Appeals could be taken to the Court of Assistants and from them to the General Court. There were petit courts in various towns for the trial of cases of small debts and trespass. In certain cases, too, where minor offenses had been committed or town by-laws violated, the selectmen had jurisdiction. An admiralty court also existed. The whole arrangement was crude, as may be seen. Though lawyers frequently were elected Assistants, this was not necessarily the case. Even after the establishment of the Superior Court we find a layman as Chief Justice.[1] That the court did not always follow the verdict of the jury is shown by a letter from Mr. Stoughton to the Governor of Plymouth in 1681:
The testimony you mention against the prisoner I think is clear and sufficient to convict him, but in case your jury should not be of that mind then if you hold yourself strictly obliged by the laws of England no other verdict but 'not guilty' can be brought in, but according to our practice in this jurisdiction we should punish him with some grievous punishment according to the demerit of his crime though not found capital.
Division of the General Court into Two Bodies
The Court of Assistants, consisting of the Governor, Deputy-Governor and Assistants, met monthly or oftener, while the General Court met four times a year, the Assistants, Governor and Deputy-Governor sitting with them. In the absence of the General Court, the action of the Court of Assistants was given the same force as the action of that body. Laws passed by either were valid when not contrary to the laws of England. Just as in the Plymouth Colony it was found expedient to do away with the practice of having all the freemen meet together in a general court, so in
- ↑ Lieutenant-Governor Hutchinson.
