In _The Times_ for December 20, 1910, the same case is again reported, this time in its aspect as a novelty. _The Times_, after giving the heading, “COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL. House of Lords’ Reversal of Criminal Appeal. (_Before the_ Lord Chief Justice _of_ England, Mr. Justice Pickford, _and_ Mr. Justice Avory)”, states, “Mr. Graham Campbell, on behalf of the prosecution, said that this Court a short time ago quashed the conviction in this case, and on Thursday last the House of Lords made an order reversing that order. The House of Lords had no machinery for enforcing its order, and it was therefore necessary to come back to this Court for an order to enforce it. The Lord Chief Justice: If the order of the Court of Criminal Appeal is set aside, you say that the conviction will stand? Mr. Graham Campbell: Yes. The Lord Chief Justice: Have the two defendants had notice of this application? Mr. Graham Campbell: Yes; the male defendant is here, but the female defendant is not present.... Mr. Forrest Fulton (Mr. E. Fulton with him) said he appeared for both defendants.... The Lord Chief Justice: The male defendant must now surrender.... The defendant having surrendered, Mr. Forrest Fulton submitted that the intention of the Legislature in section 1, sub-section 6, of the Criminal Appeal Act, 1907--the section which allowed an appeal to the House of Lords--was that, so far as the individual defendants were concerned, the order of the Court of Criminal Appeal, in quashing the conviction, should be final. The decision of the House of Lords was intended to be obtained for the guidance and direction of Courts in the future. The object of going to the House of Lords was to get a ruling on a question of exceptional public importance. The Court of Criminal Appeal had exercised the function of the jury, and that Court, having allowed the appeal from the conviction, the position was the same as if the defendants had been acquitted by the jury.... Judgment: The Lord Chief Justice, in giving the judgment of the Court, said that in their opinion there was no doubt as to the power and duty of this Court. The appeal from this Court to the House of Lords was successful, and the order of the House of Lords was that the order of this Court should be reversed, and the natural consequence was that the conviction, if he might use the expression, was re-established. In these circumstances the right procedure had been adopted--namely, to come to this Court, which was a court of record, and apply to have effect given to the order of the House of Lords, that was to say, to expunge from the record of this Court the order which had been made setting aside the verdict and entering a verdict of ‘Acquittal.’ It was said by Mr. Fulton that this being an appeal by the prosecution, and this Court having decided that the appeal should be allowed and a verdict of ‘Acquittal’ entered, the Court had no power to make a further order