The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1869-01-09


idea at one time was, that the writ would
only lie to command the performance Of u
ministerial duty; but later cases have gone
further and it is now the constant practice to
| grant the writ, to command the performance
by any inferior jurisdiction, or officers, OF any
| public drl.y for which there is no specific reme-
dy. Tappan 12, 476. More especially does
thus the Court Of Kings Bench where the or
dlnary Can ecclesiastical judge) refused grant
Of administration OF probate OF q will, the
Kings Bench, temporal court, ordered the
writ: ANONYMOUS, Strange 1, 552; King w.
Doctor Hay, Blackstone's reports 1, 648; Ba-
| con 6, Mandamus d, 434; and the ruling was fol-
lowed in Sllas vs. Ransom, John 6, 279, and State
VS.. Watson, Spears Q, 105. TO what extent the
sanrt by this prerosative writ would attempt to
lLters it'll an inferior jurisdiction, where ju-
dicial p. vas to be exercised; lit is not neces-
sary now to decide: In the case of the Com
mlSSlOners or the Poor vs.. Lvnah, McC. 2, ITO,
the court said that they would interpose if there
had been on abuse OF discretion, and this was
in regard to a body clothed with judicial au-
thority in the matter in which they had acted.
Law Rep. |, 165, often referred to in the ar
gument, said: But the authority OF managers
Is Is not purely Judicial; that discretion is limit
they should con6ne themselves within the
bounds Of their jurisdiction. yet they
must be subject to- the visltorial juris-
diction Of the Court Of General Sessions
their discretionary power" And he refers to
East 10. 40S, and East. z, 90. The mere power
to Investigate and declare an election Is not OF
such judicial character as precludes super
vision by the writ of ,nundanaa4s.
The Legislature appears to have had in view
all the acts heretofore passed in relation to
MANAGERS OF elections, 80 tar as their powers
dermen in the contingencies provided for. to
the Nero investigation of the contested case
and the declaration of the election. This per-
mitted scrutiny, and all that was necessary for
the proper execution of the power thus conG-
ded. What that dc claration should be depend
ed on the facts elected In inquiry; but it is re-
quired by the act, for otherwise, party
position which the law comedies to him,
to assert through the courts his right to
an Office. The declaration may in the end be
OF no value to him, but still if the act extends
board to deprive him Of it by a neglect or re-
tusal to carry out it's provisions.
1t is made substantive duty on the part Of
the managers the words were intended to de-
note something. The language is plain, and
has significance and meaning which the court
is not at liberty to overlook or disregard.
1t is said, however, that the writ will not be
granted where it must be fruitless, vain or USE
the matter.
1t is true that if the writ could have
no result, as in the case Of the Queen
u.s. .a1 afas7ses ef g1o Mor0ion NJ s ssSsoing bank
"a. sAaA ~ y, tAo, VI WuoIo tuo ucI 10 pe
performed would fail to carry out the purpose
Of relator because it could not be accomplish
ed in timeto render 1T available, the court
would stay its hand. It has not been made to
appear that any such distractions or difficult
ties prevail in the case before US.
Or all the powers which court is called on
to exercise, it approaches none OF them with
more caution and distrust than those which
are alleged to be within its mere discretion
Where the law affords fixed principles for gui-
dance, there is less danger Of 'false judg-
ment." %. 1t
81 Where nothing ia to be followed but the sug-
gestions Of illegal will" there is conscious
ness OF want or salty, because there is no reli-
ance; but in this dioration or mere rcason which
would induce 2. fuctuation and vacillation in
which might entail on the community all the
evils which q regulated system Of law was In
tended to prevent.
Where discretion is to be exercised, it must
be governed by some admitted and prefxed
standard OF right. It is true that where the
end sought is only private one, or granting
the writ would be attended with manifest hard
ship. there it will be withheld. Bacon 6, AS;
Van Ransaeller vs. Sheriff Of Albany; Cowan's
1, 512.
How, in q matter Of public concern affecting
o large city, can we undertake to say that the
REALTORS are not entitled to the remedy which
the law provides to place them in position in
which they may assert their claim to an officei
The wrongs and hardships would be in pre-
cluding them from the opportunity ofestablish-
which, they aver, they are prevented by the
non-performance by the Board Of Aldermen OF
duty which the law enjoins.
January z 1899