
    Uriah Oakes, Petitioner, &.c. versus Charles Hill.
    On an application for a mandamus to compel the clerk of a parish to give the pe- , tilioner a certificate of his having become a member of the parish, in order that he might file it with the clerk of the religious society which he wished to leave, the mandamus was refused, on the ground that the petitioner had a remedy by action, and a decision on this summary process might affect the rights of persons who had not been heard.
    Oakes, an inhabitant of Malden, wishing to become a member of the first parish in that town, applied to Hill, the parish clerk, for a certificate of his having joined the parish, in order that he might file it with the cleric of the religious society to which he had previously belonged, as evidence of his having left that society. Hill refused to comply with the request, and Oakes now applied for a mandamus to compel him to grant such a certificate. The case involved the question, whether any person had a right to become a member of the parish without their consent.
    The petition was supported by Fletcher, and opposed by Shaw and Peabody.
    
    The counsel on both sides were desirous of obtaining the opinion of the Court upon the merits of the case.
    
      Jan. 3d, 182 V.
    
      March 17th.
    
   But at this March term the Court said they had come to the conclusion, that it was not proper to issue a mandamus. They remarked that an action was pending in which the same ques•tions might be tried, and that a determination on this summary process might affect the rights of persons who had no opportunity to be heard. 
      
       See Oakes v. Hill, 10 Pick. 333, and 14 Pick. 442.
     