In said case the .This text uas based upon the case of Vest v, Forsythe, 1870, 34 Indiana 418. That case was ‘, instituted to relilove a guardian because of the *2 Honorable Sam H, Nvidson, page 2

c I . ihsufflciency of his bond. The father of two

Pinoro died during the Civil War, his widow re- narried, and the stepfather attempted to qualify as guardian of the estate of the minors, vhich consIsted of a pension alloved by the Govcrnuent of $140 per annum until each minor attained. tine age of sFxteen. In announcing Its decision) the .court used language applicable to the case under consideration; it said: ‘It is quite clear that Forsythe should not continue to act as the guard- ian of these children and receive on their behalf the bounty or pension due them from the govern- ment, without giving a bond vhrch will be ample to -secure it to them vhgn the perLod of their wardshIp terminates G * *.,I”

Under the above authority, it is our opinion that the guardian under the law as it exists at presont will. have to &VO a bond for double the amout that the minor could receive under the ,stated facts during his minority.

Wa call your attention, however, to the f&t thst the Legislature at its recent session Emended this statute and sa3.d in September, 1945. Under the nCii Lav, the Act vi.11 take effect guardtan will be roquirad to make a bond for only double the amount that she wlill receive any one yaar. It lB3y b0 lJiS0, therefore, for the matter to be hold in abeyance, if possible, until the nev law takes effect in September.

Yours vary truly, APA’ORRZX GiEZXXL OF ‘EXAS 3-u Gee. H. Eargus Assistant GKB/JCP

..,