England routed colonial appeals to the Privy Council, not royal courts, because politics dominated.

Evidence

It might have been possible to give the royal courts in London appellate jurisdiction over colonial courts. The royal courts, then, could have forced a certain amount of conformity on the colonial courts. But this was not the system chosen. Appeals ran, not to the law courts, but to a special committee of the Privy Council. The committee cared little for the purity of common law as such. It cared about politics and policy. — Lawrence M. Friedman, A History of American Law, 221

Categorization

• DEFINE: Establishes the Privy Council as the colonial appellate body, useful shared vocabulary for the course.
• XREF: connects to: Eighteenth-century Privy Council review was haphazard and tolerated most colonial statutory deviations. — Lawrence M. Friedman, A History of American Law, 226

Broader Connections

• Eighteenth-century Privy Council review was haphazard and tolerated most colonial statutory deviations. #expands (0.85) — Lawrence M. Friedman, A History of American Law, 226