In May, 1711, a committee of the Jamaica council informed an assembly 
committee in conference that the chief point appellant had insisted upon at 
the conciliar hearing was that the laws of England, both statute and common, 
were not in force in Jamaica. It further appeared that a 1681 act for declaring 
the laws of England in force had been disallowed, although regular notice 
thereof had not been given the island, so that the courts had proceeded to 
judge according to the laws of England. The assembly committee represented 
to the House that if the laws of England should not be allowed to be in force, 
the island would be in an ill condition, and advised an address to the King. 38 
The suggested address set forth that under a 1661 royal proclamation for encouragement 
of planters in Jamaica the inhabitants had enjoyed the benefit 
of the laws of England. Commissions and instructions to judicial and ministerial 
officers directed action and determinations according to the known laws 
of England. And it was the constant practice in all insular causes to observe 
the common law and all general statutes of England made pro bono publico 
and not by express words restrained to England, Wales, and Berwick upon 
Tweed. Acceptance of the contrary view as expressed in Orby v. Long would 
cause a multitude of law suits and disturb quiet possession, especially as to 
matters of inheritance, to the discouragement of settlement and the destruction 
of the revenue. It was therefore prayed that the sovereign would confirm 
all such judgments and proceedings as had been grounded on the laws of 
England and the known customs of the island. 39 The matter was allowed to 
lapse, however, when investigation revealed the entry of the disallowance of 
the October 23, 1681, act in the assembly journal during the governorship of 
Sir Thomas Lynch. 40 
The Order in Council in Orby v. Long had no effect as precedent upon 
judicial conduct in the island, for the courts continued to regard the Statute 
of Frauds as in force. 41 However, shortly before the arrival of the Duke of 
Portland as governor, in 1722, the right of the inhabitants to the laws of England 
was disputed in one of the island courts. 42 In October, 1722, an assembly 
" a 2 Journals Assembly Jamaica, 29. For the 
disallowance of Feb. 23, 1682/3, see PC 
2/69/637. 
39 2 Journals Assembly Jamaica, 30. The clause 
relied upon in the December 14, 1661, proclamation 
stated "that all children of any of our 
naturell borne subjects of England to be borne 
in Jamaica, shall, from their respective births, 
bee reputed to bee, and shall bee, free denizens 
of England, and shall have the same privileges, 
to all intents and purposes as our free borne 
subjects of England" (4 ibid., 455). Previously, 
on March 15, 1710/1, petitions had been presented 
to the King in Council from London 
and Bristol merchants praying confirmation of 
all judgments given in Jamaica grounded on 
the laws and statutes of England and the 
known customs of the island. These petitions 
had been referred to the Board of Trade (PC 
2/83/219). 
40 2 Journals Assembly Jamaica, 31. 
41 In an Oct. 23, 1723, report of an assembly 
committee it was advanced that a statutory 
declaration that the Statute of Frauds was in 
force in the island would be in harmony with 
judicial decisions since Orby v. Long (2 ibid., 
472-73)- 
42 2 ibid., 472.