On Motion for Rehearing.
Appellees have filed a very forceful motion for rehearing setting up twenty different grounds of alleged error. We consider them without merit except the one complaining of our failure to charge Armstrong with interest upon the funds which we found he illegally held.
In that respect we were in error and our former judgment is hereby modified so as to add to the recovery of appellees, against Armstrong, interest, at the rate of 10 per cent, per annum on the sum of $496.68, from the dates upon which the several items were converted by him as shown by the judgment. The motion is in other respects overruled.
Appellant American Surety Company has also filed its motion for rehearing complaining of our action in overruling its forty-second, forty-third, forty-fourth, and forty-fifth assignments of error and in holding that there was no meeting of the minds of the parties as to the indemnification of attorneys’ fees and in denying it recovery of such fees against appellant Armstrong. In view of the fact that the application was signed by Armstrong long after the bond had been executed and the other facts found by the trial court in this connection, we are of the opinion that the surety company was not entitled to recover the attorney’s fees in this case and that the indemnity stipulation is insufficient to support such a recovery. See St. Louis, S. F. & T. R. Co. v. Gilliam & Jackson (Tex.Civ.App.) 166 S.W. 706; Galveston, H. & S. A. Ry. Co. v. Botts, 22 Tex.Civ.App. 609, 55 S.W. 514; Pecos & N. T. R. Co. v. Stinson (Tex.Civ.App.) 181 S.W. 526; Gulf, C. & S. F. R. Co. v. House & Watkins, 40 Tex.Civ.App. 105, 88 S.W. 1110; and Gulf, C. & S. F. R. Co. v. Combes & Rretor (Tex.Civ.App.) 80 S.W. 1045.
Its motion is accordingly overruled.