appeal. Further, the Board did not know that it had ever been the practice 
in the plantations for governors to reverse judgments given by their predecessors. 
For the Governor and Council in each plantation being the superior 
judicature, "it would create endless doubts and perplexities amongst the inhabitants, 
if their judgments were liable to be reversed any otherwise than 
by appeal to His Majesty in Council, which being the established method for 
the relief of those that think themselves aggrieved in such cases, it ought to 
be observed accordingly." 167 Upon petition to the Privy Council, Alsop was 
allowed an appeal from the reversing judgment, 168 but it was never prosecuted. 
For the extraordinary notions of appellate hierarchy displayed in this 
cause we have seen no cogent explanation. 109 
THE PERSISTENCE OF NEW ENGLAND RECALCITRANCE 
The efforts of the Council, during the years immediately following the reform 
of imperial control, to establish an unquestioned jurisdiction by no means 
quenched the spirit of colonial resistance. In Connecticut, by what appears 
to be a wholly unprovoked flourish of bravado, the General Assembly in 1710 
declared it to be their opinion that "they cannot oblige any of her Majesties 
subjects to answer appeals before her Majesty in Council." 17 ° Not long afterwards, 
in the famous Winthrop v. Lechmere cause, appellant in his petition 
for leave to appeal complained of the denial of appeals from two judgments 
of the Superior Court and of the contemptuous behavior of that Court and 
the General Assembly upon his making such demands. 171 In the complaint 
tendered to the Council by Winthrop following the above petition these denials 
and contempts were set forth, as well as an alleged assertion by the Superior 
Court of the exclusion of the jurisdiction of the King in Council under the 
charter. 172 Upon this complaint being sent to the Governor and Company 
to answer, 173 Governor Talcott replied that when Winthrop demanded an 
appeal, he was informed by the Superior Court that the customary procedure 
of the colony must be observed—a review by the Superior Court and then a 
petition to the General Assembly, but that Winthrop had refused to follow 
this procedure and insisted upon an appeal per saltum. 174 It was answered 
167 Ibid., 1700, #307. 
168 p C 2/78/81, 95, 98, 258. 
169 Bellomont wrote that according to Smith, 
C. J., and Attorney General Graham the Governor 
and Council had during the session a 
judicial power, like that of the House of Lords 
in England, and could hear and determine 
civil causes, not appealable to the King (CSP, 
Col., 1701, #3). See also ibid., 1700, #210 
(complaint #20). 
170 5 Pub. Rec. Col. Conn., 161. The immediate 
cause of this declaration does not appear. 
171 6 Winthrop Papers, 5 Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll. 
(6th ser.), 460-61, 463. For affidavits in support 
of the allegations see ibid., 471. For full 
discussion of the appeal see infra, p. 537 et seq. 
172 6 APC, Col., #367, Articles #26 and 
#27- 
173 PC 2/89/330. 
i 7 16 APC, Col, #367, Article #26 of the