DNITED BTATBB V. JUSTICES OF LAUDERDALB COUNTI. 461 �court, which were accepted, leaving the county without a quorum in the court authorized to levy the tax. This was not done until serv- ice upon them of the writ of mandamus, nor until thej' had assem- bled and proposed to the attorney of relater negotiations for a com- promise, which ultimately failed. The affidavits disclose a conflict of evidence between the attorney and the justices as to what trans- pired at the time of the meeting of the justices, they insisting that he waived or excused a levy, and agreed to submit the proposition for compromise to his client, while he insista he did not interfere with the writ, but only agreed to submifc a proposition to his client on their undertaking to make a levy either at that term or an adjourned term to be held for the purpose. The court was adjourned to a subsequent day, when the relator's refusai of the compromise was presented, and, being received, the justices resigned in sufficient numbers to leave the court without the number required to make a levy. The sheriff of the county bas never held elections to fill the vacancies, as required by law, and the affidavits show a condition of great public hostility to any levy of a tax, and a determination of the people and the officers to do all in their power to escape payment of the bonds, which are claimed to be fraudulent, notwithstanding the decision of the supreme court in favor of their validity. �The relater served this rule upon the justices to show cause why they should not be punished for centempt of the process of the court, claiming that the act of resignation was a centempt, and that the constitution continued the resigning officers in office until their suc- cessors are qualified. The defendants answer the rule by setting up their right to resign as a defence, and excusing their failure to comply with the writ before the resignation on the ground of the agreement with the attorney of the relater. Some of the justices swear that they resigned on account of bad health and other causes not con- nected with the mandamus proceedings, while others rest alone on the legal right of resignation. �Humes e Poston, for relater. �Gantt de PattersoH and Emerson Etheridge, fer respondents. �Hammond, D. J. I am unable to see why an officer served with a mandamus to levy taxes should be compelled to remain in office to discharge that duty any more than to discharge any other duty im- posed by law. The mandamus directs him to de what by law he should do without it, but does not, in any legal sense, make the duty more binding. U. S. v. Clark County, 95 U. S. 769. If an officer is justiucd in surrendering his office because its duties are disagreeable ��� �
