Application to the Supreme Court for writ of mandate to require the respondent, as Auditor of the City and County of San Francisco, to enter upon the assessment book of that city and county for the fiscal year 1873-4 the unpaid taxes for the fiscal year 1872-3 upon certain solvent debts.

The parties, so far as mentioned in the petition, and the amounts assessed, are as follows: Masonic Savings and Loan Society, assessed at three hundred and sixty-five thousand dollars; Savings and Loan Society, at seven million nine hundred and sixty-eight thousand seven hundred and forty dollars and forty cents; Societie Francaise d’Epargnes, at four million nine hundred and fifty-seven thousand five hundred and eighty-three dollars and seventy-three cents; German Savings and Loan Society, at two million six hundred and twenty thousand and twenty-one dollars; Odd Fellows’ Savings Bank, at three million eighty thousand seven hundred and ninety-three dollars; San Francisco Savings Union, at four million two hundred and twenty-seven thousand nine hundred and forty dollars; Hibernia Savings and Loan Society, at eleven million three hundred and fifty-four thousand five hundred and thirty-two dollars; Land Mortgage Union of California, at thirty-three thousand nine hundred and sixteen dollars; Security Savings Bank, at three hundred and thirteen thousand nine hundred and sixty-two dollars and seventy-seven cents; Humboldt Savings and Loan Society, at five hundred and seven thousand three hundred and three dollars. The petition also states that there are many other assessments against divers persons for solvent debts; that the rate of the tax for State purposes was fifty cents in the hundred dollars, and for city and county purposes one dollar in each hundred dollars; that the Auditor delivered a corrected copy of the assessment book to the Tax Collector pursuant to law, on the fourth Monday in October, 1872; that the Collector attempted to collect the taxes but was enjoined [the injunctions were subsequently dissolved by the Supreme Court]; that on the third Monday in January, 1873, the Tax Collector attended at the office of the Auditor and compared the duplicate assessment book with the original, and marked “paid” in the latter all the taxes so marked in the former, not including the taxes on solvent debts, and then delivered to the Auditor a complete delinquent list, including such taxes; that the Auditor compared the list with the assessment book, certified it to be correct, and delivered it to the Tax Collector on the first Monday in February, 1873; that none of the taxes designated have been paid; that on the 25th of September, 1873, the Tax Collector attended at the office of the Auditor, marked the taxes that had been paid upon the assessment book, but did not mark the delinquent taxes on solvent debts; that at the same time the Auditor requested him to make the affidavit “that the taxes not marked paid ’ had not been paid, and that he had not been able to discover any property belonging to or in the possession of the person liable to pay the same whereof to collect them, ” which he refused to do, but did make an affidavit that to the best of his knowledge and belief “every person and all property assessed in the delinquent list for the fiscal year 1872-3, on which taxes have been paid, has been credited in the list with such payment;” that the Auditor has not entered these delinquent taxes, or any part of them, on the assessment book for the fiscal year 1873-á; that on the'27th day of September, 1873, the Auditor delivered to the Collector what purported to be a duplicate assessment book for that year, whióh does not contain the taxes on solvent debts, and though it had been demanded of the Auditor that he should complete the book by inserting those taxes, he had refused to do so, contending that they had been canceled by the order of the Board of Supervisors quoted in the opinion of the Court. The answer sets up the order attempting to cancel the taxes as a defense. The opinion of the Court was filed December 8th, 1873.

The other facts are stated in the opinion and concurring opinion.