30. Otis is here apparently rehearsing Thacher's arguments, text at note
above, that the Superior Court had renounced the Exchequer powers given it by province law (note
below). The last sentence, which may be inaccurately reported by JA, seems to mean that the only Exchequer powers which the court retained were those given it by provincial and parliamentary Acts of Trade and Revenue over violations of their provisions. See note 18
above. If this is the argument, it may prove too much. For, while the provincial statutes contained sharply limited search provisions (see note
above), in cases under English statutes it could well be argued that the power to issue writs of assistance was a power incident to the revenue jurisdiction, rather than an inherent chancery power which the court had renounced.