596 EMINENT DOMAIN. [ART. 33A

to the facts; and the said petition shall contain a prayer that the said
property may be condemned.

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

The jury contemplated by the act of 1912, chapter 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 the case tried in court just as in other
cases. The failure of the sheriff to return the names of the persons sum-
moned as jurors does not invalidate the return, nor affect the eligibility
of the jurors. Pitznogle v. Western Maryland E, E. Co., 119 Md. 675.

A petition held to sufficiently comply with this section. The charter of a
railroad company held sufficient to authorize it to condemn property under
this and the following sections. A right of way for a crossing over a city
street may be condemned by a railroad company; how the crossing should
be constructed. The petition and exhibits and the answer and exhibits,
without other evidence, held insufficient to authorize a judgment in a con-
demnation case; case remanded. See notes to article 23, section 261.
Hyattsville v. Washington, etc., E. E. Co., 120 Md. 130 (decided prior to
the act of 1914).

See article 23, sections 126, 250, 269, 389, 398, 399 and 405.

The State Board of Forestry has the right of condemnation—article 39A,
section 17.

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 summons, the summons may be renewed from time to time, as
often as the Court in its discretion may think proper; or if any defend-
ant 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 property, 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 not less than thirty days nor more than forty
days from the date of the first publication of said order, and show cause
why such property, or such defendant's interest therein, should not be
condemned as prayed in the petition.