clear space clear space clear space white space
A
 r c h i v e s   o f   M a r y l a n d   O n l i n e

PLEASE NOTE: The searchable text below was computer generated and may contain typographical errors. Numerical typos are particularly troubling. Click “View pdf” to see the original document.

  Maryland State Archives | Index | Help | Search		 search for:
clear space
white space
Reports of Cases in the High Court of Chancery of Maryland 1846-1854
Volume 200, Volume 2, Page 411   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
   << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>
clear space clear space clear space white space

LAMBORN VS. THE COVINGTON CO. 411
The defendants then aver that, the land through which said
stream runs, and on which said spoil bank is placed, belongs
to said company, and is used by them in the lawful pursuit of
their regular business; that it is necessary for them to have
some convenient place for depositing the offcast from the mines,
and the most convenient place for such purpose is where the
old channel of deep run was; that in order to obtain said
place, they cut and dug through the land of said company, a new
channel for said stream, and then placed their spoil bank where
the old channel had been, and which they contend they have
a right, both in law and equity, to do. They further state,
and charge, that the new channel made by them is not a nar-
row trench, totally inadequate to carry off the flow of water,
as alleged in the bill, but, on the contrary, is, in every respect,
as large, and fully as wide and deep as the old channel was,
and carries off freely all water that flows there in ordinary sea-
sons, and they deny that complainant has suffered any injury
or been put to any expense or trouble, on account of the change
of the channel of deep run, or the formation of the spoU bank,
or that he is likely or liable to suffer any such damage. They
admit, that until restrained by the writ of injunction granted in
this case, they were employed in increasing and enlarging the
said spoil bank, but utterly deny, that they have, in any way,
filled up the new channel of said run, either by throwing off
cast therein, or by any other means, or have caused any back-
water against the dam of complainant, on the contrary, they
aver that there is a fall of two feet at present in the course of
the stream from said dam, to the point opposite where the said
spoil bank is placed, and that said fall is not thereby impeded
nor liable, nor likely to be, but is amply sufficient to carry off
all the water of the stream. The answer then prays that the
injunction may be dissolved.
Depositions were taken, and by consent of parties admitted
to be read at the hearing of the motion to dissolve. The case
was, upon this motion, submitted on written arguments of the
solicitors of the respective parties, and on the 29th of July,
1848, the following opinion was delivered :]

  		clear space
clear space
white space

Please view image to verify text. To report an error, please contact us.
Reports of Cases in the High Court of Chancery of Maryland 1846-1854
Volume 200, Volume 2, Page 411   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
   << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>


This web site is presented for reference purposes under the doctrine of fair use. When this material is used, in whole or in part, proper citation and credit must be attributed to the Maryland State Archives. PLEASE NOTE: The site may contain material from other sources which may be under copyright. Rights assessment, and full originating source citation, is the responsibility of the user.

Tell Us What You Think About the Maryland State Archives Website!

An Archives of Maryland electronic publication.
For information contact mdlegal@mdarchives.state.md.us.

©Copyright  November 18, 2025
Maryland State Archives