case Lord viscount Falmouth and other in the name of themselves and the rest  of the proprietor of the i and watercourse set forth in the bill plaintiff Mr  lean on the farl of Radnor Mr trefusis and other defendant in court Lord  chancellor if a bill be bring to be quiet in the enjoyment of a watercourse  and of wear for work of stampmills and i divert and break down by the  defendant the court will grant a injunction before answer and make a order on  the defendant to put the premise in the same repair they be before the injury  a bill may be bring to be quiet and establish in the enjoyment of a I or  colliery before the right be establish at law for fear the I shall be ruin in  the mean time and a proper remedy can he have in no other court Mr  attorneygeneral for the plaintiff the end of this bill be for a injunction to  quiet the plaintiff in the enjoyment of their right and to have it establish  by a decree of this court to which purpose the bill set forth that Lord  Falmouth be seize in fee of the manor of Glantuan in Cornwall and of a waste  call north down belong to the say manor in which be several coppermines that  the defendant be seize of a farm call kerry wherry farm which be divide from  the say manor by a watercourse call black wherry water and that the say water  have belong to the Lord Falmouth and those under who he claim time out of mind  that the say Lord Falmouth be seize of several stamp mill erect on the say  waste to the number of five and twenty and mosely report that on the other  side of the water there be not one stamp mill though those mill be of great  profit and advantage in that country that the say mill be lease to one scholar  for ninetynine year and that for turn the water to these mill a wear be erect  call stamp head wear that Mr foster lease these stampingmills from my Lord  Falmouth and the i be frequent overflow he erect a engine for the drain of  they and two wear call engine head wear and little pool head wear and that one  end of the wear be always fix on kerry wherry side and peaceable suffer till  some time before the fill the bill and that the river be by these wear turn to  the mill and engine by cut or leap that in kerry wherry farm there be several  tin work from whence a great deal of water issue by a ancient adit that empty  itself into the say black wherry water just above engine head wear and that  other water arise from tin i in the land of lean on which he purchase from Mr  tomkyns in which be a adit which empty itself also into the river just above  the engine head wear and that the mill and engine be great assist by these  water that above pound a month be make by these work till on the that of may  when the i be in full work Mr lean on in a violent manner break down the  engine head wear and little pool head wear and thereby divert the water which  serve the say engine and mill whereby the work be stop all the year follow and  make a new adit in the i call the gump and wheel jolly i and by so do divert  the water from go into the old adits and that these i be wear out he can have  no other aim and intention than to distress the plaintiff that little pool  head wear be erect by the adventurer about fourteen or fifteen year ago by the  consent of those under who the defendant claim that the defendant lean on cut  several trench on his side to divert the water which be of no use or service  to he but only make the water run to waste this my lord be the plaintiff right  to the river wear and adits these be the several diversion and obstruction of  the defendant our right to the water appear from our long and quiet enjoyment  which we have full prove and can it be suppose that on a river of so much use  in a country abound with i there shall be twentyfive mill on one side of the  river and none on the other if those on the other side have any right to the  water the fact speak for itself that they have no right since they never  attempt to erect any and the defendant lean on do not pretend any such  enjoyment of the river nor deny we bat say we enjoy it only for the use of our  mill and that we can now claim it for the use of our engine which be but a  late erection but sure if we have have time out of mind a sole use of the  river we may employ it in the play of engine or any other use we please and  mosely report then the several diversion mosely report er p of the defendant  must be a injury to our right as to break down the wear he say the bank on  that side be his but it do not appear by the proof who soil it be and it may  be the plaintiff but suppose it the defendant this be no excuse for his break  they down for engine head wear have be erect many year and be quiet enjoy  which be the strong evidence that the plaintiff have a right to fix his wear  there though the soil shall be the defendant and little pool head wear be  erect about fourteen or fifteen year ago with the consent of the owner of  kerry wherry farm and no complaint of it ever make till now nor any pretence  of have a right to break it down and as to the adits they have from time to  time run into the river and the stream will be of little use without they upon  the fill