
    FURNISH v. ROBISON, Land Com’r.
    (Supreme Court of Texas.
    June 4, 1913.)
    Mandamus (§ 172) — Issues of Fact — Jurisdiction oar Court.
    The Supreme Court cannot try disputed issues of fact raised by the petition and answer in mandamus, and the case must be dismissed.
    [Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Mandamus, Cent. Dig. §§ 381-385; Dec. Dig. § 172.]
    Petition for mandamus by W. S. Furnish against J. T. Robison, Land Commissioner.
    Dismissed.
    Seth S. Searcy, of San Antonio, for relator. B. F. Looney, Atty. Gen., and G. B. Smedley, Asst. Atty. Gen., for respondent.
    
      
      For other eases see same topic and section NUMBER in Dec. Dig. & Am. Dig. Key-No. Series & Rep’r Indexes
    
   BROWN, C. J.

Relator seeks a writ of mandamus to the respondent requiring him to reinstate a purchase of school land which had been awarded to relator and thereafter declared forfeited. Respondent answered, setting up facts which would defeat the relator’s right. This presents a case involving disputed issues of fact, which this court cannot try.

It is therefore ordered that the case be dismissed.

HAWKINS, J., did not sit in this case.  