ART. 5] APPEALS FROM COURTS OF EQUITY. 149

The bond is only to stay the proceedings and has nothing to do with
the right of appeal. Baltimore v. B. & O. R. R. Co., 21 Md. 52. See also,
Lee v. Pindle, 11 G. & J. 364.

The proviso clause of this section, applied. Washington County v. School
Commissioners, 77 Md. 292.

For a discussion of the meaning and purpose of this section, see Blondheim
v. Moore, 11 Md. 371.

Prior to the adoption of this section, bonds were accepted by analogy to
the practice at law. and such bonds stayed the proceedings. Fullerton v
Miller, 22 Md. 1.

Cited but not construed in Brendel v. Zion Church, 71 Md. 85; McLuckie v.
Williams, 68 Md. 265.

See sec. 53. et seq., and sec. 64,' et seq.

1904, art. 5, sec. 30. 1888, art. 5, sec. 28. 1860, art. 5, sec. 24. 1830, ch. 185, sec. 1.

30. In case a party intends, on an appeal from a final decree or
order in the case, to dispute any previous order, and desires to stay the
operation of such order, he shall state his intention to dispute the same,
in writing, to be filed with the clerk, and shall give bond in such penalty
as the court may prescribe, with security to be approved by the court or
the clerk, to indemnify the other party from all loss and injury which
such party may sustain by reason of the staying of the operation of
such order.

The filing of the bond does not suspend the enforcement of an order for
counsel fees and alimony. Chappell v. Chappell, 86 Md. 540.

The object of the appeal bond is to suspend the operation of the previous
order, until a final decree is passed. An appeal taken directly from such
order will be dismissed. Lee v. Pindle, 11 G. & J. 364; Dugan v. Gittings.
3 Gill, 154.

Cited but not construed in Baltimore v. Weatherby, 52 Md. 449.

Ibid. sec. 31. 1888, art. 5, sec. 29. 1860, art. 5, sec. 25. 1832, ch. 197.
1843, ch. 73. 1868, ch. 102.

31. Whenever any court having equity jurisdiction shall refuse to
grant an injunction according to the prayer of the bill or petition filed
in the cause, an appeal may be taken from such refusal by any party
aggrieved thereby, and such right of appeal shall not be prejudiced by
the filing of an answer to the said bill or petition on behalf of any oppos-
ing party, nor by the taking of depositions in reference to the allega-
tions of the bill or petition to be read on the hearing of the application
for an injunction; and the said appeal shall be heard on a transcript of
the said bill or petition, with such other papers or proceedings in the
cause as may be necessary for the purposes of the appeal, and so soon
as conveniently may be after such transcript shall have been filed in the
court of appeals.

Where the court instead of hearing an application for an injunction
immediately, sets a subsequent date for the hearing meanwhile issuing a
restraining order, and at the hearing refuses the injunction, an appeal lies
under this section. Bonaparte v. Baltimore, etc., R. R. Co.. 75 Md. 343.

The history of this section, traced. An appeal lies from an order refusing
to grant an injunction ex parte. Chesapeake Telephone Co. v. Baltimore,
89 Md. 707. And see Webster v. Snsquehanna Pole Line Co., 112 Md. 423.

Prior to the Act of 1868. ch. 102, no appeal lay from an order refusing an
injunction after answer filed. Barnum v. Gordon. 28 Md. 97; Krone v.
Krone, 27 Md. 81; Stelgerwald v. Winans, 17 Md. G5.