
    Fowler’s Estate
    Before Lamorelle, P. J., and Gest, Henderson, Van Dusen, Stearne, and Sinkler, JJ.
    
      June 1, 1934.
    
      Daniel R. Rothermel, for exceptants; Charles S. Schofield, contra.
   Lamorelle, P. J.,

We might well rest the dismissal of all exceptions on the opinion of the learned auditing judge, and this covers exceptions by a distributee, as well as that of the fiduciary. We feel impelled, however, to call attention to the elaborate discussion by Judge Gest in his dictum in Tobey’s Estate, 10 D. & C. 229, and to the opinion of the court, written by the same judge, in Frick’s Estate, 13 D. & C. 536; also to the fact so frequently determined by us, that exceptions by a fiduciary must, under our rules, be signed and sworn to (see Estate of Martha E. MacDonald, deceased, no. 3249 of 1932, per curiam, November 24, 1933); and to the further fact that counsel for the exceptant, in his statement of the question involved, states that all the people agree, which is not so in fact, the Commonwealth having a claim and because of its claim being a party in interest. Further comment is unnecessary. All exceptions are dismissed, and the adjudication is confirmed absolutely.  