Appeals and writs of error are in no sense to be compared to certiorari. In re Duncan, 43 Okla. 691, 144 P. 374 (1914); — as a matter of fact, generally speaking, the presence of the right to appeal makes inappropriate and unavailable the right to certiorari. 14 C.J.S. Certiorari § 39, p. 184.
"Within 60 days from the final judgment of the county court, appeal may be taken by either party to the Supreme Court of the state as other appeals are taken." In re Duncan, 43 Okla. 691, 144 P. 374, it was held that the appeal to this court in such proceeding was not contemplated by section 15, art. 7, of the Constitution, and that the appeal would not lie; and in Rogers, Treasurer, et al. v. Duncan, 57 Okla. 20, 156 P. 678, in the body of the opinion, on page 28, the reason for such decision is more fully stated: "* * * The jurisdiction conferred upon the county court in the matter of determining questions on appeal from the county treasurer is purely statutory and special, and the court must remain strictly within the bounds prescribed by the statute, and it is only authorized to determine questions specifically provided for in the statute granting such authority, and in the particular manner therein prescribed."
Motion is here made to dismiss the appeal on the ground that no appeal will lie from the county court to the Supreme Court in a proceeding of this kind. In support of this motion In re Duncan, 43 Okla. 691, 144 P. 374, and the earlier cases to the same effect are cited. These decisions are in point and would be controlling but for the fact that the statute (section 7449, Rev. Laws 1910) has been amended, expressly granting an appeal to the Supreme Court from the county court (Sess. Laws 1915, p. 386).
Thereafter the said Duncan attempted to appeal from the judgment of the county court to the Supreme Court, which said appeal was dismissed for want of jurisdiction. In re Duncan, 43 Okla. 691, 144 P. 374. The plaintiff, Duncan, in December, 1914, after the dismissal of his petition in error, filed in the superior court of Muskogee county his petition against Connell Rogers, county treasurer, the county commissioners, and J.F. Ledbetter, sheriff, the purpose of which petition was to enjoin said defendants from levying the tax warrant upon the property of the said plaintiff in an effort to collect the amount of taxes assessed against him upon the notes and mortgages described herein.
The court there cited, in support of its position, Board of Com'rs of Kingfisher County v. Guarantee State Bank, 27 Okla. 736, 117 P. 216; Asher State Bank v. Board of Com'rs of Pottawatomie County, 31 Okla. 145, 120 P. 634. The same question was again before the court in Re Duncan, 144 P. 374, and the rule theretofore announced in State et al. v. Cawthorn's Estate, supra, was followed. Under section 15, art. 7, Constitution, it is provided that appeals and proceedings in error shall be taken from the judgments of the county court direct to the Supreme Court in all cases appealed from justices of the peace, and in all criminal cases of which the county court is vested with jurisdiction, and in all civil cases originally brought in the county court, in the same manner and by like proceedings as appeals are taken to the Supreme Court from the judgments of the district court.