faults of an agent as though they were his own; but. where the employment of an agent is necessary, or under like circumstances is usual, this stringent rule of liability is relaxed, and nothing more is required of him than the exercise of good faith and of ordinary care in selecting his agent, and in watching his conduct and solvency. Hence, if money be deposited by a guardian in bank, not to his individual credit (which would be treating the money as his own), but to his credit as guardian, the failure of the bank involves no liability on his part, if he selected it as a place of deposit in good faith, and exercised ordinary discretion, care, and vigilance. (2 Lom. Ex. 482; Clough v. Beard, 3 My. & Cr. (14 Eng. Ch.) 496.)

The guardian is not to be charged with the ward's services, even as a set-off to his board, unless they were such as, under the existing circumstances, the guardian ought fairly to have expected to afford compensation for them. (Armstrong v. Walkup & als, 12 Grat. 613; Evans v. Pearce, 15 Grat. 516.)

The sale of the ward's property at an under value, when by a prudent discharge of his duty, and the exercise of a reasonable discretion on the part of the guardian in respect of time and place of sale, or the credit allowed, more might have been obtained, subjects the guardian to make good the loss. And much more is he liable if, by himself or another, he converts the ward's goods to his own use, whether corruptly or through negligence, as where he applies them to discharge a debt due from himself. And whoever comes into possession knowingly of such effects, by collusion with the guardian, and by co-operating in his fraud, is liable to the ward, as the guardian is, for what is so received. (2 Lom. Dig. 476; Dodson v. Simpson, 2 Rand. 294; Graff v. Castleman, 5 Rand. 195; Broaddus v. Rosson, 3 Leigh, 12; Fisher v. Bassett, 9 Leigh, 119; Pinckard v. Woods, 8 Grat. 140; Hunter v. Lawrence, 11 Grat. 132; Jackson v. Updegraffe & als, 1 Rob. 107.)

3. Losses arising from the Miscondnet of a Co-Guardian.

Where there are several guardians, the default of one is not chargeable upon a co-guardian, who did not concur in the act. But any manner of concurrence will subject him to answer, such as voluntarily committing the ward's funds, without sufficient reason, to the defaulter; or arranging that he shall receive them. (2 Lom. Ex. 490 & seq; Bac. Abr. Ex'ors (D.); Id.

Guard'n (H.); Morrow v. Peyton, 8 Leigh, 64, 68; Graham v. Austin & als, 2 Grat. 273; Frazer's adm'r v. Bevill & als, 11 Grat. 15.)

But if the funds are committed to the co-guardian in another capacity (e. g. as a banker,) the liability is no more than when they are entrusted to any other banker. Business cannot be transacted without trusting some one, and it is no more unlawful to trust a coguardian, in another capacity than as guardian, than it is to trust a stranger. (2 Lom. Ex. 493-'4, 497; Bacon v. Bacon, 5 Ves. 331; Langford v. Gascoyne, 11 Ves. 335-6; Davis v. Spurling, 1 Russ. & My. (5 Eng. Ch.) 66; Boyd's ex'ors v.. Boyd's heirs, 3 Grat. 113.) It seems, therefore, to be deducible from the authorities, that in equity, generally speaking, the duty of a guardian is not to part with the assets to a co-guardian, but that in some instances it is allowable; and that whenever the transfer is made, the guardian who makes it is liable therefor, unless it is done for some sufficient reason, and usually for a specific purpose, as above explained.

As to the effect of joint receipts, as between co-trustees on the one side, and co-executors or co-guardians on the other, as making them all liable for what is acknowledged to be received, see 2 Lom. Ex. 498, &c.; Price v. Stokes, 11 Ves. 324-'5; Ld. Shipbrooke v. Ld. Hinchinbrooke, 16 Ves. 479; Post. Vol. II, ch. X. 3%. The Means provided in Virginia to Compel the prompt and accurate Settlement of Guardian's Accounts.

Thus much for the general principles which regulate the guardian's accountability. We are next to consider the apparatus provided by law to compel the prompt and accurate settlement of guardian's accounts, and the principles which regulate the preparation for such settlements.

The provisions of our statute upon this subject are eminently wise. They are directed to provide one or more officers in each county, who shall be charged specially with the supervision of the accounts of guardians and other fiduciaries; to secure an early return of an inventory of whatever property may come to the fiduciary's hands, and also of an account of any sales which he may make; and to compel an annual settlement of his accounts. Accordingly, in the further exposition of the subject we will consider, (1), The commissioner of accounts for each court charged with the appointment of guardians; (2), The return by the guardian of an inventory, and an account of sales made by him;

and (3), The annual settlement of guardian's accounts; W. C.

1h. The Commissioner of Accounts.

