Hyde

In effect, this case has already been before this court three times. The first (Hyde v. Thornton, *3 83 Cal. 83 ) was a petition asking this court to settle exceptions, on the ground that the judge of the tidal court refused to do so. This court held, after argument, that the defendants had the right to be heard on appeal, but they must compel the trial court to settle the statement if it refused, and could not ask this court to do so.

The second time (Hyde v. Boyle, 86 Cal. 352 ) was an application for leave to prove an exception, which, under the circumstances, this court declined to do.

The last (Hyde v. Boyle, 89 Cal. 590 ) was a motion to correct the bill of exceptions by striking out certain matters which appellants contended were not heard or considered in the court below. The court also refused this relief, but said: “We do not wish to be understood as holding that everything that is contained in a bill of exceptions is always to be considered by this court in reviewing the action of the court below. It may frequently happen that irrelevant matters are incorporated into the bill, and the bill itself may show upon its face that the matters therein recited were not…