The daily morning journal and courier., 1895-05-10
MANDAMUS WRIT REFUSED
lIElLOR1NDU UAT IN THE CASE OF AN-
 SONI1 YS. JUDGE STUDLEY.

Judge Prentice Finds the Borough of An-
 sonia Guilty of Remissness and Negll-
 gence-Numerous Delays-Judge Stud
 ley's Forbearance and Courtesy,
 Judge s, o. Prentice yesterday re-
 fused to grant a writ of mandamus to compel Judge J, P. studley to file a
 finding of facts in the case of J. B.
 Manley against the borough of Anso- mia, application for which was made
 by the defendants. It will be remem-
 bered that Manley brought suit against the borough of Ansonia for land dam ages, and that his suit was successful,
 judgment being rendered for a con- siderable sum,
 The opinion rendered by Judge Prem
 tice in the case charges the relator (the borough of Ansonia) with ineXcusable remissness and negligence in the mat ter and does not find anything to war rant the intervention of the superior court. The opinion in full is as follows:
 Granting that this court has all the power in the premises claimed for it py lllt IClltOly cj AuGoLIOLl NPlSAA have not found it necessary to decide, I am nevertheless of the opinion, and find. that it has been guilty of such laches that it has lost all right to claim from Judge Studley as matter of right, finding such as is asked for.
 "The relator filed it's substitute pro- posed finding September H. 1894 This was nineteen months subsequent to the trial, fully ten months after the origi- nal proposed finding had been with drawn for substitution and eight months lacking only a few days, since any communication of any kind what ever upon the subject passed between the judge and the counsel. This last communication was the latter of Judge Studley to MT. Holden, dated January 30, 1894, and it's formal acknowledge / ment on the following day. Whether this letter is regarded as a revival of lapse of right and not as a mere ex- pression of willingness of the judge, in the exercise of his discretion, to ex- tend his judicial courtesy after a lapse of right, or whether it be regarded as a suggestion of the court under a per mission to file a substitute proposed finding within an Intermediate time, which are as favorable constructions as can be placed on the confessed sit uation-the eight months of delay and silence which ensued cannot be ex- plained upon any basis of reasonable conduct The inexcusable delay and silence deprived the relator of all standing before Judge Studley upon a claim of right. By it the relator placed itself in a position, if 1t had not pre- viously done so, where it could only rely upon a continuation of courtesy on the part of Judge Studley, which had in the history of the case, since its trial, been meted out to 1t to overtlowing measure
 Tt is suggested that Judge Studley by his courtesies and forbearanee prior to January, 1894, had invited the re- lators delay and thus practically sane toned and legalized the pursuit of it by it's own course in the matter. This claim is too spacious to be even plaus- ible. The contention resolves itself l into nothing but else than this: That | a judges past forbearance of the infrac- | tion of rules, and his conformation of lax procedure on the part of the coun- gel, suffice to clothe present violations with all the dignity and force of rights, What quasi obligations the extension of forbearance and courtesies by a judge to counsel may, as between man and man, impose upon the exercise of | his discretion in his subsequent con- duet, is one thing. To say that the ex- ercise of forbearance on the part of a judge acting upon the rights of others. vests the recipient with legal right, pure and simple, to subsequent forbear- | ance in wrong doing Is quite another thing. Courts do not exist to compel the exercise the courtesies or amenities | of life. Their province is to enforce | rights. When one puts himself into a position where he surrenders his rights | and has for his reliance in their stead | only another's courtesy he must do his | elsewhere than in court.
 ''But these suggestions aside, I fail l to discover anything in the history of | the case, unusual though it be, to give i support to the claim that Judge Studley | mad invited the relators course of &C., -ion He had indeed gone to the ex- .reme in accommodating counsel, but | what there was to invite, or impliedly an eight months delay, with put word to him, especially when this lelay followed letter from him action, is not apparent to ne
 "The relator has no grievance jus flying the intervention of this court"