114 SALMON v. CLAGETT.—3 BLAND.

Tins bill was filed on the 14th day of July, 1828, by Charles
Salmon against Elizabeth Clagett, Edmund Clagett, Samuel A.

corporation, on the ground of the unconstitutionality of the charter, refused.
Shipley v. R. R., 34 Md., 341.

When, upon proceedings instituted to condemn land for a railroad the in-
quisition is returned to the Circuit Court, and. before any action is had
thereon, the parties seeking the condemnation eater upon the premises and
begin the construction of the road, such conduct is clearly unauthorized,
and equity will enjoin such unlawful entry until the final action of the Cir-
cuit Court on the inquisition, and the actual payment of the damages in the
event of the ratification of the inquisition. New Central Coal Co. v. George's
C. Co., 37 Md. 539. A company will be enjoined from making its road over
the land of a party when it has not paid or tendered compensation for the
land. R. E. Co. v. Owings, 15 Md. 199; Harness v. Canal Co.. 1 Md. Ch. 249.
When a railroad company has a right under its charter to acquire a right of
way over certain land by condemnation, and proceedings for such purpose
are dispensed with by reason of the consent of the owner of the land to the
construction of the road, and he subsequently, after the road has been built
at large expense, revokes his consent, equity will restrain him from inter-
fering with the company in the enjoyment of the right of way, pending pro-
ceedings to have the same condemned. R. R, Co. v. Algire, 63 Md. 319.

7. Pertaining to clouds on title Equity will not allow a title, otherwise
clear, to be clouded by a claim which cannot be enforced, either at law or in
equity. Holland v. Balto. 11 Md. 186: McCann v. Taylor. 10 Md. 418. Under
special circumstances, where the estate is in clanger of being sacrificed in
consequence of clouds upon the title, or conflict and confusion growing out
of the number and character of the liens and incumbrances upon it. equity
will interpose, and, keeping rival creditors off, sell the property for the
general benefit of all. Boyd v. Harris, 1 Md. Ch. 467. A bona fide assignee
of a mortgage has the right to file a bill to relieve the mortgaged estate from
the cloud and embarrassment produced by the unfounded pretensions of a
purchaser at a tax sale and his assignee, and to restrain such parties from
interfering with the property. Polk v. Reynolds, 31 Md. 106. Cf. 55 Md. 410.

In Welde v. Scotten, 59 Md. 77, it is said that numerous cases are to be
found where equity has interfered by injunction to prevent a sale about to
be made, lest it should unwarrantably cloud the complainant's title, but that
in none of the cases has the applicant alleged that the other party charged
him with fraud in the procurement of his title, to such party's prejudice.
In Abrahams v. Tappe, 60 Md. 317, a bill was filed by the owner of the re-
version, who had brought ejectment and re-entered for non-payment of
rent, against the mortgagee of the leasehold, for an injunction to restrain a
sale under the mortgage, and to remove the cloud upon the title.

8. Miscellaneous. Where a party claiming title to land has acquiesced for
a long period of time in its use as a burial ground, he and those claiming
under him, will be restrained from interfering with so much of it as has
been used as a burial place. Boyce v. Kalbaugh, 47 Md. 334. Injunction to
prevent the removal of a wooden building in the City of Baltimore, on the
ground of the invalidity of the ordinance requiring such removal, refused.
Moale v. Balto. 56 Md. 496. Injunction granted to restrain parties from
making an unauthorized use of a meeting house. Gilbert v. Arnold. 30 Md.
37. Where, pending exceptions to a Chancery sale, the reported purchaser
assumed the power to rent the property, it was held that as it was not al-
leged that the property was subject to waste in the hands of the purchaser