[495]. See Beverley’s Case, 4 Co. Rep. 123. So in the case of Miss Kendrick, 8 Ves. 67; Lord Eldon said, “No one can look at this case without seeing, that every person about this lady is satisfied, that some care should be thrown round her. If clearly it is fit to protect her against executing powers of attorney, that she should not decide where her person, or with what trustees her property ought to be, all agreeing, that she should not choose the persons who are to have the care of her property, it is fit for me to put a controul upon those who may be proper persons to have the controul of her property. I will not subject her to another commission; but will direct two physicians, who have not been concerned nor consulted, to talk to those who have been concerned and consulted, to see the evidence, and afterwards in the most tender manner, to find the means of visiting her without alarming her, for the purpose of determining, whether her state of mind is competent to the management of her affairs. I am pretty confident Lord Hardwicke would not have gone so far: but finding when I came here a course of cases establishing this authority, and feeling a strong inclination to maintain it, or that the legislature should take measures to preserve persons in a state of imbecility, laying them as open to mischief as insanity; till these decisions are reviewed, I will not alter them.”
An order was made accordingly, restraining Miss Kendrick from executing any instrument, except in the manner and with the attestation directed by the order.—We have not been able to discover this order in the Register’s books.
[496]. A broad distinction, however, is to be made between the immediate and remote effects of intoxication: we shall have occasion to dwell at greater length upon this subject, under the consideration of Criminal Responsibility, in the third part of this work; upon the present occasion, we shall only observe in the words of Dr. Haslam, that although the usual effect of fermented liquors is temporary, yet that a single debauch may produce a state of mind that may be continued into a permanent insanity; and the person so affected may remain for many months in a state of mental derangement, and during the prevalence of his disorder may be compelled to forego all intoxicating beverage.
[497]. See Bl. Commen. 497; Hall v. Warren, 9; Ves. 605; White and Wilson; 13 Ves. 37; 1 Fonb. Tr. Eq. 51, and cases there; 1 Collinson, 608, & cases there.
[498]. A lunatic ought not to be brought before the Court of Commissioners under any artificial excitement. In a recent instance, a lunatic, or supposed lunatic, was brought before commissioners for a second examination, his conduct at the first having been rational; in the interval he had been permitted to drink a considerable quantity of ale, spirits, and bottled porter, immediately after which he was again produced, when his altered demeanor convinced the jury (ignorant of his potations) that he was lunatic, and a verdict was found accordingly. One of the commissioners being afterwards accidentally informed of the circumstance, laid the case before the Lord Chancellor, who immediately quashed the commission. The conduct of these keepers could not be too severely reprobated, and we may take this opportunity of hinting that the practice of holding any judicial investigation in taverns and public houses (where it can be avoided) is liable to many objections; at least the Inquisitio post prandium should be abolished.
[499]. Access has also been denied to a party having an interest, Ex parte Littleton, 6 Ves. 7; but query.
[500]. And when the lunatic’s estate is too small to bear the expense of a commission, a reference has been directed to the Master, and an order for the payment of dividends made on his report. This appeared to Lord Loughborough to be irregular; the precedent was only to be followed in cases of necessity. Eyre v. Wake, Ves. 179. In 1799 the expense of a commission was about £120. Lord Talbot admitted a defendant who had lost his memory by extreme age, to answer by guardian, the matter in demand being but small. 2 P. Wms. 110, and Lord Eldon restrained a supposed lunatic by injunction from doing certain acts, vide ante, Miss Kendrick’s case.
[501]. A Commission must not be sued out to be held in terrorem; if a person keep the Commission by him several years without executing it, he is guilty of a contempt, and the Commission will be discharged with costs. 2 Atk. 52.
An Inquisition in England is not sufficient to bind lands in Ireland; there must be an Inquisition and finding under the Great Seal of Ireland. Duchess of Chandos’ Case, 1 Sch. and Lef. 301.
[502]. A Commission of lunacy, in a proper case, will be granted on the application of a stranger. Ex parte Ogle. 15 Ves. 112. Ex parte Ward. 6 Ves. 579.