The controversy, when this cause was before the Court upon the former appeal, 93 N. C., 115; was in reference to the secured debt represented by the certificate of deposit, and whether the intestate’s estate, the other infant wards having received their full estate from the guardian, was entitled to the whole fund in the hands of the trustees applicable thereto, or to a part only. The ruling was, that the intestate’s estate was “ entitled to one half of what would have been distributed if Ella had not received her full estate.”

Consequently, the plaintiff should be paid, less what has been already received, one moiety of what was due to the debt in administering the trust fund, and an equal share would sink into the residuum for the benefit of the party next entitled. If this fund, after deducting the costs of the action, should prove insufficient to meet the certificate in full, the apportionment must be of what is left applicable thereto. The appellant’s contention, if -sustained, would be to give nearly the whole fund to the plaintiff, leaving an inconsiderable part to pass over to the next secured debt, while under the ruling, it should share equally with him in the distribution. We cannot see how any misconception upon this point could arise in the interpretation put upon the former opinion.

Assuming the proper credits to have been allowed, we find no error in the judgment of the Court, which conforms to the adjudication heretofore made, and it is affirmed.

No error. Affirmed.