560 CORPORATIONS. [ART. 23

and provided furthermore, that the provisions of this section shall not
apply to any homestead or building association.*

Where the subscription to the stock of a loan company provides for pay-
ment in weekly Installments, it was held that the fact that the time for
such payment was extended beyond the period of the two years prescribed
by the act of 1S68, ch. 471, section 59, was not a bar to an action to recover
unpaid Installments. The cause of dissolution mentioned in said act cannot
be taken advantage of collaterally, out only in a direct proceeding by the
State against the corporation. Frank v. Morrison, 55 Md. 406; Musgrave v.
Morrlaon, 54 Md. 166; Booth v. Campbell, 37 Md. 528.

The portion of section 72 of the code of 1904, relative to the dissolution of
a corporation whose stock was not paid in in four years, cited but not con-
strued in Glymont Co. v. Toler, 80 Md. 287.
See notes to sections 65 and 66.

1908, ch. 305.

65. The exclusive remedy for the enforcement by creditors against
stockholders of all rights existing under the preceding section as the
same stood prior to April 6, 1908, and which were declared by said
section as amended by the Act of 1908, ch. 305, not to be affected by
the terms thereof as herein demanded, shall be, as against stockholders
residing in the State of Maryland, by bill in equity in the nature of a
creditor's bill filed against such stockholders by one or more creditors
on behalf of themselves and all other creditors of the corporation who
may come in and make themselves parties thereto, in a court having
jurisdiction within the limits of the county or city of Baltimore,
in which, as the case may be, the principal office of the corporation is
situated at the time of the filing of the bill, or in case any such corpora-
tion has, by reason of having been placed in the hands of a receiver, or
from any other cause, ceased to have any principal office at the time of
the filing of the bill, then the bill shall be filed in a court having juris-
diction within the limits of the county or the city of Baltimore in
which, as the case may be, the said corporation had its last principal
place of business; and to any such bill stockholders residing beyond the
limits of the State of Maryland may become parties defendant, and
upon so becoming parties shall not be proceeded against in any other
State or territory or in the District of Columbia, in respect of any
liability imposed by the said preceding section, as said section stood
before the repeal thereof, and which existed on April 6, 1908. This
section shall become operative as of July 1, 1907, and shall cause the
abatement of all actions at law which shall have been brought against
said stockholders since that date to enforce any liability created by the
preceding section, as said section stood before the repeal thereof, and
which existed on April 6, 1908; provided, however, that as to any
plaintiff or plaintiffs in any of said abated suits, who shall, within

*Section 65 relates only to the enforcement of rights existing under section 72
of the code of 1904, and section 64, enacted along with section 65 by the act of
1908, ch. 305 (approved and in effect April 6, 1908), has probably been superseded
as to rights and remedies accruing subsequent to June 1, 1908, by the new cor-
poration law, act of 1908, ch. 240 (approved March 31, 1908, and in effect June 1,
1908, see section 66 of article 23. See in this connection, Pittsburg Steel Co. v.
Baltimore Equitable Society, 113 Md. 77; Bettendorf Axle Co. v. Field, 114
Md. 487.