Reclamation Districts—Legislative Acts.—The creation of reclamation districts and the setting off of lands and the delimiting of the boundaries of such districts are legislative acts.

Id.—Control of Courts over Legislative Acts of Inferior Boards.—There is a broad distinction to be recognized between the control by courts over the general legislature acting within its powers, and the control which may be exercised over inferior boards and tribunals charged with the performance of an act enjoined by the legislature.

Id.—Mandamus—Abuse of Discretion;—Enforcement of Particular Action.—While it is a general rule that mandamus will not lie to control the discretion of a court or officer, so as to force the exercise of discretion in a particular manner, it will lie to correct abuses of discretion, and to force a particular action by the inferior tribunal or officer, when the law clearly establishes the petitioner’s right to such action.

Id.—Right to Establishment of Independent District—Mandamus Lies to Enforce Right.—Landowners who seek to have their lands in a particular reclamation district set off and erected into an independent district, and who have taken all the steps and proceedings to that end required by sections 3446, 3472, 3481, et seq. of the Political Code, and upon the hearing of their petition established all of the facts required by law by uncontradicted, material, sufficient, and competent evidence, may maintain a writ of mandate against the board of supervisors, upon their refusal to make an order establishing such independent district, to compel them to make such order. Upon such a showing being made, the petitioners are entitled to have their lands set off into an independent district, and the board of supervisors are without power to arbitrarily deny it.

Id.—Hearing on Mandamus—Evidence to be Adduced.—On the hearing of the mandamus proceeding by the superior court, the facts asserted to have been proved before the board of supervisors by good and sufficient evidence without conflict are not to be tried de novo. The hearing should be had upon the same evidence presented to the board of supervisors, and if such evidence was uncontradicted, competent, and sufficient to prove satisfactorily all matters required by the Political Code, it will become the duty of the superior court to issue its mandate accordingly.

Id.—Appeal to Superior Court from Order of Board—Constitutional Law.—The provision of the act of 1893 (Stats. 1893, p. 174), purporting to provide for an appeal to the superior court from the order of the hoard of supervisors, is unconstitutional and unnecessary.