US SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

There were two trustees of real and personal estate for the benefit of a minor. One of the trustees was also administrator de bonis non upon the estate of the father of the minor, and the other trustee was appointed guardian to the minor.

When the minor arrived at the proper age, and the accounts came to be settled, the following rules ought to have been applied.

The trustees ought not to have been charged with an amount of money, which the administrator trustee had paid himself as commission. That item was allowed by the orphans' court, and its correctness cannot be reviewed, collaterally, by another court.

Nor ought the trustees to have been charged with allowances made to the guardian trustee. The guardian's accounts also were cognizable by the orphans' court. Having power under the will to receive a portion of the income, the guardian's receipts were valid to the trustees.

The trustees were properly allowed and credited by five percent on the principal of the personal estate and ten percent on the income.

Under the circumstances of this case, the trustees ought not to have been charged upon the principle of six months' rests and compound interest.

The trustees ought to have been charged with all gains, as with those arising from usurious loans, unknown friends, or otherwise.

The trustees ought not to have been credited with the amount of a sum of money deposited with a private banking house and lost by its failure, so far as related to the capital of the estate, but ought to have been credited for so much of the loss as arose from the deposit of current collections of income.

The facts in the case are stated in the opinion of the Court. chanrobles.com-red

Page 57 U. S. 539