The Express.
London, England, 1847-05-13 00:00:00

lath 'lnternam'''.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.
lithos' at Niss .—Betore Mr. Jostles Erie sod a cesemm Jury.
COINING V. INCE ♦ND °THIEL—AVOIDANCE OE AN
AGREEMENT ENTERED INTO BY AN ALLEGED LUNATIC
TO PROCURE A STAY OP PROCEEDINGS UNDER A CON-

mission or Lv;;CX.—On the 12 h;116; last the
plain-
tiff, who is an old lady far advanced in life, was placed in a
lunatic asylum at the instance of the defendants, who are her
two daughters, and their husbands. A commission of lunacy
was issued on the 29th of July, and proceedings in execution
of it were had before Mr. Barlow, partly in the month of
August and partly in the month of September. Before the
case in opposition to tho alleged insanity had been brought
to a clan, an arrangement was entered into, on the propo-
sition of the counsel in support of the commission, between
the plaintiff, by the advice of her counsel, and with the
knowledge of the commissioner and the defendants. The
object of the arrangement was to relieve the former from
any apprehensions as to her personal liberty, and the latter
from misgivings as to the ultimate devolution Ma psi efthe
plaintiff's property, which is considerable. The amespement
and all the proceedings were submitted to the LinniChwaseller
by the commissioner, and his lordaltip allowed the jury to be
discharged without giving a verdict, and so empended the'
return to the comoresion. In pursuance of the
and to give it effect, certain title deeds of the woo
delivered up. Afterwards, however, the p deminadad
them back, and brought an action of troves to reovem thus
from the gentionea with whom they had bsia depadloi.
They, however al they had no interest in the amen op.
plied to the swirl lbw a rule under the Llatopluais, flat, 17
which the poem really interested were sow twig* helm'
the court on on keno whikh was framed to try the gawk=
whitlow the plehtA notwithstanding the arreneme t. wee
net wedded le the Mediae and uncontrolled of
the hats dee& Those fans wars admitted, and woe drown
=oho rdenilre alemsay that she had been day by day
tom the Nylon to the place where the inquiry was
held ; that she poised the evening between the proposal for
an aneeipment and the discharge of the jury on the next
m anise house of a friend on his undertaking to produce
he7B;ldrather irritation at being detained in the asylum had
bemuse hat airs appeared to him ready to make any sacrifice
citospaft helosswe her liberty. Mr. Cockburn, Q. C. with
wee Iris Hence, contended that these facts showed
the phial to bare consented to this arrangement under
abouestaacoe that did not constitute a flee and voluntary
toneent ; that bat for the dread of balsa oak areipned
an asylum& as mew would have mO k; ead that it
was k hes lavelidefed by the hoes sad reetreht soder
whisk it had bola made.—Mr. Wain% Q.C. with whoa
was Ir. Yrahly, hr the delimitate, iiMd that the sly
quail= was ate of law for the eserl, Meetly, obsther the
plaintiff had in hat rotated kb the epeesolas ; that=
had been no duress Is bet, its the widow only
legal imprhonmeat; dualism wens hum in law, blame
the law of dunes applied say to the MIN Of deeds areated
or °beaked by saashetieed reetralat ad Wimbledon, and
not to them hubbub they had ben easseled or l
as is hie hisses b! the advise et ailleasy:=
sad an gra smeßinsissik. wih lkses.
_ -

Iffr. holies li. wee d spike OM when the plaintiff
ezended this arum* she lad been, in eenemg, of
law a lanatis emthed in an asylum • end eited a mange
from " Vines.% Abridgment," to the Mace OM if a man law-
fully in rises metes an agreement asinet Ns will, he say
avottl. aerosol of imam therefore,
that the lemseC cenned euritht Ss addritileJnry se to
wskotbat the agreement had Mee made against the will of
the phdatif.

Mr. Watson then submitted to the jury that the preeau-
dons which had been taken before this arrangement had
been entered into, extending even to theproeunng the went
of the Lord Chancellor, showed, at all events, that the agree-
ment was one which, under the circumstances, it was not
improper for the plaintiff to enter into. Then what were its
terms 1 She was to enjoy her property for her life, with
power of appointment over one-third of it, the other two-
thirds to be divided equally between her daughters at her
death. For those daughters she was bound to provide.
Looking, then, at the protection which the plaintiff had
enjoyed, and the equitable provisions of the deed, the jury
would not hold that it had not been made with her free
consent.
Mr. Justice Bale repeated the opinions be had already ex-
pressed, and left it to the jury to say whether the consent of
the plaintiff to the agreement, which formed Cis subject of
the present inquiry, bad been given by her free will, or bad
been obtained by means of the restraint under which she was
at the time it had been given. If by the latter, thin their
verdict ought to be for the plaintiff. The jury, after delibe-
rating for a few minutes. returned a verdict fur the plaintiff.