KANE, Judge.
This controversy arose in the probate court of Audrain County, Mo., and has to do with exceptions filed in the probate court of that county to the final settlement of William Mongler, as guardian of the estate of Mary A. Mongler, a person of unsound mind, from which court the cause was taken by appeal to the circuit court of that county, where, on a trial de novo, judgment was for the respondents (exceptors) and the cause is here on appeal by William Mongler, guardian of Mary A. Mongler.
The settlement to which the respondents (exceptors) excepted is as follows:
"Now comes the guardian and states that the ward died_____ day of _____, 1931.
Balance due last settlement................... $3,772.28
Interest to date on $3,772.28 at 5%........... 82.52
_________
Total ..................................... $3,854.80
Five months board at $40...................... 200.00
22 days at $40 per month...................... 33.26
Ragsdale for Merchandise...................... .69
Paper and papering grandma's room............. 2.50
One comforter for Grandma in last illness..... 1.44
One gown for Grandma during last illness...... .75
Call for Dr. Jolly at Mexico, Mo.............. .10
Medicine and supplies for Grandma............. 4.10
Phone calls during last illness and death..... 2.60
Washing and dressing cancer for Grandma
from April 28, 1931, to date of death, twice
a day, 99 days at $3.00 a day................ 297.00
Washing from Feb. 16, 1931, to date of death
387 pieces at 20 cents a piece............... 77.40
Reserve for Taxes for 1931.................... 39.20
Flowers for funeral for Grandma............... 6.00
Credit for $3.045 being a fictitious note set
up and carried as a fund to care for
Grandma, but in fact never in existence...... 3,045.00
Funeral expenses to Precht and Son............ 215.00
Dr. Jolly, professional services.............. 8.00
Guardian's fees this settlement, Funeral, etc. 75.00
Attorney's fees to date....................... 150.00
Court costs this settlement................... 9.05
Rev. A. A. Wallace, Funeral................... 5.00
_________
$4,200.09
Balance due the Guardian...................... 345.29
"Subscribed and sworn to before Mary Francis Crews, Clerk.
"Explanation of Above Credit for $3045.
"This guardian states that his ward, Mary A. Mongler, who died intestate, April 23, 1892, leaving her as his widow and seven children, to-wit: Louisa, Tillie, Clara, Amelia, Joseph, William and George, his heirs and a
farm of 126 acres located in Section 19, Township 55, Range 8, in Audrain county, Missouri, it being his homestead. That said farm was encumbered by a deed of trust to secure a debt of $1100. That said estate was fully administered and all debts paid except the said deed of trust.
"That the widow continued to occupy the home until January, 1901, when she was adjudged insane by the probate court and this accountant was appointed her guardian. He qualified as such and made annual settlements until February, 1919, at which time his settlement showed a balance in his hands of $1143.51.
"That during the years 1919 and 1920, a series of transactions took place between the heirs of Jacob Mongler and with the Probate Court, shown by deeds recorded in deed book 93 at pages 364, 365 and 366 and in deed record 86 at pages 310 and 311, 248, 286, 287 and 356 and also deed of trust record 47 at page 298, whereby this guardian became the owner of 90½ (90.90) acres of said farm and Joseph A. Mongler became the owner of 35½ (35.84) acres of said farm, and this guardian and his wife executed a deed of trust conveying his said 90½ acres of land to W. W. Fry, trustee for benefit of and to secure to said Joseph A. Mongler the payment of a note for $4145.00, although he did not owe said Joseph A. Mongler said note or any part thereof.
"That this guardian being in confusion as to the effect of what he was doing, was induced to make an erroneous entry in his settlement in this court in February, 1920, of a charge of $3045.00 ($3000.00) and thereafter carried said error through all his subsequent settlements in this court, and accounted for interest thereon annually at the rate of six per cent per annum.
"That the said deed of trust for $4145 was fictitious and without consideration at least to the extent of the said sum of $3045. That he had paid each of the heirs the full value of their interest in the said land and had the said deed of trust of $1100, and had only the use of said Mary A. Mongler's homestead and dower therein which was worth only about $1000 at the time of said series of transactions."
