Certiorari only lies to an inferior tribunal, which the Board of Supervisors is not. (Stat. 1851, p. 123, sec. 456.) The writ will lie to cure excess of jurisdiction, but not where thetribunal has no jurisdiction. (3 Dall. 411; 1 Cond. Rep. 190-192.)
Wilson has no such interest as will sustain his application for the writ. Competition in business will not be restrained.
The writ does not show that the Board of Supervisors had exceeded its jurisdiction. The complaint is that they are about to exceed, which is not sufficient. (6 Mass. 72; 17 Mass. 357.)
Until action taken, there is no error to correct. The Board may decide against the application. There would then be no error: the language of the statute is, " has exceeded ."
The counsel further examined the powers of the Supervisors in the premises, which this Court did not consider.
The notice and petition of the applicants for the ferry are set out upon the record, to which no exception was taken.
JUDGES: Heydenfeldt, Justice, delivered the opinion of the Court. Wells, Justice, concurred.
OPINION
HEYDENFELDT, Judge
The writ of certiorari was sued out prematurely.
If it is true, as insisted by the appellant, that the Board of Supervisors had no jurisdiction over the subject, the objection should first have been taken before the Board. This course might have saved the necessity of an appeal. Without the action of the Board, it is impossible to say whether it would have decided to take or decline jurisdiction, and until it shall do one or the other, there can be no cause of complaint.
The certiorari was properly dismissed, and the judgment is affirmed.