It may be remarked of this commission of Oyer and Terminer, issued under the new power given to the governor, that it has not been executed without some question being raised as to its legality. Persons, who were obstinately bent to believe there was no law in Newfoundland but stat. 10 and 11 Will. 3. were disposed to doubt the power of the crown to give authority for issuing this, as well as the commission of the peace. It has been the interest and inclination of many at Newfoundland to contest every thing that was not founded upon the same parliamentary authority as stat. 10 and 11 Will. 3. But this spirit, whether of ignorance or wilfulness, has worn off, in a great measure, of late years, though it is occasionally at work even now. And it is to be lamented at this moment, that the advice given by the board of trade in the year 1718, and afterwards on the occasion of establishing the civil government in 1728, was not followed; and an act of parliament passed for remedying all the abuses and irregularities at once, instead of resorting to the half measure that was then adopted, and which had all the difficulty we have seen to support itself. If we are to judge from the dearth of matter in the books of the board of trade, things went on very quietly at Newfoundland for several years. We only find some scattered facts of no great importance. [Sidenote: Lord Baltimore revives his Claim.] In the year 1754, _Lord Baltimore_ laid in his claim to be put in possession of a large tract of land in the island, by the name of _the province of Avalon_, and of all the royal jurisdictions and prerogatives thereto belonging, and prayed that his majesty would approve _John Bradstreet, Esq._ as governor thereof. This grant has been before mentioned[62]. A claim so important was referred by the board of trade to the attorney and solicitor general; who, after inspection of such papers as were furnished by the board, and hearing what could be urged by Lord Baltimore, were of opinion, that as, notwithstanding the determination in 1660 in favour of the grant in 1623, there was no evidence of any actual possession of the province, nor the exercise of any powers of government there by the Baltimore family; as, on the contrary, it was most probable, that, at least from 1638, they had been out of possession; as from the year 1669 there had been many proceedings, which appeared from the books of the board of trade, and even an act of parliament passed in the 10 and 11 Will. 3. inconsistent with the right now set up, without taking the least notice thereof, and without any claim or interposition on the part of the Baltimore family; and as his majesty’s approbation of a governor ought to be in consequence of a clear title of proprietorship, they were of opinion, his majesty should not comply with the petition. This opinion of the law officers seems to have been adopted by the board, and no more has since been heard of the province of _Avalon_[63].