
    ROBERT C. GIBBS v. DURANT H. GIBBS.
    Where a guardian, collected a bond due to Ms ward by solvent persons in November 1863, in Confederate currency, nearly two years after the ward became of age, held that at the suit of the ward he was chargeable with the full amount of the bond and interest.
    
      (Emerson v. Mallett, Phil. Eq. 234; cited and approved.)
    Petition against a guardian for a settlement, heard upon an exception, before Shipp J. at Fall Term 1867 of the Superior Court of Hyde.
    The petition had been filed at February Term 1866 of the County Court, and an account having been taken, the report of the commissioner was returned to May Term 1867. At this last Term the petitioner excepted to an item crediting the defendant with some $1600 for Confederate money collected by him upon a note due by one James Adams to him as guardian. Upon this exception it appeared that the parties to the note were good, that the petitioner had been of age for nearly two years at the time it was collected, and that the Confederate notes were received for it in November 1863.
    In the County Court this exception was overruled; and upon appeal to the Superior Court it was sustained.
    Thereupon the defendant appealed.
    No counsel for the appellant.
    
      Rodman, contra.
    
   Reads J.

There are two reasons why the plaintiff’s ex. ception as to the James Adams debt should have been sustained.

First. The defendant’s ward (the plaintiff) had been of age nearly two years when he collected the debt, and he ought to have delivered over the bond to the plaintiff, or paid him the amount.

Second. At the time the defendant collected the bond, November 1863, the Confederate Treasury notes in which he collected it, were worth only some sis or eight cents in the dollar. To collect a good debt under such circumstances was trifling with the plaintiff’s interests. Emerson v. Mallett, Phil. Ecj., 234.

The report will be reformed by the clerk of this court by charging the defendant with the James Adams debt and interest.

There may be a decree for the plaintiff for the balance due him.

The cost, including ten dollars to the clerk for reforming the account, will be paid by the defendant.

There is no error.

Per Curiam. Decree accordingly.  