It is hardly necessary to state that a state statute as to foreign banks will not affect national banks, which are chartered for the whole nation. A foreign bank is permitted by comity to make a contract in a state other than its charterer if the act is not forbidden by the law of its creation, but its general franchises, it has been said, can be exercised only in the state of its origin.1 This must be understood with the qualifications that the act be not forbidden by law in the state where the act is done, and, as some courts say, if the act be not malum in se. There have been cases where foreign banks have been forbidden to carry on a banking business by an agent located in the state.2 Foreign banks are within state statutes against unauthorized banking,3 and statutes have been upheld which prohibit the circulation of notes of foreign banks,4 although in the absence of statutory prohibition foreign currency may be put into circulation.8 The general rule, of course, is that a state may prescribe what terms it pleases to foreign banks doing business in the state.

2 Traders' Nat. Bank v. Chipman, 164 U. S. 347; Chipman v. McClellan, 159 Mass. 363.

3 First Nat. Bank v. Commonwealth, 33 S. W. R. 1105.

4 State v. Fuller, 34 Conn. 280, as to embezzlement; State v. Fields, 98 Iowa, 748, and State v. Bardwell, 72 Miss. 535, as to receiving deposit knowing the bank to be insolvent. Compare State v. Menke, 56 Elan. 77.

5 Cross v. State, 132 U. S. 131; Hoke v. People, 122 I11. 511; State v. White, 101 N. C. 770; Commonwealth v. Seeberg, 94 Pa. 85; State v. National Bank, 2 S. Dak. 568. Contra, Commonwealth v. Felton, 101 Mass. 204. But the state statute prohibiting a cashier from engaging in any other business does not apply to a cashier of a national bank. Allen v. Carter, 119 Pa. 192.

6 Farmers' Bank v. Dearing, 91 U. S. 29; Peterborough Nat. Bank v.. Childs, 133 Mass. 248; Imp. & Traders' Nat. Bank v. Littell, 46 N. J. Law, 506; First Nat. Bank v. Duncan, Fed. Cas. No. 4804; Slaughter v. First Nat. Bank, 109 Ala. 157; Parker v. Rochester Nat. Bank, 59 N. H. 310; First Nat. Bank v. Gar-linghouse, 22 Ohio St. 492. Contra, First Nat. Bank v. Lamb, 50 N. Y. 95. But as to the law of crimes, see Sec. 191, post.

1 Lane v. Bank of West Tennessee, 9 Heisk. 419. Contra, Bank of Marietta v. Pindall, 2 Rand. 465. See City Bank v. Beach, 1 Blatch. 425

2 Conn. Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. Albert, 39 Mo. 181. See the next note.

3 Bank of Newberry v. Stegall, 41 Miss. 142.

4 Merchants' Bank v. Spalding, 9

N. Y. 53; Sackett's Harbor Bank v. Codd, 18 N. Y. 240.

5Ballston Spa Bank v. Marine Bank, 16 Wis. 125.