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

*472 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.