of this Council is 
further indicated in Egerton MS, 2395/276 
(printed in Andrews, British Committees, 
112). But cf. the evaluation of the working 
of the council in 1 APC, Col., xv; Andrews, 
British Committees, in. 
451 Smith v. Smith {PC 2/64/123; PC 2/64/ 
145; CSP, Col, 1669-74, #H55). The King 
in Council may have assumed the hearing to 
facilitate the departure of the respondent from 
England. Appellant had been compelled to 
give £5 00 security to pay costs sustained by 
respondent in delaying his departure to attend 
the Council in the matter, if no just cause 
of complaint were found. 
452 CSP, Col., 1669-74, #958 
453 Ibid. 
454 MS Journal Council for Trade and Plantations, 
1672-74, 6-7. For the answer see CSP, 
Col., i66g~74, #958. For the reply, ibid., 
#1050. Further Russell answers are in ibid., 
#1074, 1079. 
455 For Rodney see ibid., #1052-54. For his 
petition that a witness be heard before leaving 
the country see ibid., #1049. For Russell see 
ibid., #1081-82. 
456 Ibid., #1110. 
457 PC 2/64/158. The report of the Council 
for Trade and Plantations advised that a special 
commission be directed to Lieutenant-Colonel 
Stapleton and four others in Nevis with power 
to examine the records and proceedings of the 
island court and also witnesses on oath. Action 
was then to be taken conditional upon the 
identity of the debts for which the plantation 
in question was sold (CSP, Col., 1669-74, 
#1110; cf. MS Journal Council for Trade and 
Plantations, 1672-74, 25, 39-40, 42).