138 SALMON v. CLAGETT.—3 BLAND.

and thirty, and shall also indemnify and save harmless the .said
Charles Salmon against all endorsements which the said Charles

of land under a defective title. Quynn v. Stain.es, 8 H. & McH. 128. Cf.
Jones v. Jones, 4 Gill, 87. An order directing a trustee to suspend further
proceedings operates as an injunction. Denkins' Case, 2 Bland, 398.

Upon a bill for alimony and divorce by a wife against her husband, proof
was taken of his title to various items of leasehold property, upon petition
of the wife, alleging she was advised it was in the power of her husband to
alien the same and secrete the proceeds pending the suit, so as to make null
any order for her maintenance, and an injunction was granted prohibiting
defendant from disposing of any part of his property in this State of which
evidence had been given. Ricketts v. Ricketts, 4 Gill, 106. In Symonds v.
Hallett, 24 Ch. D. 346. it appeared that upon a marriage a leasehold estate
bad been settled upon the usual trusts fur the wife for life, for her separate
use, and that afterwards the parties ceased to cohabit and the wife instituted
proceedings for a divorce. The husband claimed the right to use the said
property when and as he thought fit, and for his own purposes. In an
action by the wife against the trustees and her husband, claimiag adminis-
tration of the trusts of the settlement and an injunction restraining the hus-
band from entering the house, it was held that, under the circumstances of the
case, the wife was entitled to the injunction. Cf. Wood! v. Wood, 19 W. R.
1049. Pending proceedings for divorce, the husband may be enjoined from
interfering with the custody of the children or with property in possession
of the wife. 2 High on Inj. sec. 1393.

A party will be restrained from doing an act injurious to an individual,
or which may be prejudicial as a public nuisance, pending any judicial pro-
ceeding before those tribunals by which the authority to do the act, or its
lawfulness, is to be determined. Williamson v. Carnan, 1 G. & J. 185.
Though the grant of a right to erect wharves and employ steamboats, if
destructive of the paramount right of general navigation and fishing, may
be void, yet the remedy is not by injunction, which is only applicable to
special injuries in violation of private rights. Del. R. R. Co. v. Stump, S G.
& J. 479. Cf. The Wharf Case, 3 Bland, 361.

The inadequacy of the sureties in an administration bond may, under cer-
tain circumstances, furnish a basis for the ancillary jurisdiction of equity in
restraining the authority of an administrator, until the Orphans' Court can
inquire into the matter and secure the parties concerned by demanding new
security. Alexander v. Stewart, 8 G. & J. 226.

XVIII. MANDATORY INJUNCTIONS. Upon an application for specific per-
formance, equity may decree the assignment of a particular house, or the
erection or purchase of a house, to gratify the requirement of the contract.
Busey v. McCurley, 61 Md. 446. Where a conveyance from defendant to
complainant has been decreed, and on service of a copy of the decree and
tender of a deed, the defendant refuses to deliver up possession and to exe-
cute the deed, a writ of injunction to compel delivery of the possession may
be issued. Garret son v. Cole, 1 H. & J, 370. Equity may secure the delivery
of land, sold under its decree, to the purchaser by injunction. Dorsey v.
Campbell, I Bland, 356; McComb v. Kankey, Ibid, 363, note.

An injunction issued after decree is often a judicial process. Washington.
Univ. v. Green, 1 Md. Ch. 97. The bill alleged that certain buildings were
used for the purposes of a medical school and as an infirmary by the medical
faculty of a corporation and prayed! that defendant should be restrained