
    WATERS vs. COKER.
    [FINAL SETTLEMENT OF GUARDIAN’S ACCOUNTS.]
    1. When appeal Mes. — An appeal does not lie from an order of the pro-, hate court, rendered on final settlement of a guardian’s accounts, in these words: “ It appears that said guardian is chargeable with the sum of $127 50, and is entitled to credit for the sum of $140 50, leaving a balance due said guardian on said settlement of $13; and it is therefore ordered, that the account-current, as stated, be recorded and placed on file.”
    Appeal from the Probate Court of Monroe.
    In the matter of the final settlement of the accounts and vouchers of Nathan Coker, as guardian of Sarah Ann Waters, late Sarah Ann Babb. On the settlement, the ward reserved several exceptions to the rulings of the court on different items of the account as stated, and she now assigns these rulings as error. The decree of the court is in these words : “Came Nathan Coker, guardian, and also Needham Waters, in right of his wife, Sarah Babb (now Waters), by his attorney; and the account being examined, audited, and stated, it appears that said guardian is chargeable with the sum of one hundred and twenty-seven 50-100 dollars, and is entitled to credit for the sum of one hundred and forty 50-100 dollars, leaving a balance due said guardian on said settlement of thirteen dollars; and it is therefore ordered, that the account-current, as stated, be recorded and placed on file.”
    J. "W. Posey, for the appellant.
    S. J. Cummtng, contra.
    
   Pee Curiam.

The record in this case shows, that no final decree has been rendered; consequently, the appeal must be dismissed at the cost of the appellant.  