REBECCA OWINGS' CASE.

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 protection 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 inqui-
rendo 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 withholding or suspending
it, he may do so. The object of the Chancellor's authority in
matters of lunacy is to protect and take care of citizens, who are
intellectually unfortunate; hence, it has been always so exercised
as most effectually to attain that object (f) 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 recognise 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.(g)

I am of opinion, that this may be considered as one of those
instances. The pension given to Rebecca by her father is not more
than sufficient for her comfortable maintenance; there is none to
spare. It should certainly not be involved in any expense that
can be avoided. The court is now only called on to enforce its
payment and application; which may be as safely done now as
after an inquisition has been taken; and certainly with more
advantage and economy to Rebecca. I shall, therefore, proceed
without requiring Rebecca to be formally declared a lunatic, and a
committee of her person and estate to be appointed.

It is stated and admitted, that the plaintiff Rebecca is, in fact,
so far insane as to be incapable of managing her property. Her
late parents have made a provision for her maintenance. But to
order the property they gave her to be paid into her own hands
would not be extending to her proper and adequate relief and pro-

(f) JEx Parte Tomlinson, 1 Ves. & Bea. 57; Brodie v. Barry, 2 Ves, & B. 36.
(f) Sheldon v. Aland, 8 P, Will. 111, note; Lord Donegal's case, 2 Ves. 408; Ma-
chin v. Salkeld, Dick. 634; Bird v. Lefevre, 4 Bro. C. C. 100; Eyre v. Wake, 4 Ves.
795; Exparte Cranmer, 12 Ves. 446; Warteaby v. Wartoaby, Jac. Rep. 877; l Mont
Dig. 391 Shelf. Lun. & Idiots, 436.