250 HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY.

held by trustees for its benefit, and was by them afterwards
sold, and the proceeds of sale applied to the payment of other
debts than those of the complainants.

No sale was made by the sheriff under his levy, and things re-
mained in this state until December, 1845, when the bill was
filed in this cause by the complainants. At the time these
drafts were accepted by the canal company, a receipt was sign-
ed by William Harness, in which he said, "I accept the same,"
(the accepted drafts,) "as full payment of the lands of William,
Joseph and Hannah Harness," (the complainants,) "in Alleghany
county, Maryland, condemned by inquisition at the instance of
said canal company, and affirmed by the court of that county, at
October term, 1838." The bill alleged the insolvency of the
company; that the condemned lands were the complainants'
only resource for the payment of their claim; and, that these
would be rendered worthless by the passage of the canal through
them, which, however, would be done, unless they were aided
by an injunction. The late Chancellor granted the injunction,
which, on the coming in of the answers, was continued till the
hearing.]

THE CHANCELLOR :

Though respectable authorities may be found for the princi-
ple, that the right of ennnent domain inherent in the sovereign
power, authorizes the government to take and appropriate pri-
vate properly for public uses, without making compensation to
the owner, unless there is some provision in the constitution re-
strictive of the power, I am fully persuaded, that no such prin-
ciple can be maintained in this state. The decisions of the
court of last resort here, as I understand them, clearly forbid
the exercise of any such power.

In commenting upon the act of 1825, chapter 190, which
proposed to abolish one corporation and to transfer its fran-
chises and property to another, without the consent of the form-
er, the Court of Appeals declared, that independently of the
constitution of the United States, prohibiting the states from
passing laws impairing the obligation of contracts, there