Nоtwithstanding the settlement of a bill of exceрtions purporting to show what transpired at thе hearing when the order quashing the writ was made, there still exists considerable uncertainty and confusion about the grounds on which the court'mаde that order. Apparently, however, thе action was predicated on facts arising subsequent to the return; such as that the same assessment had in another action been declared void, and a reassessment been ordered, and that the assessment roll hаd, long before the hearing, passed out of the possession of the respondent, thе town clerk, or perhaps because of the pendency of another action rendering unnecessary the certiorari proceeding. An inspection of the return, however, rеnders it unnecessary to disentangle the somewhat confused transactions which led the сourt, in the exercise of his' discretion, to order the writ quashed. That, of course, cannot prejudice the relator, if it appеars by the return that judgment of affirmance should have been entered. State ex rel. Gray v. Common Council of
By the Court.— Judgment affirmed.