FORFEITURE OF FRANCHISES. 573

that legal cause of forfeiture has been shown, and that the public
interest requires that a forfeiture should be declared, a judgment of
forfeiture shall be entered and the charter of the corporation shall
thereby be annulled and vacated; and it shall be ousted of its corporate
franchises; and the court shall thereupon appoint a receiver or receivers
of the corporate estate and assets. The powers of such receivers and
all the consequences of dissolution shall be such as are hereinabove con-
ferred and provided by this article.

Upon a charter being annulled, held that the court would appoint receivers

of the assets of the corporation as directed by section 370 of the code of

1904. State v. Easton, etc., Club, 73 Md. 104.

Section 370 of the code of 1904, referred to in holding an amendment of

the charter of the Cumberland and Pennsylvania Railroad Company invalid.

State v. Cumberland, etc., R. R. Co., 105 Md. 485.
See notes to sec. 82.

1904, art. 23, sec. 371. 1888, art. 23, sec. 259. 1868, ch. 471, sec. 180.
1908, ch. 240, sec. 59.

84. If the corporation shall neglect to plead within the times
appointed and provided, the court shall proceed to hear the petition
ex parte; and if a cause of forfeiture is shown, a judgment shall be
entered as is provided in the preceding section.
See notes to sec. 82.

Ibid. sec. 372. 1888, art. 23, sec. 260. 1868, ch. 471, sec. 181.
1908, ch. 240, sec. 60.

85. If the court upon a hearing, ex parte or otherwise shall be of
opinion that legal cause of forfeiture has been shown, it may, neverthe-
less, in its discretion, before passing a final judgment, require the cor-
poration within a time fixed to remedy the grievance complained of
and may suspend the entry of a final judgment until the time so fixed,
and may afterwards refuse to enter such judgment if the grievance has
been remedied.

The application of section 372 of the code of 1904, pointed out. State v.
Easton, etc., Club, 73 Md. 104.

Section 372 of the code of 1904 cited but not construed in State v. Easton,
etc., Club, 72 Md. 299.
See notes to sec. 82.

Ibid. secs. 373 and 374. 1888, art. 23, secs. 261 and 262. 1868, ch. 471,
secs. 182 and 183. 1908, ch. 240, sec. 61.

86. The petition for forfeiture hereinabove mentioned shall be
filed in the circuit court for the county or in the superior court of Bal-
timore, city, according to the location of the principal' office of the cor-
poration. And from any final judgment or determination of the court
in proceedings hereunder, either party may appeal to the court of appeals
as provided by sections 68 and 69 of article 5 of the annotated code.

The right of appeal (under section 374 of the code of 1904), upheld. State
v. Cumberland, etc., R. R. Co., 105 Md. 490. Cf. State v. Easton, etc., Club,
72 Md. 298.

The right of removal does not exist in proceedings for the forfeiture of
chartered franchises. Bel Air, etc., Club v. State, 74 Md. 300.
See notes to sec. 82.