546 DUVALL v. WATERS.—1 BLAND.

the year 1783, this form of a writ of injunction to stay waste
pending an action of ejectment, appears to have been treated as
then well established;(h) and I have met with another instance in

ings at law. Upon which, on the same day, an injunction was granted as
prayed.

On the 7th of July, 1785, it was decreed, that the injunction be made per-
petual, that the patent be vacated, and that the possession be delivered.—
Chanc. Proc. No. 3./oZ. 211.—This case is in other respects more fully re-
ported in 2 H. & McH. 201.

COALE v. GAERETSON.—This bill was filed, on the 15th of February, 1791,
by Richard Coale against Job Garretson. It sets forth all the particulars of
the plaintiff's case, by which it appears in substance, that on a certificate,
bearing date on the 8th of January, 1773, he had in April, 1775, obtained a
patent for a tract of land called Coale's Discovery. But that the defendant
had, by the fraudulent means therein stated, caused a certificate of survey
of the same land to be made on the 17th of June, 1772, upon which he had
obtained a patent; that afterwards this defendant brought an action of eject-
ment and obtained a judgment. The bill alleged, that this defendant had
heen put into possession by the sheriff under a writ of possession; and that
he had issued a ca. sa. for costs, which this plaintiff had superseded; but it
is not averred, or even intimated in the bill, that this defendant had com-
mitted, or ever threatened to commit waste. Yet the bill prayed for an in-
junction to prevent the said Job Garretson from committing any waste on
the said tract of land called Coale's Discovery; also to prevent the said Gar-
retson from serving the said execution, or from proceeding any further on
the said judgment: and for general relief. &c. There was an affidavit, in
the usual form, of the truth of the matters set forth; and an injunction
bond.

HANSON, C., 15th February, 1791.—Issue subpoena and injunction to stay
execution for costs; but not waste.

The defendant on the 14th of December. 1793, put in his answer by which
he denied all fraud, and also positively denied the legality and validity of
the plaintiff's title, &c.

Some time after which the plaintiff, by his petition on oath, set forth and
averred, that the defendant had cat down and carried away wood and timber
growing on the land in controversy, and still continued to commit waste
and destruction upon the land, &c. Whereupon he prayed for an injunc-
tion to stay waste and destruction upon the said tract of land called Coale's
Discovery, &c.

HANSON, C., 28th October, 1795.—Issue injunction to prohibit waste, &c.
in Coale's Discovery, in Baltimore County, surveyed for Richard Coale agree-
ably to the prayer of this petition.

After which the case coming on for final hearing on bill, answer and
proofs, it was on the 35th of May, 1797, decreed, that the injunction be made
perpetual, and that the defendant convey the land to the plaintiff. MS.—In
other respects this case seems to be sufficiently reported in 1 H. & J. 370, 378.

(A) Maryland, to wit:—The State of Maryland to Michael Krips his agents,
hirelings and servants, Greeting: Whereas Edward Flannagan of Baltimore
County, and Elizabeth his wife have exhibited unto us in our High Court of