and custody of his person and estate may be granted to them upon their giving the usual security; and that it may be referred back to the Master to inquire into the nature and amount of the lunatic's property, and to settle a proper annual sum to be allowed thereout for his maintenance and support; and it is usually further prayed, that the committees may be at liberty out of the lunatic's property to pay their costs of the inquiry before the Master, and of the application to the Court; and that such costs may be taxed and allowed to the committees on passing their accounts before the Master.

If any persons are dissatisfied with, or object to, the committees appointed by the Master, they may present a petition to the Lord Chancellor, praying that the Master's report may not be confirmed, or that other persons may be appointed committees, or that the Master may be directed to review his report. And the Court, upon hearing such petitions, will either decide the matter at once, or refer it back to the Master to review his report generally, or to take the particular objections of the parties into consideration (h).

On the petition of the heir-at-law of the lunatic against the confirmation of the Master's report appointing committees of the estates, it was referred back to the Master to review his report as to the approval of such committees; and in so doing the Master was directed to take into consideration the objection to the proposed committees, on account of their respective distances from the estates of the lunatic, and their being recommended by his mother, who had other children by the same father born before marriage; and the objection to the committee proposed by the heir, on account of his connection with the solicitor of the heir-at-law, and his situation as receiver to numerous estates under the management of the Court of Chancery (i).

In some cases, where the lunatic's property is very small, the Court will, on application, supported by satisfactory evidence, appoint committees without the usual reference to (h) See forms of such petitions in the Appendix. (i) In re Miles, 17 Jan. 1831.

the Master. An application was made by the sister of a lunatic and her husband, that she might be appointed committee of the lunatic's person and estate; and that, to save expense, the appointment might be made by the Court in the first instance, without a reference to the Master. It appeared by affidavit, that the lunatic's fortune consisted of a messuage of the yearly value of 25l., of 350l. stock in the 31. per cent. Consols, and of household furniture and other effects, and debts due to him, to the amount of 901. more. The Lord Chancellor granted the application (k).

In another case, where it was stated that the whole of the property of the lunatic was totally inadequate to defray the expense of the care and maintenance of the lunatic and her children, and that it was therefore desirable that the usual proceedings and inquiries relating to the property and the appointment of the committees might be dispensed with; it was ordered that the custody of the lunatic should be granted to the petitioner on his giving the usual security to account, and that the dividends of the stock belonging to the lunatic should be paid to the committee of the estate on his producing the grant thereof, and applied in the maintenance of the lunatic (1).

On the death of one of the committees of a lunatic, where his property was very small, a new committee was appointed without the usual reference to the Master, and the old maintenance ordered to be continued (m).

Where a person has been found a lunatic or of unsound mind, by an inquisition taken in Ireland, and a transcript of it has been transmitted to the Court of Chancery in England, committees of the estate in England may be appointed without any inquisition taken there. Thus, where it appeared by a petition, that, by an inquisition taken on a commission issued under the Great Seal of Ireland, a party had been found of unsound mind, and incapable of managing his own affairs; that the said lunatic was resident in Ireland, and possessed of a freehold and leasehold estate in Lincoln

(k) Ex parte Farrow, In re Adams, 1 Russ. & Mylne, 112.

(1) In re Morris, 6 May, 1826.

(m) Ex parte Pickard, 3 Ves. & Bea. 127; In re Lacy, April, 1808.

shire, but that no commission of lunacy had issued against the party in England; and that a transcript of the record of the inquisition in Ireland had been, by order of the Lord Chancellor of Ireland, transmitted to the Chancery of Great Britain, and duly entered of record in pursuance of the Act 9 Geo. 4, c. 78, s. 3 (n)—It was referred to the Master to inquire and certify who were the most fit persons to be appointed committees of the lunatic's estate mentioned in the petition, or elsewhere in Great Britain (o).

On the confirmation of the Master's report, approving of committees, it was ordered that the care and management of the lunatic's estate in Lincolnshire and elsewhere in Great Britain should be granted to the petitioner, on his giving security; and a reference as to maintenance was directed at the same time (p).

