The Lord Chancellorsaid, that pursuant to the notice he gave last night, he was about to lay upon the Table a bill to amend and improve the law, or rather the proceedings in cases of lunacy, and would in a few words endeavour to lay before their Lordships the general scope of his bill. In cases where amendments like the present were proposed, it was important to consider the actual state of the law, what were the evils to be remedied, and what the nature of the remedy proposed. As to the state of the law their Lordships were aware that there were certain standing commissioners to whom petitions in lunacy cases were referred. Those commissioners were men most competent to the discharge of the duties confided to them, but their jurisdiction was limited to a distance not exceeding twenty miles from the metropolis. Beyond that distance commissions in lunacy cases were sent to persons of whom the Lord Chancellor had no knowledge, and who had little or no experience in such delicate matters, and hence sometimes arose serious mistakes, which entailed very considerable expense on the estates of the lunatics. He would now say a word as to how the expenses of those commissioners were defrayed. The commissioners were paid by fees, which were charged on the estates of the unfortunate lunatics. In the same way the Commissions 204 of Bankrupts were paid by fees out of the bankrupt's estate, until the practice was altered by the bill brought in for that purpose by his noble and learned Friend (Lord Brougham) who then held the Great Seal. The expenses in lunacy cases were very great, and pressed heavily on the estates of that unhappy class of persons. As illustrations of the pressure of those fees, he would state the amount of those received by the commissioners in a few instances. In the case of Lord Portsmouth, which he would admit was an unusual one, and where there were six commissioners, instead of the ordinary number of three, the amount paid to those six commissioners was 1,071l. In the case of Mr. Davis, where there were only three commissioners, the amount which they received in fees was 346l. 10s. In the case of Taylor it was also 346l. 10s.; and in fact in this case the fees absorbed the whole of the unfortunate man's estate. In the recent case of Mr. Gundry the fees amounted to 220l., and in another case, which occurred in the country, and where there was only one commissioner, who sat four days, the fees amounted to 75l. Such an amount of fees pressed, as he had said, very heavily on the estate of lunatics; so much so indeed, that where the estate was small the friends of the lunatic were afraid to apply to the Lord Chancellor, for they were well aware that the consequence of the lunacy commission would be to consume the estate, and the lunatic would be left without adequate protection as to person, and very little as to property. He had said, that many of those to whom commissions were directed in the country were quite inadequate to the duties thus imposed on them and it often happened that commissions were quashed for irregularity. A new commission was to be issued, and thus the expense had to be incurred again. A case of this kind occurred with respect to a person named Holmes. The commission was sent down, and as soon as it was returned it was, quashed for irregularity. Another commission was sent down, and the expense thus occasioned amounted to 5,200l., not including the fees before the master. His noble and learned Friend near him would see how absolutely necessary it was, that some remedy should be speedily applied to such evils as these. The remedy which he proposed in the bill to be laid on the Table was, to appoint two permanent commissioners, who would preside in cases of lunacy in town and also in the 205 country. Those two, who would he men of ability and distinction at the bar, would be paid, not by fees, but by fixed salaries; and then there would he a fixed and regular system applying to all cases. But this was not all. At present lunacy cases were decided by a jury of twenty-four, as there must be the assent of twelve at least to make the inquisition, and return their verdict. These twenty-four jurors acted in the nature of a grand jury. They were paid one guinea per day each for each day the inquiry lasted, and he need not observe that this item of expenditure formed a very considerable portion of the expense of lunacy commissions. In the case of Lord Portsmouth the fees to the jury amounted to 410l. 11s.; in the case of Taylor, whose estate was a very small one, to 175l. In the case of Davenport the jury fees came to 315l.; and in that of Lady Kirkpatrick to 193l. When these were added to the very large amount paid to the commissioners, their Lordships would at once perceive the ruinous effect such a trial must have on a small estate. To diminish this expense as far as possible his bill proposed to vest in the Chancellor a discretionary power to have the case tried, in certain cases, with a jury of twelve, who need not be unanimous in their finding. This measure, therefore, would appoint two men of learning and distinction at the bar, who would attend to country as well as town cases, and it would enable the Chancellor in specific cases to lessen the number of jurymen. There was another point on which be proposed a change. It was well known that under the present system after the finding of the jury and the return of the commissioners there were certain inquiries to be made at the Masters' offices, and from information which he had received on the subject he learned that sometimes a year and a half elapsed from the report of the commissioners to the appointment of a committee to take care of the person and estate of the lunatic. In one case two years were allowed to elapse before the appointment of the committee. He proposed to remedy this, that the commissioners should have power to make inquiries as to- the estate and effects of the lunatic, and such other matters as the Lord Chancellor should intrust them with, but if any difficulty should arise, the case should be referred to the Master, as at present. There was another subject on which he would say a word. There was an officer in the Court of Chancery called the Clerk 206 of the Custodies, a very old and patent office, the occupant of which received large fees. In a hill which had been brought in on a former occasion by his noble and learned Friend (Lord Brougham) he tried to abolish that office; but it was found that this could not be done till the death or resignation of its present holder. He meant to propose, however, to abolish the office, the duties of which could be well performed by the Secretary of Lunatics, and he would have the Clerk of the Custodies receive compensation out of the suitors' fund in Chancery, the amount of the compensation to be fixed by the Master of the Rolls and the Vice-Chancellor. There was one other point on which he would say a word. His noble and learned Friend (Lord Brougham) had appointed visitors of lunatics; those visitors consisted of medical men, accompanied by a barrister, and he was happy to say, that that plan had worked admirably well. He would propose to make the two commissioners visitors ex officio, with power at any time to visit by themselves, or with the ordinary visitors, and he had no doubt it would be productive of much benefit. These were the general outlines of his bill. The details he would reserve for the committee, but in the meantime he would most gladly attend to any suggestion of his noble and learned Friends, by which his object might be better worked out. The noble and learned Lord then laid the bill on the Table.
