A LUNATIC AS PLAINTIFF.

Marlborough Express, Volume XXIX, Issue 183, 26 July 1893, Page 4

A LUNATIC AS PLAINTIFF.

+ A lunatic cannot begin an aation m the Supreme Court, but if a man begins an action, and afterwards becomes non compos mentis, can the proceedings ba continued m his name ? This waß the legal conundrum propounded by Mr Hayes before Mr Justice A'Beokett at Melbourne, m the important aotion of Macpherson v. Kerr. During the 11 boom " period the plaintiff, Duncan Macpherson, who i 3 now residing m Sootland, soli a large area of land, known as the Moroington Estate, to the husband of the defendam, Mrs Margaret Graca Kerr, for about £100,000. Mr Karr afterwards died and after about £40,000 had been paid his wife refused to complete the contract, on the ground that hor late husband was mentally incapable when it was made. The action was brought to recover the balance of ths purchase money. Mr Hayes, for the defendant, now applied that the aotion might be stayed, as the plaintiff also was found to hav9 become mad. It appeared that a commission had gone to England for the examination of the plaintiff, and advices were now reetived that ha was mentally unfit to give evidence, and it was very nnlikdy thst he ever would be lit. Mr Isaacs, for the plaintiff, indignantly denied that hia client was a lunatic. Mr Macpherson was over 70 years of age, suffered severely from rheumatism and a waak heart, was weak in/mind and body, and might even , be said to be a senile — but he was not a lunatic. Mr Justice A' Beckett eaid the ( point of law involved was much too delicate as well as important to be dealt with sum , manly, and he adjourned the summons till , Augußt 1, refusing a stay of pr.ceediDg3 m the meantime. :