We have seen that the circuit, county, and corporation courts with us are charged with the superintendence of the settlement of guardian's accounts, and the control of their conduct. In order to facilitate their supervision, the judge of every court of probate is required to "designate one of its commissioners in chancery (of whom each court has three, V. C. 1873, c. 171, 2, 3), who shall be known as the commissioner of accounts, and who, in addition to his other duties, shall have a general supervision of all fiduciaries admitted to qualify in that court, and make all ex parte settlements of accounts of such fiduciaries;" and, if need be, another of the commissioners is to be appointed from time to time to aid him. (V. C. 1873, c. 123, § 13; Id. c. 128, § 1 & seq.; 16 & seq.)

It is the duty of the commissioner of accounts to get from the clerk of his court, after each term, a list of all the fiduciaries who have qualified thereat; and thenceforward it is his duty to require them punctually to conform to the directions of the law, in respect to an inventory of the property subject to their control; to an account of sales; and to the periodical settlement of their accounts. And in order that the commissioner may perform his duty systematically, it is required of him to keep a record, showing in several columns the particulars following (V. C. 1873, c. 128, § 1 & seq.; Matt. Com'rs, 28), namely:

2h. The Return of the Inventory and Account of Sales by the Guardian.

Every guardian is required, within four months from his qualification, and within four months after any subsequent accession of property belonging to the ward, to return to the commissioner of accounts an inventory of all the estate, real and personal, which is subject to his authority as guardian; and if he fail so to do, the commissioner shall take proper steps to compel him to do it, by causing the court to impose on him a fine of from $50 to $100 for any delinquency; and if he persists in his contumacy, to proceed against him for contempt. The guardian is also required, within four months after any sale of the ward's property, to return to the commissioner of accounts an account of sales. Both these returns the commissioner is to inspect, and if they are in proper form, he is, within ten days, to deliver them to the clerk of the court to be recorded. (V. C. 1873, c. 128, § 4 to 6.)

These provisions very happily secure the means of holding guardians to a just accountability. Most of the defaults of this class of fiduciaries arise, not out of a preconceived purpose of dishonesty, but from negligence in preserving a memorial of what comes to their hands, and a delay in settling their accounts; and to this latter object-namely, to compel an annual settlement, the statutory provision next to be mentioned is addressed.

3h. The Annual Settlement of Guardian's Accounts.

Every guardian is required to settle his accounts annually, within six months after the end of every year, before the commissioner of accounts of the court which appointed him. And if he fails to do so, the commissioner is directed to take steps to compel him, by means of a fine of from $50 to $500, to be imposed by the court, and if need be, by proceeding for contempt; and he also forfeits all compensation for his services during the period to which the commission relates; but this denial of compensation is not to apply where the guardian has within the six months after the end of any year, furnished the ward (being now adult) with a statement of the account, and settled the same with him; nor where he has laid a statement of his account before a commissioner in chancery, upon an order of account in a pending suit. (V. C. 1873, c. 128, § 8 to 11; Synops. Crim. Law, 212-'13.) Until a recent period this forfeiture was very wholesomely absolute, however meritorious the

guardian's adininistration. (Wood's Ex'or v. Garnett, 6 Leigh, 274; Boyd's Ex'ors v. Boyd's Heirs, 3 Grat. 124-5.) But by statute, since 1870, it has been in the discretion of the court. (V. C. 1873, c. 128, § 9.)

For the steps to be taken to secure the funds in the guardian's hands, if they shall seem to be in danger, and if need be, to remove the guardian and appoint a new one, reference may be made to the statute. (V. C. 1873, c. 128, § 17, 18, & seq.)

The commissioner is required to give notice of the fact that a guardian's account is pending before him, by notice at the front door of the court-house on the first day of a county or corporation court, and he is not to complete the same until ten days after such notice. Any one interested, or his next friend, may appear before the commissioner, and insist upon or object to anything, in like manner as if the commissioner were taking an account by order in a pending suit. The commissioner is to file his report as soon as it is completed, and after the lapse of a month it is open to examination, when the court shall consider it, with any objections which may be made thereto, and confirm it, in whole or in part, or re-commit it to the same or another commissioner, as upon the whole may be deemed right. When the report is confirmed, it is recorded, and is thenceforward taken prima facie to be correct, subject, however, to be surcharged and falsified by a suit instituted in due time for the purpose. And where the report shows money to be in the guardian's hands, the court may order payment of it to whom it may be due, or that it be invested, loaned, or otherwise disposed of, as to it may seem proper. (V. C. 1873, c. 128, § 30.) But in order that any such order of court may be obligatory upon the parties or an acquittance to the guardian, the commissioner must have posted the required notice at the front door of the court-house, as we have seen the law requires, or special notice must have been given of the design to apply to the court. (Whitehead v. Whitehead & als, 23 Grat. 379-'80.)

If there are several wards, it is the guardian's duty to keep separate accounts with each; and whether he does it or not, the commissioner must state the accounts with them severally, and, as far as practicable, bring the items applicable to each under the proper account to which it belongs. (Bac. Abr. Guardian (I); Armstrong v. Walkup, 9 Grat. 376.)

Very similar provisions are applicable to other fidu