whole of this time, until 1784, although the Superior Court and its predecessor had appellate jurisdiction of civil causes, and was there fore a court for the correction of errors, yet the Legislature was the court of final resort to which many cases were carried from the lower courts. The Legislature exercised original jurisdiction also in all causes at law and in equity, especially the latter. Jurisdiction in equity was, however, gradually transferred to the courts.
Under the early practice in Connecticut, a party defeated in the trial of his cause, and desiring to obtain the correction of any supposed error, might have his action of review, or take an appeal, or bring a writ of error. The action of review was one by which the original cause was tried a second time in the same court. The appeal was the trial of the action a second time, but in a higher court. The writ of error, as now, was an action brought in the higher court for the correction of an error appearing on the record of the case, and so put in issue questions of law only. The action of review was especially frequent, but the privilege was so often abused that it was much restricted by the Legislature, and finally abolished. As a substitute it was provided that a new trial might be granted by the court for certain reasons.
In conformity with this practice, the revisory action of the Legislature as a court for the correction of errors might be invoked in two ways, — by an appeal from the Court of Assistants or the Superior Court, and by a writ of error. The customary method at first was by an appeal; but a provision made in 1697 prohibiting the appeal of any case which had already been appealed from the County Courts to the Court of Assistants, since the latter court had no original jurisdiction in civil causes, compelled parties to seek their relief in the Legislature by writs of error. In 1719 a commission was temporarily constituted to hear and determine all writs of error brought to the Legislature,— the first significant step toward the transfer of this class of cases to an independent tribunal. In addition to the appeal and writ of error application could be made to the Legislature to obtain new trials in the lower courts, but procedure on such petitions was not strictly revisory.
The democratic character of the Connecticut government and institutions, and its independence of the Crown are familiar facts of history. The only interruption to orderly development was the brief period of two years when Sir Edmund Andros administered the government, after which Connecticut easily returned to her accustomed political life. The common law of England was not recognized as binding upon the people of the Colony. The right of final appeal to the King or Queen in Council, which was exercised in a few instances, was regarded by the Legislature with jealousy, and attempts by that means to enforce the common law of England were unsuccessful.
