
    In the Matter of the Judicial Settlement of the Accounts of Gilbert R. Sprague et al., as Administrators, etc.
    (Submitted January 16, 1891;
    decided February 6, 1891.)
    Upon the final settlement of the accounts of administrators no findings were made hy the surrogate as required hy the Code of Civil Procedure (§ 2545), and the record on appeal contained no exceptions to findings or to the decision. Meld, that the decision was not reviewable upon the facts, either in this court or at General Term.
    Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered upon an order made May 9, 1887, which affirmed a decree of the surrogate of Putnam county upon a judicial settlement of the accounts of the petitioners, as administrators, etc., of the estate • of Freeman Sprague, deceased.
    
      George E. Anderson for appellant.
    
      Abram J. Miller and Hackett <& Williams for respondents.
   The following is an extract from the opinion:

“ The surrogate did not make any findings as required by section 2545 of the Code, and the record does not contain any exceptions to the findings or to the decision of the surrogate. Therefore, the General Term did not have jurisdiction on the •appeal to it to review the surrogate’s decision upon the facts, and neither has this conrt. If the appellant desired to bring to the General Term or to this comb questions of fact or of law involved in the accounting, and to review the decisions of the surrogate in reference thereto, he should have procured findings of fact and of law, and should have made proper exceptions thereto. (Hewlett v. Elmer, 103 N. Y. 156, 164; Matter of the Judicial Settlement of Kellogg, 104 id. 648; Angevine v. Jackson, 103 id. 470.) ”

Earl, J.,

reads for affirmance.

All concur.

Judgment affirmed.  