690 CORPORATIONS. [ART. 23

article, by section 324, and may construct and lay any part of
its said line or lines under ground on any route on which it
is authorized to construct such lines, in whole or in part,
above ground, and may acquire by condemnation any ease-
ments or interests in land which may be necessary to give
effect to the purposes for which such corporation was formed,
in the manner set forth in sections 360 to 365 of this article;
provided, however, that all corporations incorporated, or to be
incorporated by virtue of said section 28, class thirteen, except
such corporations of said class as are now in practical opera-
tion and have laid or constructed their lines, or any part
thereof, in the city of Baltimore, shall obtain a special grant
from the general assembly of Maryland; and the assent and
approval of the mayor and city council of Baltimore city,
before using the streets or highways of Baltimore city, either
the surface or the ground beneath the same.

Edison Co. v. Hooper, 85 Md. 112. Telephone Co. v. Balto. City, 89 Md.
702

Remedies for Abuse, Misuse -or Nonuse of Corporate Powers.

1688, art. 23, sec 255 1868, ch. 471, sec 176

367. Whenever the attorney-general of the State, or the
State's attorney for the city of Baltimore, or for any county
in this State, shall be authorized by the governor to institute
proceedings against any corporation incorporated under the
laws of this State to ascertain whether such corporation has
been guilty of such misuse, abuse or nonuse of its corporate
powers and franchises, as by law would authorize and make
proper the forfeiture of its charter, corporate powers and fran-
chises, the attorney-general or State's attorney so authorized
shall file in the court hereafter designated a, petition in the
name of the State, setting forth fully and in detail the alleged
abuse, misuse or nonuse, by reason whereof the said forfeiture
is sought; and upon the filing of such petition, the court in
which it is filed, or any judge thereof, shall lay a rule requir-
ing the said corporation to show cause, within such time as the
judge may deem proper, why a decree of forfeiture should not
issue as prayed in said petition; a copy of which rule and of
the petition shall be served on the said corporation by a day to
be therein limited, which shall be served as other process
against such corporation is directed to be served.

State v. Consolidation Coal Co., 46 Md. 6. State v. Easton Club, 62 Md.
297 Same case, 73 Md. 98. Belair Club v. State, 74 Md. 297. Mason v.
Equitable League, 77 Md. 486. Hawkins v. State, 81 Md. 311. Fraternal
Alliance v. State, 86 Md. 560.