THE COMMITTEE HEARING 
Returning to the discussion of appeals in general, we now come to the stage 
of the Committee hearing of the appeal on the merits. These hearings were 
held at the Cockpit in Whitehall. There were no designated terms for Committee 
sittings; the power of appointing Committee meetings resided in the 
Lord President of the Council under the sole restraint of convenience. 114 Thus, 
instances can be found of appeals heard in any of the twelve calender months, 
although the four winter months, commencing with December, and June and 
July witnessed the greatest number of appellate hearings. A lesser number 
were heard in April, May, and November. Practically none were heard in 
August, September, and October. We have seen above that the temporal restriction 
upon the hearing of Jersey and Guernsey appeals was not scrupulously 
observed. 115 As a practical matter, during term time it might be difficult to 
bring on an appeal for a hearing at the Cockpit because of the attendance of 
counsel and the law lords at Westminster. 116 
At some time previous to the date set for the hearing it became customary for 
the parties to distribute printed "cases" to the Lord President and those law 
lords likely to attend at the hearing. 117 These cases, which in some instances 
fattened by appendices reached voluminous proportions, were largely recitals 
of the facts of the causes and the proceedings below. 118 There was no discernible 
variance in the format with the nature of the proceedings, i.e., common 
law, chancery, or admiralty. The "brief" or grounds for reversal or affirmance 
was usually confined to a small space at the end of the case. Except for Channel 
Islands appeals, in which the governing law varied substantially from that of 
England, authorities were rarely cited in the case or brief. 119 This format was 
114 See Ferdinand John Paris to James Pipon, 
Oct. 1, 1731 (Soc. Jer. Lib.); 2 N.Y.-N.J. 
Boundary MSS, 16. 
115 See supra, n. 74 
116 See 2 N.Y.-N.J. Boundary MSS, 3. 
117 MS Conn. Archives, 2 Indians, #279 d. 
The statement by Pound {op. cit., 67) that 
"fifty copies were to be printed" is utterly 
without support. 
118 The foremost collections of these "cases" 
are those in the Hardwic\e Papers (Add. MSS, 
36,216—20), those of Sir George Lee in the 
Library of Congress (Law Division), and 
those of William Samuel Johnson in the 
Columbia Univ. Law Library. Scattered cases 
have been found in the Public Record Office 
(London), the New York Public Library, the 
Massachusetts Historical Society, the Connecticut 
Historical Society, the Bodleian (Oxford 
Univ.), Harvard University Law Library, 
and the Societe Jersiaise Library. Insight into 
the preparation of these "cases" in important 
causes is afforded by solicitor's bills in Mohegan 
Indians v. Connecticut (MS Conn. Archives, 
1 Indians, #278-79) and New Hampshire 
v. Massachusetts (5 MS Mass. Archives [Col., 
1728-74], 51-52, 111-14). The proceedings 
below were not usually inserted in the appendices 
as stated by Pound (op. cit., 67), but 
in the main "case." The latter also asserts that 
the appendix included "any collateral matter 
thought proper for the Council to consider." 
This assertion should be compared with the 
scope of the appellate hearing as discussed infra, 
Chap. VI. 
119 A rare example of citation of English 
authorities is found in Parsons v. Parsons, 
Case of Appellant, p. 3 (Add. MS, 36,219/