154 APPEALS AND ERRORS. [ART. 5

unless it shall appear by the record that such objection was made in
said court.

That the question of jurisdiction was argued will not suffice; it must have
been specially taken by exception and passed on by the lower court. Melvin
v. Aldridge, 81 Md. 657. And see Hubbard v. Jarrell, 23 Md. 80.

This section applies only to defendants who have been brought into a
regular chancery proceeding and who submit to the jurisdiction without ques-
tion. Wicks v. Westcott, 59 Md. 279. And see Pierson v. Trail, 1 Md. 143.

This section applies to defendants only. Pierson v. Trail, 1 Md. 143.

The lower Court may sua sponte refuse to grant relief on the ground of
lack of Jurisdiction. This section is confined in its operation to the appellate
court. Dunnock v. Dunnock, 3 Md. Ch. 149.

If the objection to the jurisdiction is not properly taken, the court will
entertain the suit, unless it be in cases in which no circumstances whatever
could give the court jurisdiction. Shryock v. Morris. 15 Md. 77.

This section applied. Cherbonnier v. Goodwin, 79 Md. 61; Snowden v. Reid,
67 Md. 135; Biddinger v. Wiland, 67 Md. 363; Estep v. Mackey, 52 Md. 596;
Williams v. Lee, 47 Md. 324; Edes v. Garey, 46 Md. 36; Loeber v. Laughar, 45
Md. 482; Ashton v. Ashton, 35 Md. 503; Gough v. Manning, 26 Md. 361; Stal-
lings v. Stallings, 22 Md. 45; Bratt v. Bratt, 21 Md. 583; Knight v. Brawner,
14 Md. 6; Teackle v. Gibson, 8 Md. 84; O'Neill v. Cole, 4 Md. 123; Farmers,
etc., Bank v. Wayman, 5 Gill, 356.

Influence of this section upon the lower court. Gough v. Crane, 3 Md.
Ch. 135.

1904, art. 5, sec. 38. 1SS8. art. 5, sec. 36. 1860, art. 5, sec. 28. 1818. ch. 193, sec. 14.

1832, ch. 302, sec. 6.

38. If it shall appear or be shown to the court of appeals that the
substantial merits of a cause will not be determined by the reversing or
affirming of any decree or order that may have been passed by a court
of equity, or that the purposes of justice will be advanced by permitting
further proceedings in the cause, either through amendment of any of
the pleadings or the introduction of further evidence, making additional
parties, or otherwise, then the court of appeals, instead of passing a
final decree or order, shall order the cause to be remanded to the court
from whose decision the appeal was taken, and thereupon such further
proceedings shall there be had by amendment of pleadings, or further
testimony to be taken, or otherwise, as shall be necessary for determin-
ing the cause upon its merits, as if no appeal had been taken in the
cause, and the decree or order appealed from had not been passed, save
only that the order or decree passed by the court of appeals shall be con-
clusive as to the points finally decided thereby. And it shall be the
duty of the court of appeals, in its order remanding the cause, to express
the reasons for the remanding, and also to determine and declare the
opinion of the court on all points which may have been made before the
said court, or which may be presented by the record.

Cases remanded.

Cases remanded that proof may be taken: Dimpfel v. Wilson, 107 Md. 341;
Barroll v. Farman, 88 Md. 201; Hoffman v. Hoffman, 66 Md. 575; Hagerty
v. Mann, 56 Md. 529; Gechter v. Gechter, 51 Md. 190: Brown v. Thomas, 46
Md. 641; Bull v. Pyle, 41 Md. 425; Johnson v. Robertson, 31 Md. 492; Stump
v. Henry, 6 Md. 210; Winchester v. Baltimore, etc., R. R. Co., 4 Md. 242;
Buchanan v. Lorman, 3 Gill, 82; Darnall v. Hill, 12 G. & J. 398; Harris v.
Harris, 6 G. & J. 115.