Estate of Simmons

— -The value of the services of the counsel employed by the public administrator, in respect to the affairs and management of the estate, and whether the employment of counsel was necessary or proper, under the circumstances, were matters of proof in the court below. The probate court heard the testimony, passed upon these points and fixed the compensation. But the evidence on which this ruling was based is not brought up on this appeal; and yet we are asked to reverse the order, on the ground that the employment of counsel was unnecessary, and if necessary, that the compensation allowed is excessive. It is obvious that we cannot review the action of the probate court in these points, in the absence of the testimony. We cannot judicially know that it was unnecessary to employ counsel or that the amount allowed is too large. The same remark applies to the value of the services rendered by the administrator. Without having *683 the evidence before us, it is impossible for us to decide upon the reasonable value of his services.

But the appellant claims that the administrator is entitled to no compensation, as no money or property of the estate came into his actual possession. If…