CANAL ZONE ex rel, SEIXAS V. GUDGER.

allegation that the relator tendered any bill of exceptions to the respondent herein at any time, the only averment in that regard being that the relator prayed an appeal which prayer was denied.
In the case of ordinary civil actions the method specifically provided by the Code Qf Civil Procedure for bringing a judgment of the Circuit Court before the Supreme Court for review is by a bill of exceptions, which bill must be tendered to the Circuit Judge for certification by him (Sec. 136, C. C. P.). There are no specific provisions in the Code of Civil Procedure with reference to perfecting appeals, except certain provisions in connection with appeals in special proceedings, nor is there any provision with respect to motions for the allowance of appeals, nor does the code specifically enjoin upon the trial judge any duty regarding either the allowance or disallowance of appeals as such. It is evident, therefore, that even if as contended by the relator he was entitled to have the judgment of the Circuit Court reviewed by the Supreme Court, his petition for a writ of mandamus fails to show that he took or attempted to take the proceedings provided by the code to obtain such review.
Section 552 of the Code of Civil Procedure provides that the Supreme Court may in the exercise of its original jurisdiction issue writs of mandamus to the Circuit Court and judge thereof, "wherever said court or judge unlawfully neglects, the performance of a duty which the law specifically or specially enjoins as a duty imposed upon such court or judge." And the writ of mandamus being an extraordinary remedy, it is clear that the court has no authority to issue the same except such authority as is specifically conferred by law.
Since, therefore, the petition herein fails to show, that the relator made any proper attempt to perfect his bill of exceptions and since it also fails to show that the respondent unlawfully neglected the performance of any duty specifically or specially enjoined upon him as acting judge of the Circuit Court for the Second Circuit, it is considered by the court that the alternative writ heretofore issued should be quashed, that the stay granted therein should be vacated and the petition dismissed with costs against the re'ator. It is so ordered.
JUSTICE JACKSON concurred.
Affirmed.

71