
    BOSTIC v. COUNTY JUDGE OF ROCKWALL COUNTY.
    (No. 3970.)
    (Supreme Court of Texas.
    May 30, 1917.)
    Courts <&wkey;207(4) — Mandamus — Supreme Court — Issuance Against County Judge-Statute — '“Officer oe State Government.”
    Vernon’s Sayles’ Ann. Civ. St. 1914, art. 1526, giving the Supreme Court original jurisdiction to issue mandamus against any district judge, or Court of Civil Appeals, or judge of a Court of Civil Appeals, or officer of tlie state government, except the Governor, excludes power to award the writ against a county judge, who is not to be regarded as an officer of the state government.
    [Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Courts, Cent. Dig. § 756.
    For other definitions, see Words and Phrases, First and Second Series, Officer.]
    Mandamus by Dodd Bostic against the County Judge of Rockwall County. On motion for leave to file petition for mandamus.
    Motion denied.
    H. M. Wade, of Rockwall, for relator.
   PHILLIPS, C. J.

This case and two companion eases are .before us on motions for leave to file petitions for mandamus against the county judge of Rockwall County so as to require him to accejit pleas of guilty offered by the relators, and assess the proper fine, in certain misdemeanor prosecutions pending against them in the county court of that county.

This court has original jurisdiction in proper cases to issue a mandamus against “any district judge, or court of civil appeals or judge of a court of civil appeals, or officer of the state government, except the governor.” Art. 1526, Sayles’ Civil Statutes. The enumeration in the statute of district judges and judges of the courts of civil appeals as the classes of judicial officers against whom this court may issue the writ of mandamus in the exercise of original jurisdiction excludes any power in the court to so award the writ against a county judge, unless he may, be regarded as an “officer of the state government.” He is not such an officer in the sense in which that term is used in the statute. Travis County v. Jourdan, 91 Tex. 217, 42 S. W. 543.

We have no jurisdiction of the proceeding, and the motion is accordingly denied. 
      <@=»For other oases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes
     