§ 870. Where an executor, after partially administering the estate, renounces his office, and surrenders the assets to his coexecutor, he is nevertheless liable for all the assets which he has received.1 And if an executor has proved the will, he cannot afterwards renounce his office, so as to act in relation to the estate in a different character.2 But if he have not proved the will, he may renounce his office, and may assist the executor without creating a personal liability.3

§ 371. Executors and administrators are chargeable with interest on the assets in their hands in two cases. 1st. Where they have been guilty of negligence in not accounting for the money, or in not investing it properly. Ordinarily, indeed, it is not their duty to invest funds belonging to the estate. Yet, if they be guilty of negligence in not accounting for the funds, or if they hold them for an unreasonable time in their hands, or if they keep money dead in their hands without apparent reason or necessity, they are chargeable with simple interest from the time when such funds should have been paid over or invested.4 2d. Where they have been guilty of a breach of trust, as by converting to their own personal use and profit the money in their hands as executors or administrators.5 And in such cases they must pay the interest they make,6 and in cases of gross breach of trust, they are chargeable with compound interest.1 They are also probably liable for interest where they mix the trust funds with their own, and deposit them in a bank where they receive interest on their own money.2

1 Read v. Truelove, Ambl. 417; Doyle v. Blake, 2 Sch. & Lef. 231; Underwood v. Stevens, 1 Meriv. 712; Rogers v. Frank, 1 Y. & J. 409; Edmonds v. Crenshaw, 14 Peters, 166; Douglass v. Satterlee, 11 Johns. 16.

2 Graham v. Keble, 2 Dow, 17; Balchen v. Scott, 2 Ves. Jr. 678.

3 Orr v. Newton, 2 Cox, 274; Stacey v. Elph, 1 Myl. & K. 195; Dove v. Everard, 1 Russ. & Myl. 231.

4 Dunscomb v. Dunscomb, 1 Johns. Ch. 510; Schieffelin v. Stewart, 1 Johns. Ch. 620; Boynton v. Dyer, 18 Pick. 7; Rocke v. Hart, 11 Ves. 59; Treves v. Townshend, 1 Bro. C. C. 384; De Peyster v. Clarkson, 2 Wend. 77; Wyman v. Hubbard, 13 Mass. 232. See Lamb v. Lamb, 11 Pick. 371.

5 Mannings. Manning, 1 Johns. Ch. 535; Ratcliffe v. Graves, 1 Vern. 196; Dunscomb v. Dunscomb, 1 Johns. Ch. 510; Piety v. Stace, 4 Ves. 620; Perkins v. Baynton, 1 Bro. C. C. 375; Forbes v. Ross, 2 Bro. C. C. 430; Boynton v. Dyer, 18 Pick. 7. See Christie's Estate, 1 Tuck. 81 (1869).

6 Ibid.; Forbes v. Ross, 2 Cox, 116; Rocke v. Hart, 11 Ves. 60; Pocock v. Reddington, 5 Ves. 794; Piety v. Stace, 4 Ves. 620. See McElroy v. Thompson, 42 Ala. 656.

1 Scbieffelin v. Stewart, 1 Johns. Ch. 620; Dunscomb v. Dunscomb, 1 Johns. Ch. 508; Manning v. Manning, 1 Johns. Ch. 535; Boynton v. Dyer, 18 Pick. 7; Raphael v. Boehm, 11 Ves. 92; s. c. 13 Ves. 407; Stacpoole v. Stacpoole, 4 Dow, 209; 2 Story, Eq. Jur. § 1277.

2 See Hess's Appeal, 68 Penn. St. 454 (1871).

§ 372. Executors may not only represent the testator, but they may be constituted trustees under the will, and their duties and liabilities in this character we shall now proceed to consider.