EMINENT DOMAIN 1573

Proceedings under ordinance for condemnation of property for library in Baltimore
City complied with provisions of this article. Johnson v. Baltimore, 158 Md. 101.

Act of 1912, ch. 117, is constitutional and valid. Appointment of appraisers not so
far non-judicial as to render act void. A condemnation proceeding under said, act
is a proceeding at law, the judgment being in rem; pleadings should conform as
near as may be to pleadings at law. Constructive notice by publication is sufficient
to support judgment in rem against non-residents, unknown persons, etc. Where
statute provides for assessment of value of land taken in condemnation, it will be
held to include damages to remainder of tract. Rule by which value of property
taken is to be estimated is a judicial question for court. Authentication of a statute
and impeachment thereof. Statute required to be engrossed only in house in which
it originated. Purpose of act of 1912, ch. 117. Ridgely v. Baltimore City, 119 Md.
575. And see Pitznogle v. Western Maryland R. R. Co., 119 Md. 677; Jessup v.
Baltimore, 121 Md. 562.

The jury contemplated by the act of 1912, ch. 117, need not be one selected in the
usual way from those which are regularly drawn as jurors to serve at a given term;
a special venire may be ordered. Under said act, testimony is to be taken and case
tried in court just as in other cases. Failure of sheriff to return names of persons sum-
moned as jurors does not invalidate return, nor affect eligibility of jurors. Pitznogle
v. Western Maryland R. R. Co, 119 Md. 675.

Petition held to sufficiently comply with this section. Charter of railroad company
held sufficiently to authorize it to condemn property under this and the following
sections. Right of way for a crossing over a city street may be condemned by a
railroad company; how the crossing should be constructed. Petition and exhibits
and answer and exhibits, without other evidence, held insufficient to authorize judg-
ment in condemnation case; case remanded. See notes to art. 23, sec. 198. Hyatts-
ville v. Washington, etc. R. R. Co., 120 Md. 130 (decided prior to the act of 1914);
Ibid., 124 Md. 578.

Contention that jurisdiction conferred on circuit courts of the counties and law
courts of Baltimore City by this article is a special and limited one entirely distinct
from and independent of their common law powers, not questioned. A petition for
condemnation should be filed in county or city of Baltimore where property is situated.
Park Land Corporation v. Baltimore, 128 Md. 611.

Under act of 1912, ch. 117, no appeal lay from an order of court appointing appraisers
or overruling motion to strike out an order appointing appraisers. No appeal lies
to court of appeals from action of circuit court in cases such as were provided for by
act of 1912, ch. 117, if circuit court had jurisdiction. Hyattsville v. W., W. & G. R. Co.,
124 Md. 578.

This article referred to in a suit to restrain the carrying out of an agreement for con-
struction of a municipal drain entered into after the institution of condemnation pro-
ceedings. Baltimore v. Forest Park Co., 123 Md. 294.

Nature of condemnation proceedings. The right of removal has no application to
such proceedings under act of 1912, ch. 117. When application for removal, even if it
could otherwise be granted, comes too late. Baltimore v. Kane, 125 Md. 138.

This article cited but not construed in Baltimore v. Libowitz, 159 Md. 36; Davis v.
Board of Education, 168 Md. 74.

See art. 23, sees. 153, 185, 206, 319, 328, 329 and 335.

State board of forestry has the right of condemnation—art. 39A, sec. 27.

See notes to art. 33A, secs. 9, 13 and 15; art. 23, sec. 388; art. 26, sec. 29, and art. 89B,
sec. 4.

An. Code, 1924, sec. 2. 1912, sec. 2. 1912, ch. 117. 1914, ch. 463, sec. 3.

2. Upon the filing of said petition, the Court or any judge thereof
shall pass an order directing a summons to issue for the defendants, to
be served in the same manner as a summons in actions at law, and to be
returned by some day to be named in said order, not less than ten days
nor more than twenty days from the day of the filing of said petition.
If any defendant be not summoned before the return day of said sum-
mons, the summons may be renewed from time to time, as often as the
Court in its discretion may think proper; or if any defendant is non-
resident or unknown, or is returned non est, the Court may order the
sheriff to set up a copy of the summons for such defendants upon the prop-
erty, and a notice to be published once a week for three successive weeks,
in a newspaper published in the County where such property is situated,
and, if the proceedings be in Baltimore City, in one daily newspaper
published in said City, requiring such defendant to appear in the said
Court on or before a certain day to be named in the order, said day to be