The Express.
London, England, 1864-04-07 00:00:00

THE EXPRESS, THURSDAY EVENING, AIRIL 7, 1864.

RELIEF OP THZ SICZ AND WOUNDZD DANISH

SOLDIERS.

The Marquis of Clanricarde has received the
following letter :

Legation of Denmark, 2, Great Cumberland.
Aron, Laudon, April 4,186 L
My Lord,—The fourth remittance from your lords'
committee for extending relief to the sick and wounded
Danish soldiers, , included a sum of 1,0001. from the
committee formed under the presidency of the Right Hoe.
the Lord Mayor of London. The Central Committee in
Copenhagen have, as: your lordship will perceive from the
enclosed translation of their letter of acknowledgment, re-
quested me to convey to the Lord Mayor sad to the tritium@
of London their cordial thanks for thin mark of sympathy,
Your lordship will oblige me by allowing me, tkrofth Joe,
to submit to the Lord Mayor the letter of acknowledgment
with the accompanying translation.—l have the honour to
be, with the highest regard, your lordship's most obedient
humble servant, (Signed) T. Btu..—The Marquis of Clan.
ricarde.

arawilatios.)
The Oeotral Committee has with particular plasma re-
osived the I.UUO/. wickeed in your Excellency's letter of the
16th, as the first remittance from the committee formed
under the presideocy of the Eight Hon. the Lard Mayor of
Loudon for collecting funds in aid of the sick and wounded
soldiers and nukes, and of the families of those who have
perished in the present war. The many evideocee m-
oulted of the cordial sympathy of the English people
for our soldiers sad sailors, sod comequently
also for the cause for which they contend spinet
the superior force and power of Germasy, viz., Ithe
indepeodence and liberty of tie Daaish realm sad mart
meet
with the most lively appreciation en the part
the people in general, and particularly of the soldiers and
sailors, sod confirm all in the conviction of the justice of
the Danish cause, sod in the hope of a final triumph.
The Central Committee request your Exoelleacy to con-
vey to the Right Hon. the Lord Mayor, sad to the citizens
whose honoured representative he is, their hearty dash'
for the collection made in aid of oar soldiers sad sailors ;
and the committee beg you to add the awnrance that by
these acts will be multiplied and strengthened the many
hoods already connecting the Danish people with the high-
mioded and free English people, and particularly with the
citiaens of Loudon.

(Hen follow (aatoroo.)
Coposhageo, Karol* 27, 1864.

TEE PROPOSED Sum as Os Su Rowlain) Brit
Sr BIZMINGRAIL —The tellowiag eammaniatirm boa been
received by the treasurer:—" Ganes, Var, let April,
11364.—L0rd Brougham pr sent. hi compliments to Hr.
James Lloyd, and aotboei es bim to pat down hi name for
tea guineas (101. 10a.1 to the rabaniptios an baronet
of Sir }Lowland Hill, of whiall behighly approve,
regarding Sir Rowland as a great boodacitor, especially to
the working claim."

Mont 7f AY NV= AND IZTYZI TIAN ITZIL—This
Ves to the largest and best stock of M ond .Mrsu roe ever submitted for palate werld4ails•d
. trousers at Alfred Webb Illlea,"&eratorldtaatorb eedg estn.
Manse ot Brookstreet, lianonsrdquars. Nanbialkst

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

HOUSE OF LORDS.-Arxu. 6.
APPEALS.
THE ALEXANDRA.

Yesterday the Howe of Lords held • special judicial sit-
ting, for the purpose of delivering judgment in the
aim of the Alexandra. The noble and learned lords present
were the Lard Chancellor, Lord Crenworth, Lord fit.
Leonard's, Lord Wensleydale, end Lord Kliagedown.

TRI £TIOIINET-012111AL V. ILLLI2B AND OTC.

