pealed therefrom to the Superior Court. While the appeal was pending Lechmere 
commenced proceedings during August in the Court of Probates to 
have administration granted him of the intestate's estate, but Winthrop, 
summoned to show cause, successfully insisted upon the pendency of the 
appeal. From this allowance Lechmere in turn appealed to the Superior 
Court. 90 
On September 28, 1725, the Superior Court, on hearing Winthrop's appeal, 
declared that real as well as personal estates were ordered to be inventoried 
by the colony law and that the Courts of Probates should be guided thereby, 
despite the fact that under the laws of England realty was not inventoried. It 
was then ordered that Winthrop should not be admitted to evidence to the 
inventory by any other oath than that which was agreeable to the laws of the 
province, that the sentence should be affirmed, and that appellant should be 
condemned in costs. In the appeal of Lechmere the Court of Probates' sentence 
was also affirmed. From both sentences reviews to the next Superior Court 
were prayed and allowed. 91 Upon review of Winthrop's appeal on March 22, 
1 7 3 5/6, the Superior Court affirmed the former sentence and condemned appellant 
in costs. When Lechmere's appeal was then reviewed, the pending 
appeal having been determined, it was adjudged that the former letters of 
administration to Winthrop be vacated and that Lechmere et ux. be granted 
letters of administration. 92 Winthrop thereupon allegedly prayed and was 
denied an appeal to the King in Council from both sentences. 93 To prevent 
any action until the case could be laid before the King in Council, Winthrop 
entered a protest against granting letters of administration to any other person 
and also against any division of the realty of the intestate. 94 Despite this 
protest the Superior Court, on the same March 22, granted letters of administration 
of the intestate's estate to Lechmere et ux. and took the usual adminis- 
90 Ibid., 457-59. In commencing these proceedings 
Lechmere relied upon the assembly 
resolution that this was the only proper 
remedy for establishment of his rights. 
91 MS Conn. Superior Ct. Rec, 1724-27, sub 
Sept. 28, 1725; 6 Winthrop Papers, 459-60. 
From one of the supporting affidavits on the 
later appeal to the King in Council it would 
appear that a conciliar appeal was refused from 
these sentences; see the affidavit of Tilley and 
Chapman (ibid., 471). 
92 MS Conn. Superior Ct. Rec., 1y24-2.7, sub 
Mar. 22, 1725/6. 
93 6 Winthrop Papers, 460-61. Winthrop alleged 
that the appeal to the King in Council 
"was in a contemptuous manner denyed him, 
though often demanded and insisted upon; 
the Court saying they were not under your 
Majesties government, and their Charter knew 
nothing of your Majesty in Councill, and that 
your petitioner might come and tell your 
Majesty that they denied him an appeal and bid 
him take evidence thereof, which your petitioner 
accordingly did." See ibid., 471, for 
notice of the supporting affidavit taken before 
a justice in the colony. 
94 Winthrop protested against "any proceedings 
or transactions of the said Court contrary 
to the laws of England, the full enjoyment of 
all liberties and immunities, benefit, right, and 
priviledge of which laws apperteined to your 
petitioner both by act of Parliament and by the 
royal Charter as a free and natural born subject 
of Great Britaine to all intents, constructions, 
and purposes whatsoever" {ibid., 461).