536 DUVALL v. WATERS.—1 BLAND.

equity rested; and thereupon gave notice of a motion to dis-
solve.

BLAND, C., 1st October, 1827.—The motion to dissolve the in-
junction standing ready for hearing, the solicitors of the parties
were heard and the proceedings read and considered.

It has been urged, in support of this motion, that this was not
merely and properly a case of waste, but an injunction, in restraint
of trespass, granted at the instance of a plaintiff Avho claimed
title; which title had been directly and positively denied by the
defendants. And that according to the well established law of
this Court, as deduced from the English authorities, no such in-
junction could be granted or continued where the title of the
plaintiff, as in this instance, was admitted to be in dispute, or was
altogether denied by the defendant in his answer. This objection
is certainly well founded upon the principles of the English law;
but it is otherwise according to the law of Maryland.

*This is the first instance, since I have been here, in which
571 the correctness of this peculiar species of injunction has
been called in question; and as its origin and nature seem to have
fallen into some degree of obscurity; it may be well to take a
larger view of the subject than might otherwise be deemed neces-
sary.

The terms waste and trespass are very often used to designate
injuries to property of the identical same nature. The cutting
of a timber tree, or the pulling down of a house, may be an act
entirely lawful; or it may be an act of waste, or of trespass; and,
that not because of any peculiarity of the act itself; but, because
of the party, by whom it may have been done, having an absolute
title, a limited estate, or no right whatever. The absolute owner
of an estate in fee simple, without any incumbrance, or charge
upon it, has an uncontrollable power to dispose of it as he may
think proper; and can be, in 110 way held accountable, as a waster
or trespasser, for any thing he may do with the trees, houses, or
soil of his lands. If he who does such an act has only a particular
estate, as a tenancy for life or years, it is properly denominated
waste; bat, if he has no right whatever, it is then said to be a
trespass. In general, when any permanent or lasting injury is done,
by the holder of the particular estate, to the inheritance, or to the
prejudice of any one who has an interest in the inheritance, it is
properly called waste; as where timber trees are felled, or houses
are destroyed by a tenant for life or , years, or by a mortgagor or
mortgagee in possession; or by a tenant in fee simple, where the
State has reserved to itself an interest in the trees, &c. for the use
of the public. (f)

{f} Although in England the cutting of timber, by a tenant in fee simple,
cannot be deemed waste: yet if the public has an interest in the forest trees,