The exceptions to the final settlement are as follows:
"Comes now Joe Mongler and Clara Gaebe, children and heirs at law of Mary A. Mongler, formerly a person of unsound mind and now deceased, in their own right and for and in behalf of the other heirs at law of said deceased, and except and object to the final settlement submitted to this court by William A. Mongler, guardian of said Mary A. Mongler, now deceased, on the 24th day of November, 1931, and as grounds for their exceptions and objections state:
"1. That said guardian has wholly failed to account for and charge himself with a certain promissory note belonging to said estate, said promissory note being dated September 1, 1919, for the principal sum of $4145 due three years after date, with the interest from date at the rate of six per cent per annum, compounded annually, executed by William Mongler, as an individual, to Joe Mongler, which said note was shortly thereafter endorsed over without recourse by said Joe Mongler to said William Mongler, as guardian of Mary A. Mongler, and which said note is secured by deed of trust on certain real estate, and which said deed of trust is recorded in book 47 at page 298 of the deed of trust records of Audrain County, Missouri.
"2. Exceptors object to the credit taken by guardian for `Washing and dressing cancer for grandma from April 28, 1931, to date of death, twice a day, 99 days at $3.00 per day— $297.00' for the reason that same is unreasonable, extortionate and illegal.
"3. Exceptors object to credit taken by guardian in said settlement for `Washing from February 16, 1931, to date of death, 387 pieces at 20¢ a piece—$77.40' for the reason that said claim is unreasonable, extortionate and illegal.
"4. Exceptors object to credit taken by guardian in said settlement for `Credit for $3045 being a fictitious note set up and carried as a fund to care for grandma, but in fact never in existence—$3045' for the reason that said credit is without foundation in fact and is unlawful.
"5. Exceptors object to credit taken by guardian in said settlement for `Guardian's fees this settlement, funeral, etc.—$75.00' for the reason that the same is unreasonable, extortionate and far in excess of value of services rendered by said guardian.
"6. Exceptors object to credit taken by guardian in said settlement for `Attorney's fees to date—$150.00' for the reason that said charge is excessive, extortionate and in excess of the reasonable value of any attorney's fees rendered."
The judgment of the circuit court (omitting formal parts) is as follows:
"1. The guardian is charged with the sum of $3854.80, the amount stated in his report.
"2. Exception No. 4 is sustained and the claim of the guardian for a credit of $3045 is denied.
"3. Exceptions 1, 2, 3, 5 and 6 are by the court overruled with the exception that the amount claimed as allowance for guardian is reduced from $75 to $40 and the amount claimed for Attorney's fee is reduced from $150 to $100, and on motion the guardian is allowed to pay E. A. Shannon and W. W. Botts the sum of $50 for attorneys in this case."
After an unavailing motion for a new trial
the case is here on appeal. The appellant assigns as errors the following:
"1. The Court erred in refusing to permit William Mongler, the appellant, to testify that he received no money or other direct consideration from Joe Mongler, one of the exceptors, for the guardian's deed read in evidence, and erred repeatedly in limiting the scope of the inquiry into the details of the family settlement.
"2. The court erred as to the weight and materiality of the evidence offered by appellant consisting of deeds and checks passed between the appellant and the other heirs of Jacob and Mary A. Mongler. The checks and deeds were admitted in evidence but clearly not considered of any probative value.
"3. Appellant on September 3rd, 1919, accounted for the receipt of $3,000 for Mary A. Mongler's interest in the farm by including the amount in the deed of trust given that day, and on the 20th day of February, 1920, accounted, in his settlement, for amount and interest on it to that date, whereas the over-whelming weight of the evidence shows that in fact he had only received in land value $1629.40 and that thereafter he had paid interest annually on the excess, $1370.60, for ten years at 6 per cent and for two years two months and 20 days at five per cent. That said error made a difference of $2735.12 in his final account, and the court erred in not so finding.
"4. The judgment of the court...