It may be remembered that this is as appeal from a deci-
sion in the Court of Exchequer Chamber, arrived at on
Bth February, 1864, diamiming an appeal from the Court of
Exchequer.
The OW was argued on several days last month, and
jut." LordP=or now delivered his opinion in sub-
stance to this effect. He dated that the appeal depended
on the question whether the rules made by the Court of
Exchequer were warranted by the powers_ given to that
court by the 26th section of ad and 23rd Vick. c. 21,
commonly called the Queen's flamembranoer's Act. The
second Common Law Procedure Act of 1834 contained very
important provisions, most of which created new rights of
appeal. Cases which had been tried by juries were decided
under different rules before the Act of 1854, and there was
no
right of awed nrictly so called. The creation of • new
right of appeal required legislative authority, and it was
not competent either to a court of first instance,
or en appeal court, to create rights of appeal,
which would in fact be extensions of the jam-
diction of such courts., which had no inherent power
to alter the nature or extent of their jurisdiction. In the
act of 1854 it was thought necessary to bind the courts with
regard te rights of appeal, and this was done by the 36th
section, which made the Exchequer Chamber and the House
of Lords Courts of Appeal ; but by that act the revenue
aide of the Court of Exchequer was excluded from the
right of appeal, and a new act of parliament was required
to give an appeal to that side of the court. The Barons of
the Exchequer had assumed that power had been conferred
on them to create new rights of appeal by the 26th section
of 22nd aad 23rd Vie., cep. 21 ; but if the legislature had
done this they would have done • very singular thing, and
it was not likely that in • matter which related
to the taxation of the subject they would abandon their
functions, and leave it to the Barons of the Exchequer to
say whether then Auld be a right of appeal between the
crown and **subject. The 10th section of the Queen's
Remembranoer's Act applied to the revenue aide of the
Court of Exchequer new powers with regard to errors, and
now rights of appeal were crested by the 14th, 15th, and
16th sections, and suits between the crow nand the subject
were by uprise enactment put on the same footing with
regard to proceedings in error as those of the Court of
Common Law, except as regarded interlocutory matters.
It was difficult to say that rights of appeal in those respects
were not specially omitted, but it was more difficult
to say with the Attorney-Oeneral that power was
given to the Barons of the Exchequer to create
them. The 26th section contained two powers which were
even to the Barons of the Exchequer; and ow was to
make rules regulating the prunes, practice, and mode of
pleading of the revenue side of the court tinder this
power any rule* laid down by the Barons regulating the
proceedings in revenue cases did sot require legislative sane.
tin. The second power given to the Barons was to apply
the rides of the Common Law Procedure Act, and the pro-
ms, practice, and mode of pleading of the plea-side of the
court as they should deem it expedient, so as to make the
proceedings of the revenue side uniform with those
of the plea side. The provisions of the act
of 1854, which might be applied to the re-
venue side, mast be such as were applicable to
the process, practice, and mode of pleading ; but it
was difficult to give • different meaning to the words con-
ferring that power to that which they bore in the first part
of the section, and which applied to the proceedings in the
Court of Exchequer itself only. The question was whether the
rules which had been famed applied to such moms, prac-
tice, and mode of pleading. Now an appeal was an act by
which • superior court was entered for the pupa* of re-
dressing errors committed by a court below, and it would be
absurd to denominate this part of the practice of the in-
ferior court. The enactments of the datute in ques-
tion crested new relations between different count,
which were se distinct from the practice of
the courts below as municipal was from inter.
=timed law. The take which had been made by the
Buono of the Exchequer were equivalent to so many legis-
lative enactments creating new powers in the Court of Ex-
chequer Chamber and the House of Lords. In his opinion
the barons had DO power to make such rules under the
powers conferred os them by the Queen's Becumbrancer's
Act, and if the argument of the Attorney-General was ac-
cepted it would involve the assumption that the Court of
Exchequer had power to make rules for the Bones of Lade,
which would be absurd. It was to him • subject of deep
regret that any rules should have been made by
the Court of Reneguer expressly for the deter-
mination of a particular cause. It was four years since
the Queen's Remembrancer'a Act had been passed, and it
never occurred to the Barons of the Exchequer until the
eve of • motion for a new trial in the present case to make
such rules as they bad then framed, and they had done en
necemarily without the due deliberation which such an act
demanded. It thus happened that this important cue
could come to nothing except the ridiculous nue of some
discordant opinion on the meaning of word'. He moved
that the appeal of the crown he dismissed with nets.
Lord Cesnworth having given • description of the
procedure of the Court of Exchequer oa the
plea aide, and showed wherever it differed from that on
the revenue side, proceeded to my he had come to
the conclusion that the rules giving • right of •p peal were
warranted by the 26th coition of the act 22 and 23 Vie.,
o. 21, they being calculated to make the practice of the
two sides of the Court of Exchequer uniform, and there-
fore that the jodgmeut of the Court of Exchequer Cham-
ber should be reversed, and the appeal allowed.
Lord BR Looser& stated that he had formed • decided
opinion on this case. He wee clearly of opinion that the
present appeal should be dismissed.
Lord Wensleydale said that the quinine involved turned
on the 26th section of 220 d sad 23rd Ver... a. 21, arid the point
was whether that season authorised the Court of Exchequer
to grant an appeal after a motion for • new trial had bees
refused on the revenue side of the court. Ho was of opinion
that this woe • rescuable and convenient power to be
exercised by the court, and one which might well be dela-
pted to its judges. He thought that the second part of the
mortice authorised them to maks such rules. The word
" practice " was to (be taken in its largest esnee, and ex-
tended to granting an appeal. Rethought there was nothing
in the objection which bad bees taken thattheraleshad been
made during the progress of the cause, and to meet this
particular case ; sod as to their retrospective effect, it was
equivalent to the provisions of an sot of parliament which
did not prevent its opera:ion being retrospective, and which
would then become applicable to soy existing cue. In his
opinion, the judgment of the Court of Exchequer Chamber
• tto be reversed, and the present appeal allowed.
Cbeltbdord expressed his regret that the Court of
Exchequer had made the rules in question to meat the
exigency of the present case. He was strongly of opinion
that the court went " ultra wires" in making rules for giving
the right of appeal under consideration, and he had no hesi-
ditationoes& in saying that the appeal before the house should be

Lord Kingedown briefly concurred in the opinion that the
appeal of the crown should be dismissed.
By a mejority of four to two, the appeal was then dis-
missed with costs. The offset is that the verdict in favour
of the claimants of the Alexandra stands.