The action to forfeit a charter is an action at law on behalf of the state in a direct proceeding for that purpose unless a different procedure is fixed by statute.1 The proceeding is of a civil nature and is not a criminal proceeding.2 The courts of equity have no power to dissolve a corporation,3 unless the power be given by statute.4 An ancillary injunction is sometimes permitted by statute,5 and in the nature of things, if the state could show sufficient grounds therefor, there is no reason why it should not have an injunction without a statute from a court of equity or from the same court, where the equitable and common-law jurisdictions are amalgamated.6 Sometimes the power to sue for a forfeiture is given to bank commissioners,7 but under one act it was held that the court on the application of the commissioners was given no power to appoint a receiver or to grant an injunction ex parte where the statute required a hearing.8 In other cases trustees or commissioners were nominated by acts of the legislature, but their powers were so various that it would serve no useful purpose to review these decisions.9

3 People v. Niagara Bank, 6 Cow. 196. Contra, Coram. Bank v. State, 6Smedes&M. 599.

4 People v. Bank of Pontiac, 12 Mich. 527.

5 Welles v. Graves, 41 Fed. R. 459.

6 Long v. Farmers' Bank, 1 Clark, 284. 2 Pa. Law J. 230.

7 Bank Commissioners v. Bank of Buffalo, 6 Paige, 497.

1 Attorney-General v. Bank of Niagara, Hopk. Ch. 354; Murphy v. Farmers' Bank; 20 Pa. 415; State Bank v. Snelling, 35 Mo. 190; Huntington v. Crescent City Bank, 18 La. Ann. 350. A court of equity has no such power except by statute. Such statutes sometimes make an injunction a dissolution of the charter. Wiswell v. Starr, 48 Me. 401; Dane v. Young, 61 Ma 160.

See Commonwealth v. Bank of Mutual Redemption, 86 Mass. 1.

2 Commercial Bank v. Rodney, 4 Smedes & M. 439. Historically this is not true as to quo warranto, because a fine could be imposed as well as a judgment of ouster enforced. The proceeding was in the-name of the sovereign in the nature of a writ of right superseded by information.

3 This is the general rule. There is but one case which directly holds otherwise, and that case is wholly unsound.

4 Such statutes are numerous. See note 1, supra; and see Mitchell v. Bank of St. Paul, 7 Minn. 252.

5 Attorney-General v. Bank of Chenango, Hopk. Ch. 596; Commonwealth v. Bank of Mutual Redemption, 86 Mass. 1.