REBECCA OWINGS' CASE.—1 BLAND. 275

however, unwarranted, in that sense, by any adjudged case what-
ever. But according to the loose proceedings of the Land Office,
it seems, that a warrant of resurvey was obtained by his next
friend for the benefit of one who was then non compos mentis,
although not found to be so by inquisition. Land H. A. 150. A
lunatic, that is, one who has been found and returned to be non
compos mentis, can only sue by his committee. 2 Mad. Chan. 175;
1 Hurt: Pra. Chaw. 762. Rebecca has not been judicially declared
ajuuatic; and consequently she can have no committee by whom
to institute any suit.

It follows, therefore, that if there are no other principles upon
which Cromwell and wife may be associated in this suit with Re-
becca, no relief can be granted upon this bill as it now stands, but
it must be amended or dismissed. The King of Spain v. Machado,
4 Russ. 225.

Generally and technically speaking, those only are called luna-
tics who have been so found and returned. Without an inquest
and return thereon, no one can be judicially treated as a lunatic,
and be debarred of his liberty, or have the management of his
property taken from him. The power to divest a citizen of his
personal freedom and of his property is one of a most extraor-
dinary and delicate nature; and should, therefore, never be exer-
cised without observing every precaution required by the law.
But, although this Court will, in no case, undertake to go all
lengths; * and to confine or dispose of the person of any
one, as a lunatic, until he has, upon solemn inquisition, been
found to be non compos mentis; yet it will grant relief and protec-
tion to such persons without and previous to their being adjudged
to be non compos. On a proper application, the granting of a writ
de lunatico inquirendo is generally a matter of course; but still it
is discretionary. If the Chancellor sees, that the interests of the
subject of it, may be promoted, or his health benefited by with-
holding or suspending it, he may do so. The object of the Chan-
cellor's authority in matters of lunacy is to protect and take care
of citizens, who are intellectually unfortunate; hence, it has been
alwajs so exercised as most effectually to attain that object. Ex
parte Tomlinson, 1 Ves. & Beu. 57; Brodie v. Barry, 2 Ves. & B.
36. If the execution of a commission of lunacy would in all
probability have a tendency to confirm the lunatic in his insanity;
or if his estate or income is too small to defray the expense of its
execution; or if the object in view may be attained as safely and
as fully in all respects without it; the execution of the inquisition
may be suspended or dispensed with altogether. In short, there

are many instances in which the Court will recognize and act upon
the fact, that a person is in a partial or complete state of insanity,
without requiring that fact to be established by a return to a writ
de lunatico inquirendo. Sheldon v. Aland, 3 P. Will. 111, note;