the nature of the crimes charged as was necessary in warrants of commitment, 
although much greater certainty was required of the indictments. It was 
further submitted that the basic question was whether the evidence given to 
the provincial council was sufficient to charge Bayard and Hutchins with the 
crimes mentioned in the warrants; having no account thereof, Northey could 
venture no opinion. 200 Believing from available information that the prosecutions 
were unfounded, it was recommended by the Board of Trade, on April 
28,1702, that the royal pleasure be signified to the government of the province 
and that execution of any sentences which might be passed should be respited 
until further royal order. 201 A May 3 letter under the sign manual directed 
Lord Cornbury to respite any sentences until further notice. 202 On April 30 
the Board of Trade further adjudged the matter as one proper for hearing 
before the Queen in Council; memorialists Adderley and Lodwick were left 
to petition the Queen for a hearing as they saw fit. 203 
In accordance with this direction, the memorialists on June 18, 1702, petitioned 
the Queen in Council, praying a writ of error to reverse the judgment 
and attainder of Bayard, and that for such purpose the record and all the 
proceedings relating thereto might be transmitted, together with the minutes 
of all the evidence given at the trial. The petition was referred to the crown 
law officers to consider and report what was fit to be done therein. 204 In a June 
20 report these officers represented that from consideration of the matter, from 
hearing the petitioners, and from the perusal of some letters from New York, 
it appeared that the proceedings were very extraordinary. Therefore, it would 
be reasonable to grant Bayard leave to appeal and to order that the minutes of 
evidence taken by the officer of the court there, if any existed, should be transmitted 
with the record, so that knowledge could be had of the evidence given 
against Bayard to incline the royal mercy. The embodying Order in Council 
ordered transmitted authentic copies of the proceedings under the province 
seal and such examinations and minutes of evidence as were taken; it also 
admitted Bayard to bail upon sufficient security to answer at the Council Board 
'in England what should be objected against him and abide the determination 
- nn lbid., #379; 4 Doc. Rel. Col. Hist. N.Y., 
954. The crown law officer observed that it 
appeared by the warrant for committing 
Hutchins that the council required him to 
produce the libel of which he was charged 
with authorship—this was to accuse himself 
and his refusal to produce was alleged as part 
of his crime. 
201 CSP, Col., 1702, #392. 
202 Bayard MSS. 
203 Copies of all papers in the matter were to 
be furnished to Champante, the New York 
agent, and Mrs. Atwood on one side and 
Adderley and Lodwick on the other (CSP, 
Col., iyo2, #397, 399-401, 423). See also 4 
Doc. Rel. Col. Hist. N.Y., 954. 
20i PC 2/79/156. The petition alleged that 
the offenses, if true, were not so much as 
misdemeanors, or at most but misdemeanors, 
not capital offenses. The offenses were not 
within the intention of the 1691 act, or if 
within the act, yet no sentence of death or 
forfeiture for high treason could be inflicted 
by virtue of the act as it was penned. If the