It appears that in one case, where a person who had been found a lunatic petitioned to supersede the commission, on the ground that he enjoyed perfect and constant sanity of mind, the commission was not superseded, but the party was permitted to have the care and management of his estates for several years; and upon his again becoming disordered in his senses, a committee was appointed of his person and estate (q).

The Chancellor being himself a stranger to the private connections of individuals, allows those who are concerned in prosecuting the commission, or are connected with the lunatic by the ties of consanguinity, or have a vested or presumptive interest in his property, to propose committees before the Master; and they are generally reimbursed their expenses out of the estate.

A caveat may be entered in the office of the Secretary of lunatics against the appointment of committees: and then the Chancellor will not pronounce an order, unless notice has

(n) This statute was repealed by statute 11 Geo. 4 & 1 Will. 4, c. 65, but re-enacted by the 41st section of the latter act. See ante, pp. 21, 22.

(0) In re Newport, 22 Dec. 1828. (p) In re Newport, 21 Feb. 1829. (q) Ex parte Fermor, In re Errington, Jac. Rep. 404.

been given to the solicitor or party by whom or on whose behalf the caveat was entered, of the hearing of the petition (r).

In a case where a petition for the appointment of committees of the person and estate of a lunatic had been presented, and a caveat had been entered against such appointment, an order was made, on the petition of the co-heiresses and three of the next of kin of the lunatic, that they should be at liberty to carry in proposals before the Master for the appointment of the committees of the person and estate, and that they should have notice of all other proposals to be carried into the Master's office, and the proceedings to be had thereon for that purpose (s).

The Master is sometimes directed to make a separate report as to the committee of the person and estate (t). In case the Master has approved of improper persons as committees, the Lord Chancellor, on application, will direct him to review his report (u), or will appoint others, without requiring the Master to review his report (v).

An appeal against an appointment of a committee by the Lord Chancellor, may be made to the King in council (w). But the previous proceedings on the commission, to inquire whether or no the party be non compos, are on the law side of the Court of Chancery, and can be only redressed, if erroneous, by writ of error in the regular course of law (x).

The power of the Chancellor to appoint committees cannot be controlled by a testamentary devise of the custody; except in the case of a father appointing a guardian to his child, a non compos under the age of twenty-one years, until he attain that age (y).

When two or more persons are appointed committees,

(r) In re Galpine, Nov. 1808. (s) In re Howell, Aug. 1829. (t) In re Weatherell, July, 1808. (u) In re Hardy, Aug. 1808; Ex parte Fermor, In re Errington, Jac. Rep. 405.

(v) Ex parte Le Heup, 18 Ves.

221.

(w) Pitt's case, 3 P. Wms. 108; Rochfort v. Earl of Ely, 1 Bro. P. C. 450, Toml. ed.

(x) 3 Bl. Comm. 427, ante, p. 19. (y) Ludlow's case, 2 P. Wms. 636.

and one of them dies, the grant being joint, and a mere authority without any interest, the right to the custody of the lunatic's estate will determine; and it is necessary to obtain an order for a new appointment, which contains a direction to inquire who are then the heir-at-law and next of kin of the lunatic (~).

SECTION II.

Of the Committee of the Person.

THE committees of the person of a non compos are generally selected from his next of kin, not being his heir-atlaw. Attempts, however, were formerly made to exclude the next of kin, on the same principle of interest which formerly excluded the heirs-at-law (a).

Where two of the next of kin of a lunatic preferred a petition to be appointed committees of her person, and it was objected, that, as they would be entitled upon her death to a distributive share of the personal estate, whose value might exceed that of the land, they had an interest in her dying; or, at least, supposing the personal estate likely to increase during her life, it would be for their advantage that she should remain for ever incapable of making a will. Lord Chancellor King observed, it was true, where the party seeking the custody had been heirat-law, or next entitled to the real estate upon the lunatic's death, an objection had prevailed upon that ground, though to an extent much more considerable formerly than of late years; but that a person was next of kin, so as to be entitled to a share of the personal estate, was not an objection, nor did he remember it to have ever prevailed as such; for

(z) Ex parte Lyne, Cases tempo- 583. See Jac. Rep. 593. re Talbot, 143; Anon. 2 Eq. Cas. Abr. (a) Neal's case, 2 P. Wms. 544.