and lunatic to traverse the inquisition, so that the law on this point remains as it was settled in re Cumming.* Lord Hardwicket and Lord Thurlow were of opinion that the traverse was not matter of right; but Lord Rosslyn. § Lord Eldon,|| Lord Cottenham, Lord Truro** held that the traverse was a matter of right. In re Cumming the question came before Lord St. Leonards and the Lords Justices Knight Bruce and Lord Cranworth in full court, and they were unanimously of opinion that the traverse was a matter of right, subject to such a control over the matter by the Court as may be necessary for the protection of the person and estate of the alleged lunatic; as, for instance, the ascertaining that the application is bonâ fide, and that the alleged lunatic, where he is the person applying, is competent to judge of what he is doing, and is really desirous that the traverse should issue. It was stated in this case that there did not appear to be any instance in which the traverse had been refused when applied for by the lunatic himself. Both Lord Lyndhurst++ and Lord Campbell‡‡ were of opinion that the traverse should not be allowed as of right, and Lord Truro proposed to meet the point by having the question of lunacy, when disputed, tried in the first instance before the judge at the assizes. But, of course, in this latter case there would be the right to grant a new trial if, in the opinion of the judge before whom the issue was tried, or in the opinion of the Lord Chancellor, there were grounds for a new trial. Lord Truro stated that, during the last forty years there had not been a single instance of the verdict upon the trial of the traverse being contrary to the verdict upon the inquisition.§§ It is provided by § 152 that when any person has been found of unsound mind by inquisition, but the question of unsoundness of mind is disputed, and liberty to traverse has been applied for, and whether granted or not, and it appears to the Lord Chancellor to be for the lunatic's benefit, and also expedient that the inquisition should be superseded on terms and conditions, and subject to an arrangement respecting the lunatic's estate, he may, upon the consent of the lunatic and of the person entitled or claiming to traverse, and of such persons, if any, whose consent he may deem necessary, order the inquisition to be superseded on such terms and conditions to be fulfilled by the lunatic or such other person, and subject to such arrangement respecting the lunatic's estate, as he may under the circumstances of the case think proper, and may by the same or any other order direct the lunatic and any other persons, being consenting parties to the arrangement, to do such acts as may seem necessary or proper for securing the fulfilment of such terms and conditions and the completion of such arrangement. By § 153 the Lord Chancellor, with the advice and assistance of the + Ex parte Roberts, 3 Atk. 5. In re Fust, 1 Cox, 418. * De Gex, M. and G. 537. ++ 120 Hansard, 358. ** 1 De Gex, M. and G. 541, 551. §§ 120 Hansard, 364. Lords Justices, is empowered to make general orders for carrying into effect the provisions of the act, and regulating the form and mode of proceeding and the practice in lunacy. Under this provision general orders, 56 in number, were issued on the 7th November, 1853, whereby the previous general orders of the 27th October, 1842, and 15th April, 1844, are discharged. Orders 7-10 regulate the notice to be given to an alleged lunatic of the petition for inquiry; and he may within seven days after such notice demand that the inquiry be had before a jury. By other orders the jurisdiction of the Masters in Lunacy is extended; and for the purpose of saving repetition in orders in lunacy that may from time to time be made, of directions usually inserted therein, many of such usual directions are embodied in the new general orders, 34 to 56. A glance at the 153 sections of the New Lunacy Regulation Act, and the 56 General Orders issued under its authority, would show that they effect many and valuable improvements both in the law and the practice, and we feel bound to express our sense of the great praise which is due to Lord St. Leonards for the valuable improvements he has been able to effect in this branch of the law. The dispensing with the special commission in each case, and the jury in certain cases, the abolition of the grant, and the enlarged jurisdiction of the Masters, considerably reduces the expense of proceedings; the abolition of nearly all fees, and the substitution of a graduated percentage upon the incomes of lunatics, is also a great relief to small estates; and as regards the amount of percentage paid on the large incomes, it will practically be an ad valorem payment, not for the administration of justice, but for administering the lunatic's property. The extension of the Lord Chancellor's power of dealing with the lunatic's real estate, as well as his property generally, is also highly important, and many other minor changes are valuable; but at the same time we think that the practice may be simplified to a much greater extent, and the expense so reduced as to allow the property of every case of a chronic and incurable lunatic, who has property in his own right, and is not merely dependent upon eleemosynary support of relatives or friends, to be brought within the jurisdiction of the Lord Chancellor, and under his authority, so that his property may be legally administered for his benefit. We think something similar to Lord Lyndhurst's bill would be a decided improvement on the recent act. Instead of reports requiring an order to give it operation, orders would be made at once, which would not only lead to a further saving of expense, but also to increased expedi tion in the despatch of business. There would be the right of appeal whenever it was desired. The matters requiring the decision of the Master or the Judge are generally not points of law, they are administrative matters, no doubt involving points of delicacy and importance; but all that is necessary is to obtain the consideration by a person competent experience and authority, and his direction for carrying into of The friends of lunatics have often been most reluctant to resort to legal proceedings, owing to the painful exposure of a public exhibition of their relative before a jury. The privacy with which an ordinary inquiry is now conducted may well be included among the great benefits conferred by this Act. effect, according to law and the rules of the court, the wishes and suggestions of the family and friends of a lunatic, with regard to his care and the management of his property. the We subjoin the principal clauses of Lord Lyndhurst's bill: SECT. I.