
    BELVIDERE WATER COMPANY, APPELLANT, v. INHABITANTS OF THE TOWN OF BELVIDERE, RESPONDENT.
    Argued March 3, 1914
    Decided July 10, 1914.
    On appeal from the Supreme Court, in which court the following memoranda, was filed by Mr. Justice Garrison:
    “We think that this writ should be dismissed, for the reason that no judgment we could render would possess any remedial efficacy to the prosecutor. The prosecutor and the defendant have for a long time worked under a contract, the terms of which are violated by the municipal action declared in the resolution that is brought up by this writ. The only point at issue between the parties is the enforceability of the prosecutor’s contract, obviously, therefore, the test of the validity of the resolution is to enforce the contract; if it is enforceable, the resolution is of no effect; if it is not enforceable, the resolution does the prosecutor no harm.
    “If the prosecutor had the defendant’s bond for a thousand dollars, and the defendant passed a resolution to pay only $500, the remedy would be not to review the' resolution by certiorari but to enforce the bond by suing on it. The same is true of the present resolution. The only ground on which the prosecutor could have the resolution set aside would be that its contract constituted a monopoty, but this is not argued and is not set forth as one of the reasons for setting aside the resolution.
    “The writ is dismissed.”
    For the appellant, George M. Shipman and Gilbert Collins.
    
    For the respondent, George A. Angle and Joseph M. Roseberry.
    
   Per Curiam.

The judgment under review herein should be affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion delivered by Mr. Justice Garrison in the Supreme Court.

For affirmance—The Chancellor, Chief Justice, Bergen, Kalisci-i, Black, Bogert, Vredenburgh, White, Hep-P KNI1E1MER, JJ. 9.

For reversal—None.  