Lord Broughamsaid, he should gladly adopt some such measure as that now proposed by his noble and learned Friend. In the main he concurred with him, but he would rather reserve anything like detail to a future and more convenient stage. He was glad to know that the system of visiting had worked so well, and that the persons appointed to perform those duties had discharged them so faithfully. He had no objection to the abolition of the office of Clerk of the Custodies, but that, also, he would defer any observation upon to a future stage.
§ Lord Cottenhamwould not then discuss the details of the measure, but if he understood his noble and learned Friend rightly, that his two commissioners were to be alike for town and country, and were to range all over England, he thought their jurisdiction was too extensive, and that it would be impossible they could perform the duties required of them, He had hoped rather, that his noble and 207 learned Friend would have adopted the plan of founding local jurisdictions for general purposes, and transferring to those jurisdictions, as he had proposed the inquiries under country commissioners. With respect to taking away the inquiries into the estate of the lunatic, and the appointment of the committees from the Master's office, he very much doubted its propriety. Few inquiries were more important, or more peculiarly delicate, than those relating to lunatics; and unless some very good reason were given he could not assent to depriving of their jurisdiction those who had always been in the habit of exercising it. As to the abolition of the office of Clerk of the Custodies, that was desirable, but he could not consent, nor did he see how their Lordships could consent to the payment of lunacy commission out of the fee fund of the Court of Chancery. The suitors fund arose from suits in Chancery, and he did not see how their Lordships could deprive the suitors of any part of that fund for the purpose of making up the deficiency of fees in lunacy. It was not just, nor was he aware, that the suitors' fund could very well bear it.
The Lord Chancellorobserved, that his noble and learned Friend seemed to think that the control of lunatics' affairs should not be taken from the Masters in Chancery, as he feared that such an arrangement would be injurious to lunatics, as the affairs would not be under the revision of the Court of Chancery; but his noble and learned Friend seemed to forget that the proceedings of the commissioners would be subject to revision, in the same manner as those of the Masters, by the Lord Chancellor. With respect to the resources from whence the remuneration was to be de rived, he would remind his noble and learned Friend, that the suitors' fund in Chancery was as much from the accumulations from the estates of lunatics as from other persons, suitors in that court. He thought, that a fund so created might be charged with the expenses of this plan, by which the estates of these unhappy per sons would be relieved from heavy charges to which they were now liable.
§ Lord Cottenhamsaid, that so far as the estates of lunatics contributed, he had no objection; but to go beyond that point he considered unjust.
Lord Broughambegged to ask his noble and learned Friend, what greater harm there was in taking a sum from the general suitors fund, and applying it to purposes 208 in lunacy, than in taking it, as was every day done, from one suit in Chancery, and applying it to the purposes of another?
Lord Campbellwished to ask if the two commissioners were to sit together or separately. He thought one enough. If two were to sit it would add to the expense.
The Lord Chancellor:That could not be, since the commissioners would be paid by salaries, and not by fees. Generally speaking, he proposed, that only one commissioner should sit, but in cases of great importance both would sit.
The Lord ChancellorIn that case there was a provision in the bill to enable the Chancellor to have another commissioner. This was a power which had always been exercised by the Chancellor in commissions of lunacy, and in the case of Lord Portsmouth, no less than six were appointed, over whom Mr. Baron Hullock, just before he was made a Judge, presided.