9. As to the establishment of the Vice Admiralty Courts, see Barrow, Colonial Customs
124–127, 145–150; Wroth, “The Massachusetts Vice Admiralty Court,” in George A. Billias, ed., Law and Authority in Colonial America
(Barre, Mass., in press). As to doubts about the scope of the jurisdiction before 1764, see Knollenberg, Origin of the American Revolution
266–268. The various penalties and forfeitures, and the mechanics of suit run through all the statutes and are discussed in most of the cases that follow. See especially No. 46
. A search of the records of the Massachusetts Superior Court and the Suffolk County Inferior Court files has revealed no actions at law under the Acts of Trade after 1764. An incomplete search for the earlier period has produced only a few revenue suits, and these were matters in which the power of the Admiralty Court was being tested by writ of prohibition. See, for example, Robinson v. Patriarch, SCJ Rec.
1725–1730, fol. 59 (Suffolk, 1726) (Dismissed on exceptions); Robinson v. Patriarch, SCJ Rec.
1725–1729, fols. 97–99 (Essex, 1726) (Quashed because summons said “Suffolk SS” instead of “Essex SS”); Lambert v. Bardin, SCJ Rec.
1730–1733, fol. 202 (Suffolk, 1732) (Verdict for forfeiture. Vessel ordered sold, with seamen's wages also to be paid). As to distrust of the jury, see No. 46, note 61