our bill on proper affidavit we obtain a injunction till the come in  of the defendant answer and afterward Lord Macclesfield make a order that the  premise shall be repair and put in the same condition they be in before the  break down the wear at the defendant lean on his expense and the lord  commissioner continue the injunction till the hear the cause in the case of i  and colliery and diversion of water there be always a necessity to come into a  court of chancer and the plaintiff can have no adequate remedy elsewhere  though they be to bring ever so many action but the only proper remedy be to  put a stop to the wrong and restore thing to the old condition Mr sergeant  shepherd insist that the plaintiff ought first to have ascertain their right  by a trial at law and that in the case of tailor and hale when the plaintiff  counsel move for a injunction they produce a exemplification of the verdict  and that after they have prevail at law they may bring their bill to have  their right establish but Mr solicitor general mention the case of foster and  Saul and the Lord chancellor agree that it be settle otherwise in the case of  i and colliery lest the I shall be ruin in the mean time and his lordship  declare that if the plaintiff shall be oblige to proceed at law only there  will be infinite and endless action of trespass but that this court only can  give they a proper and adequate remedy by quiet they in the enjoyment of their  right restore thing be to their old condition and establish their right by a  decree but then whether the plaintiff have the right or not that they insist  on must be try by issue and that he will determine it by the deposition vern  mosely report Mr solicitor general where there be a contrariety of evidence  issue be necessary to be try before any decree can be make but I hope here  without direct any that your lordship will decree for we for our evidence be  positive and uncontroverted that there be twentyfive mill on our side of the  river and none on they nor no instance give of their have any use of the river  the next fact be that these wear have be erect many year and quiet enjoy by  Lord Falmouth till the break they down in and that they be always repair by  the Lord Falmouth only and we submit to your lordship if these be not  sufficient evidence of a sole right to the use of the river and lean on his  interruption in be thus occasion Mr lean on have former some share in these i  as a adventurer who interest be determinable at the will of the lord and the i  be repair and put in order by Lord Falmouth and his lessee his lordship be  please to determine the interest of lean on and in revenge he set up this  scheme to divert the water Mr peer William in the case of finch versus  Resbridger vern a bill be bring to quiet the plaintiff in the enjoyment of a  watercourse on the evidence as here of a long and quiet enjoyment and the  court be press to direct a trial before they grant a perpetual injunction but  it be deny because the plaintiff have long and peaceable be in possession of  it and since it be think reasonable in case of a private watercourse it be  much more so in we and therefore we hope your lordship will make the  injunction perpetual and the duke of Bedford claim a right to bring water from  Kensington to his house at Chelsea and the Lord Cowper say that after forty or  fifty year quiet possession he will suppose a right though it do not amount to  a prescription at law and decree a perpetual injunction Mr sergeant shepherd  for the defendant lean on the plaintiff insist on three point first that they  have a sole right to the water second that they have a right to erect any wear  they please over the river on our ground and three that they have a right to  the water flow from two adits belong to our i into this river and that we have  no right to alter these casual water as to the first if this mosely report er  p river be the boundary of the two estate then the whole do not belong to they  but we have a equal right to the use but they endeavour to prove their right  from a long and quiet usage which will indeed be a good evidence mosely report  of a right do not we account for it otherwise Lord Falmouths i have occasion  for the whole use of this water Mr lean on and his grandfather Gregoire have a  quarter part in these i so that there be a unity of possession it be no wonder  while that continue they be never interrupt in their exercise of this right  but now we have lose our interest in these i we have a power to assert our  right by pull down the wear and if the plaintiff think himself injure we  thereby give he a opportunity to try his title but it appear that we have a  equal right with the Lord Falmouth to the use of this water not only from its  be a common boundary but from our actual exercise of this right for we have it  in proof that whenever any over be find in the stream it be always equal  divide between the Lord Falmouth and Mr lean on and we say that whenever they  pretend to this right they be always interrupt in the enjoyment of it and that  for this reason our grandfather and we be let into a share in the adventure  and Mr