COLEGATE D. OWINGS' CASE.—1 BLAND. 357

estate, and to apply the whole to their use; although he recovers
not his memory, but continues non compos mentis. Beverley's
Case, 4 Co. 127."

But we are told, that although the lunatic himself may be fettered
by this maxim, yet there is a mode in which he may obtain redress;
and that his heirs and personal representatives are not bound by
this maxim. A commission of lunacy may be taken out, he may
be declared a lunatic, and a committee appointed to take charge
of his person and estate: and such committee may sue and have
any deed, made by the lunatic, during his insanity, vacated for
his benefit. But why this circuity? The issue joined between the
committee of the lunatic and his grantee must be exactly the same,
and it must be met by precisely the same proof as if the lunatic
himself had been the party. But even this circuitous mode of re-
dress, is often lame, tardy, or wholly inefficient. It is, however,
better than none at all.

But if a lunatic, in the condition of having been defrauded of
his property, should recover his reason, then there is an end even
of this circuitous remedy. He is discharged from the government
and protection of his committee, and left to regain his property as
*he can; taking care, however, that he does not allege his
own former insanity as a ground for vacating any contract 381
by which he may have been defrauded of it. Hence as regards
his property, the recovery of his reason, instead of being a bless-
ing, may be his greatest misfortune; for he may, notwithstanding
he is in fact the owner of a large estate, be by the operation of
this maxim, fixed in penury during the remainder of his days.
The granting of a commission of lunacy it is said, is a matter not
of right but of sound discretion under all circumstances. 1 Coll.
Idiots, 67; Rebecca Owings' Case, ante, 290. But if this maxim
prevails it should be held to be a matter of right, since it may be
often indispensably necessary as the only means by which a lunatic
can obtain justice.

The heirs and personal representatives of the lunatic are, how-
ever, not restrained by this maxim. They may obtain the redress
which has been denied to him. The heir may recover the im-
perishable realty; but of whom is re-imburseinent to be obtained
for the years of waste and devastation that may have been com-
mitted upon it during the life of the lunatic ? The only remedy
against the wrong-doer, in its best form, is a mere personal claim
for an account of the rents and profits; but he may be a beggar.
The administrator of the lunatic may reclaim his personal prop-
erty itself, if to be found; or if not, he may sue for its value, if
the wrong-doer can be found; and recover from him its full value,
if he should be worth as much. He who delays to pay what is
due, pays less than is due; but suspended and indefinitely deferred
justice is a tantalizing pernicious mockery. It appears to be most