-After inquisition found, it shall be lawful for the Masters in Lunacy to conduct all such inquiries, as to the care, custody, and management of the person and property, and to make such orders relating thereto, and for payment of money into court, or for sale or mortgage of real or personal estates, or for leases of real estate, and generally to make such orders, and give such directions in relation to the persons and properties of lunatics, as may from time to time seem to such Masters necessary and proper; and for purposes aforesaid the Masters shall have (subject to the restrictions and regulations herein provided) the same jurisdiction, authority, and discretion, and the same power to make orders, and otherwise to act in and about the matter, as the Lord Chancellor or the Masters in Lunacy could have exercised or done in relation thereto, according to the ordinary practice of the Lord Chancellor in lunacy: Provided always, that it shall be lawful for the Lord Chancellor, if he shall see fit, by order, to direct that the matter of any person found lunatic by inquisition shall be excepted from the provisions of this Act, so far as they give the said Masters the same jurisdiction, authority, and discretion as the Lord Chancellor, and the same power to make orders, and otherwise to act in and about such matter, and that thereupon the proceedings relating to such matter shall be conducted according to the ordinary practice in matters in lunacy before the passing of this Act. SECT. II. No order of the Masters under this Act shall require confirmation, except when such order is made subject to the opinion of the court, or is a special report, as hereinafter provided, but every such order shall have the same authority and effect, and shall be binding on the same persons, companies, and bodies, and may be enforced by the same, or any such process, as if the same had been made by the Lord Chancellor, or as may be directed by any general orders to be made in that behalf as hereinafter directed. SECT. III.-The Masters shall have power, if they think fit, to make a special report in any matter in which they shall proceed under the authority of this Act, or upon any question or matter arising in the proceedings thereupon, or to make any order, subject to the opinion of the court, to the intent that the opinion of the court may be taken on the subject of such order, and such special report or order shall be brought before the Lord Chancellor upon motion; and on the hearing, such report or order respectively of the Master shall be confirmed, discharged, or varied, or such directions shall be given as to the Lord Chancellor may seem just. SECT. V.-An appeal shall lie to the Lord Chancellor, upon motion, from or against all orders, directions, and other proceedings of or before the Masters under this Act; provided that such appeal shall be made within fourteen days from the time when such order, direction, or other proceeding shall be made or taken, or such further time as the Masters shall by order made in the matter allow. 126 IMPORTANT MEDICO-LEGAL TRIAL-THE PLEA OF INSANITY. ROBERT HANCOCK (41, N) was indicted for the murder of his wife, at Northam, in August last, and was tried at the Winter Assizes, Dec. 15, 1855. The prisoner, on appearing at the bar, was visibly affected, and on the charge being read, sobbed bitterly, and was scarcely able to utter "Not Guilty." The prisoner is a mild-looking man, of the labouring class. He is about 40 years of age, and has light hair and whiskers. He was attired in a fustian jacket and dark trowsers. Throughout the trial, he was often affected to tears, and his restless eye and perturbed manner showed the anxious feelings which were working within him. Mr. Karslake and Mr. Bere prosecuted; and Mr. Cox defended the prisoner. Mr. KARSLAKE, addressing the jury, said the investigation upon which they were about to enter was one which demanded their very serious attention. The charge against the prisoner at the bar was no less a charge than that of murder upon the person of his wife. He (the learned counsel) was glad that they (the jury) had been chosen from a part of the county far removed from that in which the occurrence took place, because he would not have them brought into the jury-box in any way prejudiced by anything they had heard outside this court; and if any of them had preconceived, or prejudged, he hoped they would dismiss all such prejudices from their minds, and listen only to the evidence which would be laid before them. Having said this much, he thought he would best discharge his duty by detailing the particular acts and particular circumstances which took place prior to the decease of the unfortu nate woman as to whose death it was their duty to inquire. Robert Hancock, the prisoner, had been married to his wife more than twenty years. There were two children by the marriage, but neither of the children were living with Hancock at the time of the death of the wife. He and his wife were living together at a small cottage at Northam, near Appledore, a town or village situated upon the sea, at the