PREFACE. of the more IN a pretions volume, the author has attempted to delineate the principles governing courts of equity in administering relief by the extraordinary remedy of the writ of injunction. The unexpected favor with which that work was at once received, led to the belief that a similar treatise, upon some important extraordinary remedies of courts of law, might prove acceptable to the profession, and the result is the following work, embracing the legal remedies of mandamus, quo warranto and prohibition. In the selection of these topics, the author has by no means intended to exclude others from the generic class of extraordinary legal remedies. He has rather been governed by the unsatisfactory condition of our legal literature upon the subjects here included, and by the necessity for a more exhaustive presentation of the law governing these particular remedies, than is to be found in any existing treatise. To a considerable extent his labors have covered a field hitherto untrodden, no previous writer having ever attempted a treatise upon either of the subjects here embraced, which should be founded upon and include the result of all the English and American decisions. The author has endeavored to familiarize himself with these decisions, from the earliest cases in England, down to and including the reported cases in both countries, as well as many which appeared in the various legal periodicals. Following the inductive method, he has endeavored so to group and general latest have ize the results of his investigations, as to ascertain the gov erning principles underlying all the decisions, and to state these in the text with as much brevity as seemed consistent with clearness. If his generalizations are not always satisfactory to his readers, they have at least the means of verifying their correctness, since his citations are believed to be as accurate as patient toil can make them. No case has been cited upon the authority of a digest, text-writer, or head note, and none without a careful and conscientious study of the entire decision from beginning to end. The author is well aware of a growing prejudice among the bench and bar against the rapid accumulation of law books. He is not disposed to assert that that prejudice is without just foundation, nor, upon the other hand, does he desire to be understood as tendering any apology for his own contributions to the literature of the profession. But if he may be permitted to state what he conceives to be the real need of the profession, it is, not for fewer text-books, but for better ones. We want less rhetoric and more law in the hand-books which we are obliged to use in the daily routine of practice. Convenience in analysis and arrangement, clearness and precision in the statement of principles, ease of reference and accuracy in citation, are the indispensable requisites of a good law book. Above all else the writer should content himself with stating the law as it is, leaving to legislators and judges the task of determining what it should be. In the attainment of these results, graces of style and diction may well be made a secondary consideration. And while a careful adherence to these conditions may not win for the author an enviable reputation in the domain of belles lettres, it will do something more and better, it will secure him the gratitude of a profession whose labors he has lightened, and whose just commendation should be his highest and best reward. CHICAGO, July 1, 1874. J. L. H. OF MANDAMUS TO PUBLIC OFFICERS, . I. Nature and Grounds of the Jurisdiction,. |