afterwards taken up a large sum on the same estate, the mortgage was ordered to stand as a security for the first 501. only. Fuster v. Merchant, M. 1684. 1 Vern. 263.

21. The committee of a lunatic invested part of his personal estate in freehold lands. This shall be taken as personal estate, and go to his next of kin, and not to his heir. Awdley v. Awdley. M. 1690. 2 Vern. 192.

22. Martiage with a lunatic under the care of the committee of the court is a contempt, for which the person marrying may be committed, and the marriage is no supersedeas of the com mitment, so as to take him or her out of the custody of the committee. Ashe's case, T. 1702. Pre, in Ch. 203.

23. It is a cule never to change the property of a lunatic, nor to alter the succession of it. But where a debt is due to a lunatic in Scotland, the court will give the committee leave to sue in Scotland in the lunatic's name, and will direct the lunatic to execute a proxy (to save forms) which the committee shall attest. Ex parte Lady Annandale, M. 1749. Amb 81,

24, The committee having a lien on the lunatic's estate, recovered by him, the solicitor employed in the business was held to stand in the place of the committee, and to have a lien for his bill. Barnsley v. Powell, T. 1750. Amb, 103.

25. The court in this case appointed the brother of a lunatic as committee of his person and estate, but with restrictions not to receive any part of the estate; and a receiver being appointed maintenance money only was allowed to the brother. Ex parte Billinghurst, T. 1750, Amb, 104.

26. An agreement by the committee, that coal under the Junatic's estate should be worked by the owner of the adjoining land, was established where the heir had no interest, but the next of kin had, Ex parte Tabbert, T. 1801. 6 Ves. jun, 428.

(c) How he shall account,

27. A committee shall not be allowed for buildings and improvements on the lunatic's estate, but where the committee has maintained the lunatic's son, the master shall consider of a proper allowance. Foster v. Merchant, M, 1684. 1 Vern, 263,

28. Where the court had allowed the profits of the lunatic's estate to the committee for the maintenance of his person, and upon the lunatic's death, his administrator brought a bill for an account of such profits, the committee pleaded the order of allowance, and his plea was ordered to stand for an answer; but the court declared they would not relieve in such a case without gross fraud. Sheldon v. Alland, E. 1731. 3 P. W. 104.

29. A committee of a lunatic's real estate may cut down tim

ber for repairs. Ex parte Ludlow, T. 1742. 2 Atk. 407. Vide ex parte Bromfield, 3 Bro. Ch. Ca. 510. And the court have allowed part of a lunatic's personal estate to be laid out in repairs, and even upon improvements of his real estate. Sergison v. Sealey, M. 1742. 2 Atk. 414.

30. Lord Chancellor would not allow the committee of a lunatic any thing for his trouble, for fear of the precedent; but as his office, in this case, had been peculiarly troublesome, the court increased the allowance for maintenance. In re Annesley T. 1749. Amb. 78.

31. The committee of a lunatic's estate shall not be permitted to pass his accounts without inquiry what money was in his hands from time to time, and the master must state any particular circumstances. Ex parte Catton, T. 1790. 1 Ves. jun. 156.

32. The interest of a fund in court belonging to the hus band, who was in a state of imbecility, was ordered to be paid to the wife for the maintenance of the family. Bird v. Lefevre, M. 1792. 4 Bro. Ch. Ca. 100.

33. In an account directed against the husband's estate of the wife's separate property received by him, consideration is taken of his extra expence, she being a lunatic. Attorney general v. Parnthor, T. 1793. 4 Bro Ch. Ca. 409.

34. The court cannot, on petition, order part of a lunatic's estate to be sold for payment of his debts to prevent a bill by the creditors. Ex parte Smith, T. 1800. 5 Ves. jun. 556.

35. Where there are sufficient funds, a liberal application of the property of a lunatic ought to be made, in order to afford him every comfort his situation will admit. Ex parte Baker, E. 1801. 6 Ves, jun. 8. Vide ex parte Chumley, i Ves. jun. 296.

