IDIOCY (in law). A total lack of reasoning powers, or of those intellectual faculties by which man is peculiarly distinguished. Its legal conse quences, so far as contract and tort obligations as well as criminal responsibility are concerned, are the same as those of insanity (q.v.). The term is limited to those who have had no understanding from birth. although some courts have declared that it is properly applica ble to those who have become totally imbecile sickness or other canses, as well as to con genital fools. In case of one who has never possessed a glimmer of reason. the law presumes that he will never attain any. Hence the cus tody of his person and of his lands formerly vested in the lord of the fee or of the manor. Because of the abase of this power. Parliament transferred the wardship of idiots to the King, by statute of 17 Ed. IL. e. 9. In this country the care of their persons and property is pro vided for by statute or safeguarded by consti tutional provisions. For example. the present Constitution of New York vests the care of idiots ie the State Board of Charities, and ma in the ClIoniti44ion of Lunacy. It was laid down by an ci•nt English upon law that a man who is born blind, 'leaf. and dumb can have no un
and hence cannot make a valid con tract. gift, or grant. This doctrine had its origin in a misconception of certain texts of the civil law, which declared that one who was deaf or dumb could not he a party to a stipulatio. that is. a contract which was entered into by an oral question and answer, in certain formal words. It is quite clear that a dumb person could not be a party to this formal contract, for he could not ask the question nor speak the response. Deafness also incapacitated one for such ol con tract, by preventing his hearing the or the answer. But the civil law 1111_4' counte nanced the presumption that deaf and dumb person was mentally incapable of entering into a consensual contract. In modern English law the presumption is only prima and may be repelled by evidence, that the particular per son ‘N hose competency is brought into question does liossess sufficient intelligence to rank as one of sound mind. Consult: the Commentaries oil Illackstoole and Dent ; Holmes, Misunderstand :nos the Civil Lair. 6 Ain. Law Bey., 37; and the authorities referred to under. AlEritc.kr, JURIS