owner, who is called the claimant, makes a stipu lation with security, that he will pay the demand of the plaintiff or libellant, as he is called, if there is an adjudication in his favor. The libel, which is the first pleading filed, must show a case for admiralty jurisdiction, and if it is filed for the benefit of all who are interested in like claims against the vessel it must so state. One peculiarity about the practice is that recoupment is allowed in cases of tort and contract, even when it goes to the extent of compelling contributions among joint tort feasors. In case of collision the damages may be apportioned according to the degree of negligence where both vessels are to blame. In taking evidence, the rules are very lax and this results from the nature of the case, the witnesses being seafaring men, and their places of residence and movements being often sudden and uncertain. Unless the statute expressly requires it, there is no jury trial. Where there is a variance between the evidence and pleadings, it will not be fatal unless it is so great as to mislead the court. decision is against the vessel and all persons over whom the court obtained jurisdiction. Such decrees are good against all the world, so far as the vessel or cargo is concerned, and can not be questioned even in the courts of a country whose vessel has been seized and condemned in a foreign port by a foreign court. The CHAPTER XLIV. EXTRAORDINARY REMEDIES AND SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS. Apart from the ordinary forms of action there is a class of remedies which are properly designated as extraordinary remedies, such as mandamus, quo warranto, prohibition, habeas corpus, contempt. § 585. Mandamus.-The writ of mandamus is a command issuing from a court of competent jurisdiction in the name of the state directed to some corporation or officer, or inferior court, requiring the performance of a particular duty therein specified, which duty results from the official station of the party to whom the writ is directed, or from operation of law. The writ is either alternative or peremptory. In the first instance it is usual to issue it in the alternative form, which requires the person to whom it is directed to appear and show cause why the peremptory writ should not issue. If he shows good cause, the proceedings are at an end. If he fails to show good cause, the court awards the peremptory writ which is its final judgment in the case, and obedience to it can be enforced by attachment. From judgments awarding the peremptory writ there is usually an appeal allowed except in some special cases, as where it issues from the courts of last resort. § 586. Nature of the action.-The proceeding is instituted in the name of the state on the relation of some individual who has an interest in the matter, and who is known as the relator. The writ is issued only in cases where there is a clear legal right and the party has no other adequate remedy. Its office is to compel the performance of a ministerial act, but not to control the exercise of a discretion. It will issue to compel a judge to decide a case, but it will not direct him how to decide it. By the French code a judge who refuses to decide a case may be sued for a denial of justice. Though generally used to enforce the performance of public duties, it may be resorted to to enforce private rights when withheld by officers. The following are some of the cases in which this writ may be invoked: (1) To compel the board of commissioners to build or repair bridges; (2) to compel a judge to sign a bill of exceptions or to make a record; (3) to compel a justice of the peace to render judgment or send papers to a higher court; (4) to compel the mayor and city council to levy a tax, or make estimates for public improvements in favor of contractors. § 587. Quo warranto.-Quo warranto is the name of a writ which at common law might be issued against persons or corporations claiming to exercise any office or franchise, for the purpose of inquiring into their authority, and ousting them from such office or franchise in case no authority should be shown. By the common practice in many, if not all, the states, the redress is sought by means of an information in the nature of a quo warranto. The cases in which the remedy is applied are (1) where any person shall usurp any public office, or any office in a private corporation; (2) where any officer has done or suffered an act which works a forfeiture of the office; (3) where an association of persons shall assume to act as a corporation contrary to law; (4) where for non-user or misuser a corporation has forfeited its corporate rights. § 588. How obtained.-The information is based upon the affidavit of some person, who states specifically the acts or omissions which show a case justifying the proceedings. When the information is filed and the proper notice is served, the defendant appears and the case is conducted, as to pleading and trial, as ordinary civil cases, except where the statute makes provision for a different method of proceeding. § 589. Prohibition.-Prohibition is an extraordinary writ issuing out of a court of superior jurisdiction directed to an inferior court commanding it to cease entertaining jurisdiction in a cause or proceeding over which it has no control, or where such inferior tribunal assumes to entertain a cause over which it has jurisdiction, but goes beyond its legitimate powers and transgresses the bounds prescribed to it by law. It is a writ which should only be issued in cases of extreme necessity and not for a grievance which may be redressed by means of the ordinary forms of law or in equity. The application for the writ is addressed to the sound discretion of the court and will be issued only where the wrong is imminent and the right to the remedy is clear. Ordinarily, no appeal lies from the judgment of the court refusing to grant the writ. § 590. Habeas corpus.-The writ of habeas corpus is issued by any court of competent jurisdiction or judge thereof, in behalf of any person who is re strained of his liberty under any pretext whatever, and it is directed to the officer or person who has custody of the petitioner, commanding him to produce the body of the person so restrained forthwith before the judge or court by whose order the writ was issued, with the day and cause of his caption and detention. It is a writ of right, and the constitution of the United States provides that the priv ilege of the writ shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety requires it. § 591. What application must show-Return.— One who applies for the writ must show in his application by whom the person is restrained, the cause or pretense of the restraint, and in what the illegality of the restraint consists. Where the writ is served upon the person to whom it is directed, he must make an immediate return, and if he delays or refuses he may be attached for contempt. Where he produces the person held in custody, he must make and file a return, making a full statement of the authority for the detention and exhibit a copy of the warrant under which he restrains the person in his custody. If the applicant deems the return insufficient, he files exceptions thereto and the judge proceeds to dispose of the application in a summary manner. After hearing the case the judge remands the applicant to the officer or person having him in custody, if the restraint is lawful; if it is unlawful he discharges the applicant from custody. § 592. When legality of restraint will not be inquired into. The court or judge will never inquire into the legality of the restraint where it is in pur |