arose from the act of the opposite party, or from unavoidable necessity.(r)

A bill of peace to prevent litigation at law, is allowed only in case the plaintiff has satisfactorily established his right at law, or where the persons who controvert the right, are so numerous as to render an issue under the directions of the court, necessary to bring in all the parties concerned, and to prevent a multiplicity of suits.(s)

II. To restrain the infringement of patents.

An injunction may be obtained to restrain the infringement of patents; as where persons get a patent, and have been in possession of it, (a sale of the invention is considered as possession,) an injunction will be issued against a person invading it, until the right is tried at law; and this, although the Chancellor may be doubtful whether the patent is good.(a)

III. To stay waste.

Injunctions to stay waste, are very frequently ap plied for in Chancery, and a mere threat to commit waste, is sufficient to ground an injunction upon; it not being necessary for the plaintiff to wait till the waste is actually committed.(a)

An injunction to stay waste, will be granted though there is no suit pending, and though no action at law can be maintained against the tenant.(b)

(+) Dodge and others v. Strong, 2 Johns. Chan. Rep. 228,

(8) Eldridge v. Hill & Murray, 2 Johns. Chan. Rep. 281.

(a) 14 Ves. 130.

.

(a) 1 Mad. 114. Gibson v. Smith, 2 Atk. 185.

(b) Kane v. Vandenburgh and others, 1 Johns. Chan. Rep. 11.

An injunction is not allowed, in order to prevent the repetition of a trespass, in entering and cutting down timber on land of which the plaintiff is in possession as owner, and has adequate remedy at law for the trespass.(c)

Though it seems, an injunction may be allowed in a case of trespass, under very special circumstances.(d) Injunction lies, to prevent a lessee making material alterations in a dwelling-house, by changing it into a warehouse or store, which would produce permanent injury to the building.(e)

A mortgagor, who has sold his equity of redemption, without taking any security as indemnity against his bond, cannot have an injunction to stay waste against his vendee, on the ground that he will be answerable for what the land may fail to satisfy the mortgage.(f)

An injunction to stay waste between tenants in common, lies in special cases; as to prevent one tenant in common in possession, from cutting down timber growing on the land, and not wanted for the necessary use of the farm.(g)

An injunction lies against a mortgagor, in possession of mortgaged premises, to stay waste.(h)

Where commissioners, appointed under the authority of an act of the legislature to drain a swamp, exceed their authority, to the injury of the plaintiff, a perpetual injunction will be granted, although there

(c) Stephens v. Beekman and others, Johns. Chan. Rep. 501.

1 Johns. Chan. Rep. 318. (d) Ibid.

(e) Douglas and others v. Wiggins and another, 1 Johns. Chan. Rep. 435.

(f) Brumby v. Fanning & Devoe, 1

(g) Hawley v. Clowes, 2 Johns. Chan Rep. 122.

(h) Brady v. Waldron & Waldron, 2 Johns, Chan. Rep. 146.

has been no trial at law; the plaintiff's right to the land being undisputed.(i)

IV. To restrain the sale of books, &c.

An injunction to restrain the sale of books, printed music, or prints, will be granted, if a proper ground be laid for such proceedings.

If, however, a publication be of such a nature that the author can maintain no action at law, a Court of Equity will grant an injunction even upon the submission in the answer. The court, for instance will not, says Lord Eldon, "give an account of the unhallowed profits of libellous publications."(a)

V. To restrain the negociation of bills of exchange, &c.

If negociable securities, notes, or bills, are affected by fraud, and are, before they are due, endorsed in a mercantile manner, the endorser, for the sake of commerce, will not be affected by the fraud, and therefore the negociation of them may be restrained by injunction immediately on filing the bill, supported by an affidavit of the truth of the fraudulent circumstance stated in the bill, for the defendant should, upon intimation of the suit, by negociating the security, defeat its object.(a)

VI. To prevent the commission of nuisances.

Injunctions to stay nuisances, will, under circumstances, be granted, but they will be extended only to

(1) Belknap and others v. Belknap and er, 7 Ves. 1.

others, 1 Johns. Chan. Rep. 463.

(a) 1 Mad. 123, 124. Wolcott v. Walk

(a) 1 Mad. 127. Esp. 43. in note.

such as are nuisances at law: the fears of mankind, though they may be reasonable ones, will not create a nuisance.(a)

Nuisances are private or public. A private nuisance is, that which affects only particular persons, as in stopping up ancient lights, &c. A public nuisance is, such as affects many persons, though at the same time, it may likewise be of a private nature too, as in the case of a hole in the highway, &c. &c.

This court has concurrent jurisdiction with courts of law, in a case of private nuisance, by diverting or obstructing an ancient water course, and may issue an injunction to prevent the interruption, though the plaintiff has not established his title at law.(b)

Carrying on banking operations, contrary to the statute, is not such a mischief, or public nuisance, that this court would grant this injunction to restrain the party, even if it had jurisdiction over public nuisances, which it seems it has not.(c)

VII. Injunctions on a bill of interpleader.

In the cases of a bill of interpleader, if the defendants have commenced actions at law, unless they are ejectments, or suits in equity, an injunction must be prayed in the usual form, to restrain the claimants from proceeding till the right is determined, and in support of the motion for the injunction, an affidavit of facts may be read. But it seems, the plaintiff never can proceed compulsorily by injunction till he has

(a) 1 Mad. 128.

(c) Attorney General v. Utica Insu(b) Gardner v. The Trustees of New. rance Company, 2 Johns. Chau. Rep. 379. bargh, 2 Johns. Chan. Rep. 162.

brought the money into court, though there are some cases that point to a contrary doctrine.(a)

VIII. To restrain the use of partnership name.

Where a partnership is dissolved, a bill may be filed for an account, and to restrain the defendant from using the partnership name, and receiving the partnership debts.(b)

Affidavits, ex parte, cannot be read in opposition to a motion made on the coming in of the answer, to dissolve an injunction, restraining one copartner from using the copartnership name, or doing any act relative to the partnership concern, or in support of the allegations in the bill.(c)

IX. Where the flowing of a stream is obstructed.

A. defendant had a piece of water supplied by the same stream from which a mill of the plaintiff was supplied, and the defendant sometimes kept back the water, at other times let it run in such quantities that the mill was overflowed; on a bill filed for the purpose, an injunction was granted to restrain the defendant from preventing its flowing in regular quantities.(d)

X. In cases of forcible entry.

The court will grant an injunction when there has been a forcible entry by commissioners of turnpike, for

(a) 1 Mad. 143. Thannet v. Patter son, Barnard, 247. 2 Austr. 551. in note, and S Anstr. 798. 2 Ves. jun. 101. LansTow v. Boylston, 3d Bro. 56.

(c) Eastburn & Downs v. Kirk, 14 Johns, Chan, Rep. 444.

(d) 1 Mad. 129. 1 Chan. Cases, 574. See Robinson v. Lord Byron, 1 Bro. C.

(b) 1 Mad. 78. Master v. Kirton, SC. 588. Ves. 75.