
    Nathaniel P. Martin vs. Benjamin Odell.
    A motion for an order to restrain defendant from committing waste on' premises, will be denied, on the defendant’s fully denying the commission of waste.
    
      Motion by plaintiff for an order restraining the defendant in this cause from the commission of waste, upon the land or premises, for the recovery of which this suit is brought.—This is an action of ejectment for about fifty three acres of land. Issue was joined on the 21st January, 1845. The plaintiff states that the timber on the premises is of great value— that the defendant since this suit has been commenced, has been and still is committing waste upon the premises, by cutting and felling the standing timber thereon; and that the defendant has frequently told plaintiff he should go on and cut down what timber he pleased upon the premises. The defendant states that he has been in the occupation and possession of the premises for twenty-seven years last past, under claim of title; within that time no other person has exercised or claimed to exercise any acts of ownership over the premises, until within a year past, when plaintiff claimed the same under a title from some person. The defendant states he is the owner of the premises, and believes no one else has any right or title therein. And also that since the commencement of this suit, defendant has committed no waste on the premises ; he has cut down and carried away such timber as was necessary for his fire wood only. And fully denies that he has committed waste on the premises at all.
    J. A. Spencer, Plffs Counsel. Davis, Woodcock & Davis, Plffs Attys.
    
    A. Taber, Defts Counsel. Hayner & Johnson, I)efts Attys.
    
   Beardsley, Justice.

Denied the motion on the ground, that the de-' j fendant had fully denied the commission of waste,  