remedied) or complaint to Parliament. 57 The Board of Trade had thereupon 
related the Thomson opinion and declared that it agreed with the 1706 opinion 
of the crown law officers. Since the act was in force until repealed, the 
King in Council had been advised to order the proprietors to disallow the 
act. 58 As we have seen, the Order in Council accordingly issued on May 14, 
1718. 59 In this case there would seem little doubt that the Order in Council 
was a disallowance, not a declaration of nullity, yet in 1767 this conciliar order 
was also regarded as a declaration of nullity. 60 The identical language of this 
order obviously supports the view that the earlier action of the King in Council 
was only a disallowance. 
There is some evidence that colonial judges were not fully aware of their 
declarative powers under section nine of the Act for Preventing Frauds. In 
May, 1717, Nicholas Trott, sitting in the South Carolina Vice-Admiralty Court, 
heard a cause in which the Ludlow Galley had been libeled by Thomas 
Saunders et al. for wages due as seamen. In this case the owner, one Barons, 
had agreed to pay the seamen on a slaving voyage from Guinea in currency 
of the colony where the slaves were landed. When the slaves were landed 
in South Carolina (the crew apparently thought the ship bound for Virginia), 
the owner endeavored to pay off the seamen in depreciated South Carolina 
bills of credit under the terms of the agreement. Refusing this tender, the 
seamen libeled the ship. 61 
In his decision Trott stated that 
the several acts of Assembly made in this province for stamping bills of credit 
(which are of so small intrinsick value that 25 shillings of the said stamped bills 
are now of no greater value than a piece of eight) are very repugnant and contrary 
to the said statute [c. 30] of the sixth of her said Majesty Queen Anne in 
asmuch as the said bills bear no equality or proportion to the said act, seven and 
20 shillings and 6 pence in the said stamped bills being now currently passed and 
given for one ounce of silver. 
Therefore it was decreed that the wages be paid in pieces of eight at the rate 
fixed by 6 Anne, c. 30, or in bills of credit, with due allowance for their depreciated 
state. 62 Despite mention of repugnancy, there was no declaration 
that the several acts of assembly were null and void under the 1696 act of 
Parliament. 
57 2 Chalmers, Opinions, 292-93; CSP, Col., 
1717-18, #489. 
58 Ibid., #514. 
59 For the proprietary order declaring the act 
"null and void to all intents and purposes 
whatsoever" see ibid., #631; 3 Stat, at Large 
So. Car., 33. 
60 Infra, p. 613. 
61 The record is in Rawlinson MS, C 385. 
62 MS So. Car. Adm. Rec, Vols. A and B, 
'7'6-33, 63-78-