beth, c. 8. 311 We have seen no cases in which the Council Board awarded 
"damages" in the circumstances contemplated by, 3 Henry VII, c. 10, although 
there is at least one case where interest was awarded to the appellant as a part 
of the restoration ordered. 312 a 
Let us examine the pattern of conciliar awards in the light of actual expenditures 
upon appeal, for it was a source of colonial complaint that the expenses 
incident to appeals rendered conciliar determinations prohibitory for 
most litigants. 312 Fees were demanded at the Council Office for lodging appeals 
and doleances, for entry of appearances, for intraconciliar references, 
for copies of Orders in Council and Committee reports and orders, for conciliar 
summonses, for setting down causes, and for copies of adversary papers. 
In addition, the chamber keeper received a fee and the under clerks at the 
Council Office gratuities. 313 The usual individual counsel fee for argument 
of an appeal in chief was 10 guineas, but in important causes the amount was 
raised. Additional fees were usually forthcoming for retainers, for perusing, 
settling, and signing the printed "case," for one or more consultations before 
the hearing in chief. 314 The third important element of costs was solicitor 
or attorney services. These varied services included drawing up the petition 
and appeal and the case for argument, frequent attendance at the Council 
Office to move the conciliar machinery or to observe adversarial conduct, con- 
311 Winne v. Lloyd (i Levinz, 146); Holroi 
v. Ebizon (10 Mod., 274). See also Sayer, 
Law of Damages (1770), 102-3. 
312 a Infra, p. 337. 
312 From Virginia, Hartwell, Blair, and Chilton 
wrote of the "infinite charge in bringing the 
matter to Whitehall, which few in that country 
have purse and skill to manage" {The Present 
State of Virginia and the College, 46-47). 
From Barbados it was complained that "great 
trouble and vast expense is caused to litigants 
by the necessity of appealing to England" 
{CSP, Col, 1697-98, #52). See also Plantation 
justice (1701), 6. From New Hampshire 
Lieutenant-Governor Usher remarked upon the 
ruinous costs of appeals to England {CSP, Col., 
1708-9, $663). Later, in 1744, Governor 
Wentworth of the same colony wrote in confirmation 
{CO 5/925/ A 26). See further the 
complaints of appellant Dering (26 MS Mass. 
Archives [Hutchinson Cones., 1761-70], 5, 
9). In Massachusetts the expense of appeals 
constituted part of the objections to appeals 
in real actions, supra, pp. 163-64. For New 
York opinion see Wm. Smith, Opinion Relating 
to Courts of Equity within the Colony of 
New York, (1734), 32. From the Leeward Islands 
came complaints of "Ferdinando Parisian 
accounts." Writing of his efforts to solicit appeal 
business for his son's acquaintances, 
Samuel Martin, in 1757, doubted not of his 
success "if they will both concur in avoiding 
Ferdinando Parisian accounts, of most exorbitant 
articles: for it is natural to all appellants, 
to prefer such sollicitors as will do their 
business most effectually, at the most reasonable 
rate of expenses. Appeals have risen to 
such an exorbitant price that a litigant had 
better sit down by the decisions of our courts, 
than to appeal, upon the terms of loosing the 
oyster and having the shell" {Add. MS, 
41,346/187-88). Even from Jersey in the 
Channel Islands it was complained, c. 1773, 
that the expense of prosecuting an appeal or 
doleance in England was so great that it virtually 
amounted to a prohibition in causes 
under although the appealable minimum 
was .£2O {Petition of the Inhabitants of 
Jersey, p. 7 in SP 47/7). 
313 See the bills of Nicholas Fiott on the 
doleances of Philip Laurens and of Philip de 
Gruchy {Fiott MSS, Soc. Jer. Lib.); MS R.I. 
Law Cases, 1739-40, #25; 5 MS. Mass. Archives 
{Colonial, 1728-74), 51-52. 
314 See MS Conn. Archives, 2 Indians, #278, 
279, printed infra as Appendix B.