of the complainant parishes. It was therefore prayed that these acts might 
be declared void and of no effect. 303 The Privy Council did not, however, on 
this occasion proceed to declare the objectionable acts void. After a hearing 
upon the complaint and the answer of the States, dismissal was ordered. 
Nevertheless, since judgments had been given against petitioners in actions 
under the complained of acts, petitioners were to be allowed to appeal from 
such judgments despite the lapse of time. 364 In other words, the Council again 
evinced a desire to have the matter of vacating the acts tested through judicial 
channels. 
In 1771 there was an abrupt change in the state of Jersey law. A code was 
put into effect, and at the same time by Order in Council it was commanded 
that all laws were thereafter to be made by the "assembly of the States of the 
Island." This body was to have the right to make ordinances which would be 
provisional for a maximum three-year period. These ordinances could then 
be continued if royal consent were obtained, and upon such approbation could 
be inserted in the Code. 365 
Shortly after this Order several acts were passed in Jersey laying duties on 
rum and gin imported into the island. The King in Council, upon consideration 
thereof, was of the opinion that the local legislature had no authority to 
pass such acts without previous royal application and approval. Therefore the 
acts were declared "to be null and void in themselves" and ordered erased 
from the island records by an April 20, 1774, Order in Council. 366 By a June 
25, 1783, Order in Council another Jersey act was declared "null and void" as 
passed contrary to the form prescribed by a previous Order in Council of 
March 28, 1771, and erasure directed. 367 
383 PC 2/97/142. Upon reading the complaint, 
the Committee ordered that precedents 
be searched of complaints against die States 
and how the proceedings at the Council had 
been carried on against them and also whether 
any acts of the States had been approved or 
repealed (PC 2/97/151)- Later the Committee 
ordered the petition sent to the Lieutenant-Governor 
of Jersey to lay it before the 
States for their answer in writing {PC 2/97/ 
255)- 
* M PC 2/99/128-33, 167; 3 Ordres du Conseil 
et Pieces Analogues Enregistres A Jersey, 
260-71. 
365 8 State Trials (n.s.), 1119. 
see 4 o r dres du Conseil et Pieces Analogues 
Enregistres A Jersey, 12-15. Complaint had 
been made by the Lieutenant-Governor against 
the acts which were thereupon referred to 
the King's Advocate and the Attorney General 
to report whether the States had authority 
to pass such acts without previous application 
to the King and the royal consent obtained 
(PC 2/116/111). See also the further reference 
on March 18, 1773 (PC 2/117/94). On 
March 24 we have the notation in the Council 
Register of a message to Attorney General 
Thurlow by Clerk Blair that he had caused a 
search to be made in the Council books for 
precedents where the Privy Council had given 
orders in a legislative capacity with respect 
to the Channel Islands and had marked down 
several between 1617 and the present (PC 
2/117/97). The King's Advocate and the Attorney 
General finally reported that the States 
had no authority to pass such acts (PC 2/117/ 
221). 
367 4 Ordres du Conseil et Pieces Analogues 
Enregistres A Jersey, 94-96. For the March 28, 
1771, order, see ibid., 2-4.