LUNATICS AND IDEOTS IV,

Effects of their incapacities on the civil acts of the parties. 36. H. was found a lunatic by inquisition with a retrospect of seventeen years. It was also found that he had assigned a debt due to him for the purchase of a manor; on a bill by the attorney general, it was held that the lunatic ought to be relieved, but that he need not be made a party, though the defendant should have leave to traverse the inquisition. Attorney General v. Parkhurst, M. 1668. 1 Ch. Ca. 113. Et vide S. C. 1 Ch. Ca. 153, where it was held necessary that the lunatic should be made a party; sed secus of an ideot, for he shall not be admitted to stultify himself.

37. A. tenant for life being non compos, with remainder to his first son in tail, remainder to B. in fee, surrendered by deed to B, before he had a son. Held, that this surrender was absolutely

void, and the contingent remainder not destroyed. Thompson v. Leach, M. 1697. 3 Salk. 427. 1 Lord Raymond, 313. Com. Rep. 45. Show. P. C. 150. Et vide White v. Small, 2 Ch. Ca. 103. Portington v. Eglington, 2 Vern. 189, where a conveyance made by a person of weak understanding, though no lunatic, was set aside.

38. A. obtained a purchase at a great under value, by deeds, fines, and recoveries, from a lunatic, which was set aside, on application, by the committee. Addison v. Dawson, H. 1711. 2 Ven. 678. So shall settlement made by a lunatic be set aside, though not unreasonable. Clerk v. Clerk, H. 1700, 2 Vern. 414. Et vide Anon. E. 1683. 1 Vern. 155, where the court directed that a settlement made by one who was found a lunatic, and was afterwards restored to his understanding, should be made by a fine in C. B. so that the judges might examine him. Et vide etiam Sackville v. Ayleworth, M. 1682. 1 Vern. 105, where a will made by one who afterwards became non compos, was held not revoked by his being found a lunatic afterwards, and that a bill will not lie to examine the witnesses to it in perpetuum

rei memoriam.

39. A lunatic is never to be looked upon as irrecoverable, his comfort therefore is to be regarded where no creditor complains, not the heaping up riches for his administrator or next of kin. Dormer's case, M. 1724. 2 P. W. 265. See more of this case, 3 P. W. 104.

40. The rule that a man shall not be admitted to stultify himself is to be understood of acts done by a lunatic to the prejudice of others, and that he should not be admitted to excuse himself on pretence of lunacy, but not as to acts done by him to the prejudice of himself. Ridler v. Ridler, M. 1729. 1 Eq. Ab. 279. pl. 5.

41. A mortgage on a lunatic's estate may be paid off with his money, and then the mortgage term shall be assigned in trust, to attend the inheritance, and held not to go to his next of kin. parte Grimston, E. 1772. Amb. 606.

Ex

42. A trustee, found a lunatic by the master's report, cannot be ordered to convey under the stat. 4 Geo. II. c. 10, unless a commission of lunacy has issued. Ex parte Gillam, T. 1795. 2 Ves. jun, 587. But where a commission has issued, the court will order the lunatic and his curator to join in such a conveyEx parte Lady Annendale, Amb. 80. So where the beir of a mortgagee was found a lunatic by the senate of Ham→ burgh, he was directed to convey to the mortgagor, under the statute. Ex parte Otto Lewis, 1 Ves. 298.

ance.

43. A lunatic trustee refused to transfer stock, and it ap peared that his refusal was occasioned by an imbecility of mind,

The court ordered the stock to be transferred under 36 Co, III. c. 90, though no commission of lunacy had issued. v. Naylor, M. 1798. 4 Ves. jun. 360.

LUNATICS AND IDEOTS, V.

Jurisdiction of the court in matters of Lunacy and Ideocy; and herein of traversing the Inquisition.

44. The court refused a motion that a lunatic who had recovered his senses, might be examined and make a settlement of his estate, but directed an issue to be taken upon it in C. B. Anon. E 1683. 1 Vern. 155.

45. An Irish peeress was committed in this case for not producing her husband, who was a lunatic, Wenman's case, T. 1721. 1 P. W.701.

46. An appeal lies from the Lord Chancellor's decree touching lunatics and ideots to the King in council only. Ex parte Pitt, H. 1726. 3 P. W. 108. (n). and not to the Lords, against an order awarding a commission of lunacy or ideocy by the great seal, nor against any proceedings touching the awarding or refusing such commission. Rochfort v. E. of Ely, H. 1768. 6 Bro. P. C. 329.