mouth of the estuaries of the rivers Torridge and Taw. He believed that for about seventeen years the prisoner and his wife had been living at Northam, and during the greater part of that time they lived in peace and harmony, and behaved to each other as man and wife ought to do. But for some little time before the dreadful occurrence, which took place on the 1st of August last, bickerings and quarrels existed between man and wife, the result, in a great measure, of a jealous feeling entertained by the prisoner toward his wife, which was constantly showing itself in observations, revilings, and quarrels which took place. He (the learned counsel) did not know whether the prisoner had any cause of jealousy or not, but certain it was, from many observations they would hear detailed, that he had frequently charged her with having been too intimate with a man named Punchard, and she, he regretted to say, did not give that contradiction to the charge which was made against her which she ought, but rather fostered the charge, and represented herself, at all events, as having been intimate with Punchard. At home this was a constant cause of irritation, and a constant quarrel; and at last, on the 1st of August, that dreadful occurrence took place which formed the subject, or rather, which had led to the investigation which they were now to enter upon. It seemed-and without going into the quarrels specifically, he would take up the case as regarded the facts of it, upon the 1st of August, the day on which the unfortunate woman was killed,-that about three o'clock in the afternoon of that day, the prisoner was with his wife in the house of a woman named Hele, and while there, one of those violent quarrels took place between them, and expressions were used by the prisoner towards his wife which he would not repeat, but leave to the witness Hele. The prisoner was one of the labouring class, and his wife also had been in the habit of labouring in the fields and during what was called the lime season, the time of year at which vessels from the coast of Wales came to Appledore with lime, both of them were frequently in the habit of working, heaving limestone, that was, discharging it from the vessels. The quarrel which, as he told them, took place on the afternoon of Wednesday, the 1st of August, appeared to have been to a certain extent, indeed very considerably, quieted up between the man and wife, and on the evening of that day they both proceeded to Appledore, for the purpose of getting a job at lime heaving. It appeared that when they got there, there were a sufficient number of persons already engaged, and in consequence they could not obtain any work upon that occasion. It appeared that the prisoner and his wife came home together as far as Northam. They came home in company, and, as witnesses who would be called before them would tell them, apparently at that time on good terms, the prisoner doing some little act of civility to his wife, in carrying a bundle of rough clothes which she had taken with her to put on in prospect of getting work at lime heaving. They were then in company, and they were never seen together again; and the wife was never seen alive after that time. About nine o'clock on the same evening, the prisoner was seen to light his pipe at the house of a woman named Jane Saltern, at Northam, and at eleven o'clock he was seen going in the direction from his house, in a lane called Back Lane, in the village of Northam. The prisoner was not seen again till two days afterwards. On the morning of the following day, Thursday, the 2nd of August, some suspicions being entertained, in consequence of a child which had been taken in to nurse being heard to cry in the house of the prisoner, the woman, Jane Saltern, opened the up-stair room in the house, and she there found upon the bed the body of Phillipa Hancock, dead. In company with others, examination was made of the person of Phillipa Hancock, and very shortly afterwards, it was found that beyond all doubt death was caused by a most severe blow inflicted upon the left temple and the throat being cut. The pillow and bedclothes were covered with blood. The hammer by which this deed was committed was lying upon the pillow, and there could be no question whatever in this case that the wounds which appeared on the unfortunate woman's person were not self-inflicted, but feloniously inflicted upon her. Search was made for the prisoner, who was not in the house, and he was not found during the next day, but on the morning of the following day, Friday, the 3rd of August, he was seen in a tallet, which the jury would know was a loft above a stable. He went from there, and went across some fields, and afterwards gave himself up to a man named Dennis, his brother-in-law, who was seeking for him in the village of Appledore. He (the learned counsel) had told them the facts which would be presented before them in this case by witnesses, and it would be material for them to listen attentively to these facts, because, in all probability, they would raise a very strong presumption that the hand which committed the act upon the person of Phillipa Hancock was the hand of the prisoner at the bar, and the more so when he told them that he gave up a razor, which, no doubt, was such an instrument as caused the wound in the throat, to Dennis and the constable. There was some blood upon the hammer found on the pillow, and blood upon the blade of the razor. He (the learned Counsel) had stated to them what would be spoken to by witnesses who had knowledge of the facts of the case, and probably it would be better that he should not detain them by statements made by the prisoner subsequently, as they would be laid before them by the witnesses to whom they were made. They would find by these statements the fullest admission of the fact that by his hand that murder was committed, and that it was committed first by |