MANDAMUS. In Practice. This is a high prerogative writ, usually issuing out of the hiFhest court of general Jurisdiction in a state, in the name of the sovereignty, directed to any natural person, corporation, or inferior court of judicature within its jurisdiction, requiring them to do some particular thing therein specified, and which appertains to their office or duty. 3 Blackstone, Comm. 110 ; 4 Bacon, Abr. 495 ; Opinion of Mar shall, Ch. J., in Marbury vs. Madison ; 1 Cranch, 137, 168.
2. Its use is well defined by Lord Mans field, Ch. J., in Rex vs. Barker, 3 Burr. 1265: " It was introduced to prevent disorder from a failure of justice and defect of police. Therefore it ought to be used upon all occa sions when the law has established no specific remedy, and where in justice and good gov ernment there ought to be one." " If there be a right, and no other specific remedy, this should not be denied." The same principles are declared by Lord Ellenborough, Ch. J., in Rex vs. Archbishop of Canterbury, 8 East, 219. See 6 Ad. SCE. 321. The writ of man damu,s is the supplementary remedy when the party has a clear right, and no other appropriate redress, in order to prevent a failure of justice. 12 Petersdorff, Abr. 438 (309). It is the absence of a specific legal remedy which gives the court jurisdictidn, 2 Selwyn, Nisi P. Mandamus ; 29 Penn. St. 131; 32 id. 219 ; 34 id. 496 ; 41 Me. 15 ; 2 Pat. & H. Va. 385 ; but the party must have a perfect legal right. 27 Mo. 225; 11 Ind. 205 ; 20 111. 525 ; 25 Barb. N. Y. 73 ; 2 Dutch. N. J. 135 ; 3 Cal. 167.
3. The remedy extends to the control of all inferior tribunals, corporations, public officers, and even private persons in some cases. But more generally the English court of king's bench, from which our practice on the subject is derived, declines to interfere by mandamus to require a specific perform ance of a contract when no public right is concerned. Angell & A. Corp. 761; 2 Term, 260; 6 East, 356 ; Bacon, Abr. Mandamus ; 28 Vt. 587, 592.
It is 74 proper remedy to compel the per formance of a specific act where the act is ministerial in its character, 12 Pet. 524 ; 34 Penn. St. 293 ; 26 Ga. 665 ; 7 Iowa, 186, 390 ; but where the act is of a discretionary, 6 How. 92 ; 11 id. 272 ; 17 id. 284 ; 12 Cush. Mass. 403 ; 20 Tex. 60 : 10 Cal. 376 ; 5 Harr. Del. 108 ; 12 Md. 329 ; 4 Mich. 187; 5 Ohio St. 528, or judicial nature, 14 La. Ann. 60; 7 Cal. 130 ; 18 B. Monr. Ky. 423 ; 7 Ell. & B. 366, it will lie only to compel action generally, 11 Cal. 42 ; 30 Ala. N. s. 49 ; 28 Mo. 259 ; and where the necessity of acting is a matter of discretion, it will not lie even to compel ac tion. 6 How. 92 ; 5 Iowa, 380.
4. This remedy will be applied to compel a corporation or public officer, 14 La. Ann. 265; 41 Me. 15 ; 3 Ind. 452; see 7 Gray, Mass. 280, to pay money awarded against them in pursuance of b, statute duty, where no other specific remedy is provided, 6 Ad. & E. 335 ; 8 id. 438, 910 ; 34 Penn. St. 496; but if debt will lie, and the party is entitled to exe cution, mandamus will not be allowed. Red field, Railw. / 196, and cases cited in notes. But mandamus will not be granted to enforce a matter of contract or right upon which an action lies in the common-law courts, as to enforce the duty of common carriers, 7 Dowl.
Parl. Cas. 566, or where the proper remedy is in equity. 3 Term, 646; 16 Mees. & W. Exch. 451. But where compensation is claimed for damages done under a statute, mandamus is the proper remedy. 2 Railw. Cas. 1 ; Redfield, Railw. 196, pt. 3, 4, and notes and cases cited.
5. Mandamus is the appropriate remedy to compel corporations to produce and allow an inspection of their books and records, at the suit of a corporator, where a controversy exists in which such inspection is material to his interest. 2 Strange, 1223; 3 Term, 141; 4 Maule & S. 162.
It lies to compel the performance by a cor poration of a variety of specific acts within the scope of its duties. 34 Penn. St. 496; 26 Ga. 665 ; 2 Mete. Ky. 56.