“The decision was on technical grounds, apart from the question of the prisoner’s guilt or innocence, and Mr. Justice Darling, giving the judgment of the court, pointed to the case as strengthening their often expressed opinion that the law should provide the court with power to order a new trial in such cases.”--_Daily Mail_, Sept. 29, 1911. CHAPTER X CRIMINAL APPEAL AND THE BALL CASE The Criminal Appeal Act is brought into operation nowadays by almost every notorious murder case. Crippen availed himself of its provisions, and, again, more recently, Morrison, the South London murderer, drove his appeal through the new Court. The end of sub-section (3), section 20, of the Act [see Appendix F], contains a mildly confusing line, to say the least. It runs, “But shall not apply in the case of convictions on indictments or inquisitions charging any peer or peeress, _or other person claiming the privilege of peerage_, with any offence not lawfully triable by a court of assize.” Why a person other than a peer or peeress who claims the privilege of peerage should be entitled to any special consideration it is impossible to say. A claimant unless his claim has been admitted, when he ceases to be a claimant and becomes a possessor, cannot conceivably be entitled to any right appertaining to the dignity claimed. The only persons entitled to the privilege of peerage are peers and peeresses, and a claimant to any such privilege must perforce be a peer or peeress or else be a person with no right whatever to the privilege of peerage.