scholar who in build the stamp mill be then in possession also of kerry  wherry farm but when the say mill come afterward to the possession of Mr Craig  he pay a acknowledgement for this right so that this unity of possession and  our be a sharer in the work account for their long and quiet usage but second  if they have such a right it will not give they a title to erect the wear if  Scholarss mill be new mill and stamp head wear be build for the use of they  they can plead no prescriptive right to it and much less to engine head wear  which be build about twenty year ago and to little pool head wear which be  build about seven year since and these be the wear we break down not stamp  head wear and this single point may easy have be try at law we have not meddle  with the old wear but only with the two new one and the proper way be to pull  they up that it may be determine at law whether we have a right to do so or  not as to the three it be impossible they shall have any such right from the  nature of adits who only use be to unwater i and it be necessary to the due  work the i to alter and change and to make new adits for if the vein change or  run deep there must be a new adit or it must be sink deep and they be only for  the use of the I they must change as that do and when they claim a  prescriptive right to these water and that we shall not change they this be in  effect to claim a right to destroy and render our i useless whereas by the law  of the stannary we may alter these adits as we please may make they through  other man land or sink the vein deep and as our vein grow more deep it be  necessary to make this new adit which cost we above pound and there can be no  prescriptive right to the adits of i which be suppose to be within time of  mind mosely report Lord chancellor the plaintiff have obtain a injunction to  stop one new adit the defendant lean on have make and to restrain he from open  two other they be apprehensive he design to make can you give I a instance of  a injunction be grant because to fear Mr attorneygeneral this court will grant  a injunction to stay waste on affidavit of a contract for the sale of the  timber and it be the great use of come into this court for a injunction to  prevent Saturday January Mr robin it appear by lutterel case   b that though  the plaintiff have a prescriptive right to the water they can only divert it  as the prescription direct now the old course of the water be to the stamp  mill and therefore they can erect other wear to turn their engine nor be it  any objection that these wear be erect before Mr lean on come into possession  of kerry wherry farm for these wear be in nature of a nuisance or a  encroachment and whether the premise continue in the same hand or be alien the  alienees may have redress or abate it in the same manner as the person in who  time it be do   b Lord chancellor I will not determine the right of the party  but shall direct issue to be try at law one question in this cause be whether  by custom or the stannary law adits be such fix course of water that they can  be divert another question be whether the whole water belong to Lord Falmouth  if so it be nothing to the defendant what use he make of it but still he can  injure another man by lie the end of his wear on their land as to stamp head  wear I shall suppose a agreement to do so because it have be build and enjoy  above threescore mosely report er p year but I can do so as to the two other  wear of twenty and seven year stand the first issue must be whether the Lord  Falmouth and those claim under he have a right to the whole water or to the  use of the whole water of so much of the stream call black river water as run  between stamp head wear and Chesswater bridge mosely report the party can not  agree the second issue which it shall be whether Lord Falmouth have a right to  erect the wear or whether the defendant have a right to break they down and  therefore the Lord chancellor direct a action of trespass to be bring to which  the defendant lean on shall plead the general issue and give nothing in  evidence but the mere right the other issue be whether Mr lean on and those  under who he claim have a right to divert or draw off the water run through  the three adits of gump wheel jolly and Colnoth i or any or either of they by  make new adits from these i or otherwise from fall into black water river in  such place as the say water fall respective into the say river on or before  the that of may the first and the three issue be to be put into one record and  his lordship think it not reasonable that a matter of this value shall be try  at the assize order the say issue and action to be try at the bar of p b in  which the lord Falmouth be to be plaintiff and lean on the defendant both  issue be to be try by the same jury and a special jury be to be return and a  view have the council for the defendant lean on insist that it be hard for he  alone to stand this trial against all the plaintiff and therefore pray if the  issue be find against he he may pay only nisi prius cost which Mr mead say  have be often direct but the Lord chancellor say that it can not be do