47. No appeal lies from an order of Ld. Ch. touching lunatics to the House of Lords, but only to the King in council. Sheldon v. Aland, E. 1731. 3 P. W. 107. Vide ex parte Pitt, 3 P. W. 108. (n). Rochfort v. E. of Ely, 6 Bro. F. C. 3129.

48. In cases of insanity, the rules of judging are the same at law and in equity. Bennet v. Vade, T. 1741. 2 Atk. 327.

49. An inquisition of lunacy is always admitted to be read, but it is not conclusive evidence, for it may be traversed. Sergeson v. Sealey, M. 1742, 2 Atk. 412.

50. Where, before an inquisition of lunacy, a person who was found a lunatic has made a purchase, with the approbation of his only son, the court will not change the disposition that has been made of the money, but purchase shall stand. S. C. Vide Ridler v. Ridler, 1 Eq. Ab. 279.

51. After the abolition of the court of wards, the jurisdiction over lunatics and ideots reverted to the court of Chancery, to whom it originally belonged. Corporation of Bedford v. Len thall, T. 1743. 2 Atk. 533.

52. A lunatic was allowed to traverse the inquisition, from the appearance he made upon a second inspection, and the grant of the custody was suspended till further order. Ex parte Roberts, M. 1740. 3 Atk. 7.

53. Not only the lunatic but his heir is bound upon the tra verse of the inquisition. So where the alienee and the lunatic traverse, if he is found a lunatic at the time of the alienation, the

alienee is bound. Ex parte Roberts, 3 Atk. 308. Ex parte Grimstone, Amb. 706.

54. Where an inquisition found a person a lunatic, and it appeared a hard case, the court gave leave to traverse it. Ex parte Barnsley, M. 1744 3 Atk. 184.

55. Where the lunacy of a person is in question, the court will make a provisional order as to his effects till the point of lunacy is determined. In re Hele (a lunatic), E. 1748. 3 Atk. 635.

56. In this case Ld. Ch. stopped a lunatic from being carried into Scotland, though no commission had issued. Lady Marr's case, cited in Lady Annendale's case, M. 1749. Amb. 82.

57. Ld. Ch. can make an order in a lunatic's affairs after his death. Ex parte Grimstone, E. 1772. Amb. 706. So where there is a reference to a master, in a case of lunacy, he shall make his report, though the lunatic be dead. Ex parte Armstrong, E. 1791. 3 Bro. Ch. Ca. 238.

58. On a petition for a reference to the master as to the state of the plaintiff and her fortune, and directions for her maintenanoe, the property being too small to bear the expence of a commission, an order was made on affidavit without a reference for payment of dividends for the two ensuing quarters. Eyre v. Wake, T. 1799. 4 Ves. jun. 795.

59. A traverse to an inquisition finding a person a lunatic, is de jure, and not a matter of favour, (Vide 2 Ed. VI. c. 8. s. 6.) though the chancellor is not dissatisfied with the return upon the evidence; the order for a new commission was therefore suspended for the purpose of taking the traverse. Upon the return of the traverse, finding that the party was a lunatic at the time of her marriage and at the taking of the inquisition, though not so at the time of the verdict, the commission was superseded; yet Ld. Ch. doubted the propriety of such a double issue; and as to costs, they cannot be allowed to the party taking out a commission which is traversed with success, however meritorious the case, for the property never coming to the crown, there is no fund. Ex parte Wragg; Ex parte Ferne, T. 1800. 5 Ves. jun. 450, 832.

60. The manner of pleading a traverse is very short, merely to state the inquisition, take the common traverse upon it, and th attorney joins issue. Ex parte Wragg, 5 Ves. jun. 452.

61. Access to a lunatic, in this case, was denied to a person entitled upon her death, in default of appointment by her, though only with a view to see whether she was in a state to exercise that power. Ex parte Lyttleton, E. 1801. 6 Ves. jun. 7.

62. All fair and provident applications to impeach a com mission of lunacy are not discouraged; but where, as in this instance, a petition is presented by a stranger, without any interest,