318 FEDERAL REPORTBR. �3. The third defence stated is that the same cause of action pending is before the supreme court of Missouri, during the pendency of which a transfer of the alleged title was made to this plaintiff. �If the allegations were of a collusive transfer, in fraud of jurisdiction, that question, it is contended, should be raised in abatement. Even if that were the rule, strictly, the aver- ment is not suf&oient to raise the question. It is not averred that there was a collusive transfer, or that the plaintiflE was not, at institution of this suit, the owner in fee. �The demurrer is sustained. ���United States v. Labette Countt. �(Oircuit Court, D. Kamas. , 1881.) �Mandamtjs — Public Officeb. �The only office of the writ of mandamus, when addressed to a pub- lic otecer, is to compel him to exercise such functions as the lawcon- fers upon him, and such part of the mandate of the writ as enjoins the performance of duties he has, under the law, no power to per- form, is void. �SaMB — BOABD OP COUNTT CoMMISSIONERS— LEVT AND COLLECTION �OF Taxes to Satisfy Judgment. �The laws of Kansas, relative to the collection of taxes, require — (1) That the taxes shall be levied by the board of county commission- ers ; (2) that the tax roll shall be prepared by the county clerk ; (3) that the taxes shall be collected and paid over by the treasurer. A writ of mandamus having issued commanding the board of county commissioners " to levy and collect a sufflcient tax"to paya judg- ment against the county, and " to cause the said moneys to be paid overto" X., the board levied the tax, but it was not collected and paid over. Held : �(1) That section 6, c. 107, Laws of Kansas of 1876, did not empower the board to collect the taxes therein ref erred to, except through the usual agency of the ofilcials of the county, as other taxes were col- lected. �(2) That the members of the board were not punishable for con- tempt for failing to obey a writ commanding the performance of duties which by law devolved on the county clerk and treasurer. �(3) That the county clerk and treasurer were not punishable for contempt for failing to obey a writ which was not addressed to or ��� �
