INDEX. 573

JURISDICTION—Continued.

equity, and its power to afford a remedy for a breach of this trust
cannot be questioned, unless it has been taken away by some express
statutory enactment. It.

6. Where the Court of Chancery has original jurisdiction, it is not depriv-
ed of it because the courts of law, by statutory enactments, may have
power over the same subject, when the enactments giving them
authority contain no provisions depriving this court of its ancient ju-
risdiction. Ib.

7. The Court of Chancery has no jurisdiction over a trustee acting under
the decree of a court of concurrent jurisdiction. If such an authority
were exercised by the co-ordinate equity tribunals of the state, the ut-
most confusion and clashing of power would ensue. Snyderva. Smyder,
295.

8. Courts of equity will interfere by injunction, even as against trespass-
ers, if the acts done or threatened to be done to the property would
be ruinous and irremediable. Georges Creek Cool and Iron Company
vs. Detmold, 371.

9. But an injunction is not granted to restrain a mere transfer, where the
injury is not irreparable and destructive to the plaintiff's estate, but is
susceptible of a perfect pecuniary compensation, and for which the
party may obtain adequate satisfaction in the ordinary course of law.
Ib.

10. In the case of waste, where there is privity of title, as between tenants
for life and the reversioner, it is not necessary for the plaintiff to show
irreparable injury or destruction to the estate to entitle him to the
remedy by|injunction. Ib.

11. But as between strangers or parties claiming adversely, there is no dis-
tinction between trespass and waste, and in both cases, the injury
must be shown to be irreparable before this court will grant an in-
junction. Ib.

12. It is conclusively settled, that a court of equity may interfere by in-
junction to prevent the commission of waste. Chttds vs. Smith, 483.

13. The objection to the jurisdiction of the Court of Chancery to stay waste
committed by adowress on her dower lands, upon the ground that the
remedy should be sought on the equity side of the County Court where
the proceedings for partition were had, would apply with equal force
to every application to enjoin proceedings upon judgments and suits
at law in the County Courts, and is, therefore, untenable. Ib.

14. In the case of misrepresentation, if facts, whether made with a know-
ledge of their untruth, and with intent to defraud, or made inadvertently
by mutual mistake of parties, or by mistake of either ofthefa, if the
other haa boon prejudiced thereby, a court of equity has jurisdiction
and will set aside the contract and declare it a nullity. Tayinwn vs.
MUchell, 497.

15. A court of equity has concurrent jurisdiction with courts of law in all
cases of fraud and damage, and it makes no difference that the sale
sought to be rescinded on the ground of fraud, was a sale of personal
property. Ib.