[485]. The word Mad has been derived by Dr. Haslam from the Gothic Mod, which signifies rage; he observes, “it is true, we have now converted the O into A, but Mod is the ancient word.”
[486]. Ideocy, or fatuity a nativitate, vel dementia naturalis. Such a one is described by Fitzherbert, who knows not to tell 20s, nor knows who is his father or mother, nor knows his age; but if he knows letters, or can read by the instruction of another, then he is no ideot. F. N. B. 233. new edit. 517. These, though they may be evidences, yet they are too narrow, and conclude not always; for ideocy or not is a question of fact triable by jury, and sometimes by inspection. Hale Pl. 29. Bl. Comm. 304.
[487]. Hence the term LUNACY, from the supposed regulation of the intellect in certain states, by the influence of the moon; and the distinction between Idiot and Lunatic was formerly of the greatest importance, as the King had the custody of an Idiot to his own use, not so of a Lunatic. F.N.B. 530, n. Dyer, 25.
[488]. Igiter si de insania ejusque variis generibus judicium ferendum est, hoc ab iis potissimum fierio portet, quibus omnia pertinent, quæ ad omnem hominis naturam proprius perspecta sunt, atque cognita, medici igitur de dignoscendis insanis audiendi sunt.—Platner de Insanis et furiosis.
[489]. The word is originally Greek, ιδιωτης, a private person, or one who leads a private life, without any share or concern in the government of affairs.
[490]. Anciently the king could grant the care of an idiot’s person and the profits of his estate during his life, without account, except for necessaries; but since the Revolution the crown has always granted the surplus to some of his family. Ridgw. Pa. Ca. 159. App. n. 1. Lysart v. Royse. Sch. and Lef. 153. Fitz-geralds Case ib. 436.
[491]. See also Lord Wenman’s case, 1 P. Wms. 702, Beverley’s Case, 4 Co. R. 126; Rochfort v. Ely, Ridgw. Parl. ca. 515 App. note 1.
[492]. This term is recognised by the 4th Geo. 2, c. 10. Carew v. Johnson, 2 Sch. and Lef. 304, and Sir Ed. Coke says it is the most legal name, 1 Inst. 246: “Here Littleton explaineth a man of no sound memory to be non compos mentis. Many times (as it here appeareth) the Latin word explaineth the true sense; and calleth him not amens, demens, furiosus, lunaticus, fatuus, stultus, or the like, for non compos mentis is most sure and legal.” Lord Coke says, “Non compos mentis is of four sorts: first Idiota, which from his nativity, by a perpetual infirmity, is non compos mentis; secondly, he that by sickness, grief, or other accident, wholly loses his memory and understanding; thirdly, a lunatic that has sometimes his understanding and sometimes not, “aliquando gaudet lucis intervallis;” and therefore he is called non compos mentis, so long as he hath not understanding.”
[493]. Where it is among other things laid down that mere weakness of mind only is not a sufficient reason for granting the custody of the person and of his estate. The cupidity of relations is too apt to magnify indiscretion, eccentricity, and more particularly pecuniary extravagance into signs of madness; juries and commissioners cannot be too much on their guard against such modes of proof, lest one half of the world should lock up the other. The Romans committed prodigals to the custody of a guardian, as if they had been infants or madmen; but this is not the law of England.
[494]. In common parlance it is called the jurisdiction of the Court of Chancery; but in strictness, the care and regulation of ideots and lunatics is a branch of the king’s prerogative (17 Ed. 2. c. 9.) which is committed to the Lord Chancellor, not by delivery of the great seal, as his general jurisdiction is, but by warrant under the sign manual; therefore the appeal is to the King in Council, and not to the House of Lords; and neither the Master of the Rolls nor the Vice Chancellor can sit for the Chancellor, or make any orders in matters of lunacy.