This Chief-Justice delivered the opinion of the court.

Application fora writ of mandamus to compel the Judge to approve an appeal bond in case of an appeal attempted to be taken by Caro, from an order adjudging him guilty of a contempt in violating au injunction issued by the court, and imposing a fine therefor.

An appeal will not lie in such case, a- matters of contempt of the authority of a court are entirely within the province of the court adjudging the same, and .not subject to be reviewed upon writ of error or appeal. Easton vs. The state, 39 Ala., 551; Ex-parte Summers, 5 Iredell, 149; The State vs. Tipton, 1 Blackf., 166; Ex-pàrte Kearney, 7 Wheat., 38; Ex-parte Stickney, 40 Ala., 160; Cossart vs. State, 14 Ark., 538; Bunch vs. State, 14 ib., 544; Ware vs. Robinson, 9 Cal., 107; Howard vs. Durand, 36 Ga.. 346; Hunter vs. State, 6 Inch, 423; First Cong. Ch. vs. Muscatine, 2 Iowa, 69 ; Bickley vs. Com., 1 J. J. Mar., 575; Turner vs. Com., 2 Met., (Ky.) 619; Watson vs. Thomas, 6 Ditt., 248; People vs. Simonson, 9 Mich., 492; Romeyn vs. Caplis, 17 Mich., 449; State vs. Towle, 42 N. H., 540; Coryellvs. Holcombe, 9 N. J. Eq., 650; Johnston vs. Com., 1 Bibb, 598; Case of Yates, 4 Johns. R., 443; Buel vs. *19Street, 9 Johns. R., 443; McCredie vs. Senior, 4 Paige, 378; People vs. Sturtevant, 9 N. Y., 263; State vs. Sheriff, 1 Mill., (S. C. Court,) 145; Martin’s Case, 5 Yerger, 456; Casey vs. State, 25 Tex., 380; Vilas vs. Burtow, 27 Vt., 56; In re Cooper, 32 Vt., 253; Ex-parte Edwards, 11 Fla.

Writ denied.