The law relating to the powers of bank officers, or indeed any corporate officers, is but a development of the law of principal and agent The rule is that the agent can bind his principal in regard to any act done within the scope of the agent's authority. The extent and scope of the authority in the case of a bank officer depend upon the provisions of the general law, the provisions of the special charter if there be one, the provisions of the articles of agreement, where the organization is made thereby, the nature and character of the office, the general usages and customs, which are a part of the business of banking, which define the power and authority annexed to a particular-office, and the power and authority given to a particular office by a particular course of dealing in a particular bank. Certain modifications arise from a condition of fact when the officer is acting in regard to his own private interests as well as those of the bank, and when the same officer is acting for some other person or corporation dealing with the bank, and when the third person has or has not knowledge of the want of authority. The subject is further modified by the principles of acquiescence and delay in objecting to an officer's unauthorized act, or a ratification thereof by the corporation. The questions of admissions made by corporate officers as to corporate transactions require examination; and finally the subject of notice of a fact given to a corporation through its officers - a subject which is also modified by the fact that a corporate officer may be interested in a transaction in regard to which notice is sought to be imputed to the bank through that officer's knowledge. These various subjects will be examined in order.

24 Dows v. United States, 82 Fed. R.904.

1 Potter v. United States, 155 U. S. 438.

2 Cross v. North Carolina, 132 U. S. 131.

3 United States v. Potter, 56 Fed. R. 83; Potter v. United States, 155,

U. S. 438