appeals, and explanation given of the words "whole process" therein. 125 The same letter, mutatis mutandis, was dispatched to the Royal Court of Guernsey directing attention to the regulatory Order in Council of October 9, 1580. 126 The directions to Jersey were reiterated in 1758 on an appeal in which the record was found defective. 127 The 1771 Jersey Code, which obtained royal approbation, declared that the record should include all the pleadings, the evidence, the decisions of the Royal Court with reference thereto, and the judgment. 128 This procedural defect is also found in the case of appeals from the Isle of Man. In July, 1771, the Committee observed that the proceedings in such appeals were being transmitted very irregularly and without proper authentication, but postponed palliative action to a full meeting. 129 In January, 1774, the principal Secretary of State for the Northern Department was desired to direct the governor of that isle in all future appeals to cause copies of the judgment or sentence appealed from, as also the whole process of the cause, to be delivered under seal to the parties to the appeal upon payment of the usual fees. 130 To this direction Governor Wood answered that after decrees and judgments were recorded all further proceedings had hitherto rested with the parties, without the least interference by the court appealed from, and that undoubtedly proceedings and exhibits were irregularly transmitted. Wood gave assurance that particular care would be taken in juturo that all appeals with the proceedings therein would be properly exemplified and transmitted in such manner as the King directed. 131 In the colonial field several appeals were delayed in hearing because of records irregularly or incompletely transmitted. 132 In some cases the record 125 PC 2/91/565-66. The whole process comprised "not only the proofs, declaration and all other matters pleaded by any of the partys and the orders of the court but also the proofs either by depositions of witnesses or by deeds or instruments in writing which shall be admitted as evidence together with all determinations made by the court for overruling or rejecting any matter offered in evidence by either party." Cf. 3 Les Manuscrits de Philippe le Geyt, equyer, lieutencmt-bailli de L'lle de Jersey, sur la Constitution, les Lois, et les Usages de cette lie, 324-25. 126 pc 2/91/566-67. But in the 1734-36 appeal of Bonamy v. Giles the transmitted proceedings failed to record certain objections made below (PC 2/93/413). 127 It was ordered that the Royal Court should in the future take care to return not only the copy of the sentence or judgment appealed from but also the whole process of the cause, closed together under the seal of the island, viz., the process, declaration and all other matters pleaded by any of the parties, and the orders of the court, and also the proofs either by depositions of witnesses or by deeds or instruments in writing, which should be admitted as evidence, together with all determinations made by the court for overruling or rejecting any matter offered in evidence by either party (Pipon v. de Carteret, PC 2/105/200, 222). 128 Safford and Wheeler, Practice of the Privy Council, 234. 129 PC 2/115/358. 130 PC 2/117/403; Stephen Cottrell to William Fraser, Jan. 5, 1774 (SP 48/1); the Earl of Suffolk to Governor Wood, Jan. 7, 1774 (ibid.). 131 Governor Wood to the Earl of Suffolk, Jan. 20, 1774 (SP 48/1). 132 See Cockburn v. Beckford (PC 2/86/111);