the province. lsB But since the appellate jurisdiction of the Governor and 
Council was seemingly never exercised, 109 this extension was of no practical 
value. 
By far the most significant noninstructional regulatory device was legislation 
by colonial assemblies. Most of this legislation is to be found in the chartered 
and proprietary colonies, where the royal instructions seldom entered, 
although a greater number of regulatory statutes are found in the royal colonies 
than one might reasonably expect to encounter. Turning first to the 
former group, let us start with Rhode Island, a prolific source of appeals. 
The earliest regulation in this colony appeared in a 1706 enactment that in 
all appeals to the Queen in Council bond was to be posted by appellants for the 
prosecution thereof within the time limited by the Governor and Council. 
Respondents were also to be cited to appear in England before the Queen in 
Council to answer the appeal. 160 Since no appealable minimum was established, 
it was found that many appeals were taken in causes involving small 
amounts, to the injury of persons of small means, unable to respond. 161 It was 
therefore enacted in 1719, by way of remedy, that no appeals were to be allowed 
to the King in Council unless the matter in controversy was of the value of 
,£3OO current money of the colony, to be valued by the court at which the appeal 
was prayed. 162 
The nature of the subject matter in Rhode Island litigation was as important 
as the quantity. For by an act of 1729 appeals from the Superior Court 
of Judicature in personal actions were to lie to the General Assembly and from 
thence in proper cases to the King in Council. But an appeal lay directly from 
the Superior Court to the King in Council in causes not cognizable before the 
Assembly. 103 The minimum fixed in 1719 failed to ameliorate the indigent 
litigant's lot, so in 1746 this act suffered repeal. In place of the repealed act, it 
was enacted that persons aggrieved by judgments of the Superior Court of 
Judicature should have liberty of appeal to the King in Council when the 
matter in controversy was of the value of sterling. 104 In effect, owing to 
the currency conditions in the colonies, this change from lawful money to 
sterling amounted to more than a fivefold increase of the requisite mini- 
158 jj ms 5 0- Q ar _ Council Journal, 1J65-66, 
507-12. These acts of Parliament were given 
force in the colony by a 1712 local enactment; 
see 2 Stat, at Large So. Car., 401, 410-11. 
169 See infra, p. 389. 
160 3 Rcc. Col. R. 1., 562. 
lei Preamble to An Act for regulating Appeals 
to His Majesty in Council in Great Britain, 
June, 1719 (Acts and Laws R.I. [1730], 106). 
162 Ibid. 
163 Ibid., 192. For the genesis of this appellate 
distinction see the 1680 Act Granting Appeals 
to the General Assembly, from the General 
Court of Tryals, where liberty of appeal was 
confined to personal actions (ibid., 28-29). 
164 Acts and Laws R.I. (1752), 30. The Superior 
Ct Tt was also empowered to ascertain 
the value of the matter in controversy where 
an appeal was prayed.