[dashboy]

Congress, having power to create a system of national banks, is the judge as to the extent of the powers which should be conferred upon such banks, and has the sole power to regulate and control the exercise of their operations. > Easton v. State of Iowa, U.S.Iowa 1903, 23 S.Ct. 288, 188 U.S. 220, 47 L.Ed. 452. See, also, > Coon v. Smith, D.C.Ill.1933, 4 F.Supp. 960.

The federal statutes relative to national banks constitute the measure of authority of such corporations; they have no other powers than such as are expressly granted and such as are necessary for the purpose of carrying into effect the powers expressly granted. > Logan County Nat. Bank v. Townsend, U.S.Ky.1891, 11 S.Ct. 496, 139 U.S. 67, 35 L.Ed. 107. See, also, > First Nat. Bank of St. Louis v. State of Missouri ex inf. Barrett, 1924, 44 S.Ct. 213, 263 U.S. 640, 68 L.Ed. 486; California Sav. > Bank v. Kennedy, C.1897, 17 S.Ct. 831, 167 U.S. 362, 42 L.Ed. 198; > Kimen v. Atlas Exchange Nat. Bank of Chicago, C.C.A.Ill.1937, 92 F.2d 615, certiorari denied > 58 S.Ct. 746, 303 U.S. 650, 82 L.Ed. 1110; > Commonwealth Trust Co. of Pittsburgh v. First-Second Nat. Bank of Pittsburgh, 1918, 103 A. 598, 260 Pa. 223, certiorari denied > 38 S.Ct. 425, 246 U.S. 675, 62 L.Ed. 933; Standard Livestock Co. v. Bank of California, National Ass'n, 1924, 227 P. 962, 67 C.A. 381; McBoyle v. Union Nat. Bank, 1912, 122 P. 458, 162 C. 277, appeal dismissed > 37 S.Ct. 370, 243 U.S. 26, 61 L.Ed. 570; > People's Nat. Bank v. Southern States Finance Co., N.C.1926, 133 S.E. 415; > Hansford v. Tifton Nat. Bank, 1912, 10 Ga.App. 270, 73 S.E. 405; McCrory v. Chambers, 1892, 48 Ill.App. 445; Lazear v. National Union Bank, 1879, 52 Md. 78, 36 Am.Rep. 355; Weckler v. Hagerstown First Nat. Bank, 1875, 42 Md. 581, 20 Am.Rep. 95, 1923, 34 Op.Atty.Gen. 1.

The extent of the powers of national banking associations is to be measured by the Act of Congress under which such associations are organized. > Bullard v. National Eagle Bank, U.S.Mass.1873, 85 U.S. 589, 21 L.Ed. 923, 18 Wall. 589.

This chapter, under which national banks are organized, constitutes a complete system for their government. > Downey v. City of Yonkers, C.C.A.2 (N.Y.) 1939, 106 F.2d 69, certiorari granted > 60 S.Ct. 298, 308 U.S. 547, 308 U.S. 548, 84 L.Ed. 461, affirmed > 60 S.Ct. 796, 309 U.S. 590, 84 L.Ed. 964, rehearing denied 60 S.Ct. 1071, 310 U.S. 656, 84 L.Ed. 1420.

National banks cannot generally exercise any powers except those expressly granted or incidental to carrying on business. > Williams v. Merchants' Nat. Bank of St. Cloud, D.C.Minn.1930, 42 F.2d 243. See, also, > Baltimore & O.R. Co. v. Smith, C.A.Pa.1932, 56 F.2d 799.

Federally-chartered and state-chartered banks in Connecticut lack inherent power beyond those powers enumerated or incidentally conferred under the relevant federal or state banking law. > Fleet Bank, Nat. Ass'n v. Burke, D.Conn.1998, 23 F.Supp.2d 196.

National bank has only power expressly given to it and such incidental powers as are necessary to carry on business of powers expressly given. > Suburban Trust Co. v. National Bank of Westfield, D.C.N.J.1962, 211 F.Supp. 694.

National banks' powers are limited to those expressly granted by this section. > Birdsell Mfg. Co. v. Anderson, W.D.Ky.1937, 20 F.Supp. 571, affirmed > 104 F.2d 340.

> 42. Scope of incidental powers
United States Comptroller of Currency acted within his "incidental powers" under National Bank Act in authorizing national banks to offer debt cancellation contracts; such contracts were directly connected to national banks' lending activities. First Nat. Bank of Eastern Arkansas v. Taylor, C.A.8 (> Ark.) 1990, 907 F.2d 775, rehearing denied, certiorari denied > 111 S.Ct. 442, 498 U.S. 972, 112 L.Ed.2d 425.

For an activity to be pursuant to an incidental power necessary to carry on the business of banking, it must be convenient or useful in connection with the performance of one of the bank's established activities pursuant to its express powers under this chapter. > M & M Leasing Corp. v. Seattle First Nat. Bank, C.A.9 (Wash.) 1977, 563 F.2d 1377, certiorari denied > 98 S.Ct. 3069, 436 U.S. 956, 57 L.Ed.2d 1121.

A sine qua non standard would be an inappropriate measure of a national bank's incidental powers under this section. > Arnold Tours, Inc. v. Camp, C.A.1 (Mass.) 1972, 472 F.2d 427.

Generally, ultra vires contracts of national banks are unenforceable. > Birdsell Mfg. Co. v. Anderson, C.C.A.6 (Ky.) 1939, 104 F.2d 340.

Incidental powers of national banks can avail neither to create powers which expressly or by reasonable implications are withheld nor to enlarge powers granted, since incidental powers are inferred and exist only to carry into effect such powers as are granted. > Kimen v. Atlas Exchange Nat. Bank of Chicago, C.C.A.7 (Ill.) 1937, 92 F.2d 615, certiorari denied > 58 S.Ct. 746, 303 U.S. 650, 82 L.Ed. 1110.

National bank's activity is authorized as incidental power, "necessary to carry on the business of banking," within meaning of this section, if it is convenient or useful in connection with performance of one of the bank's established activities pursuant to its express power under this section but, if this connection between incidental activity and express power does not exist, activity is not authorized as incidental power. > National Retailers Corp. of Arizona v. Valley Nat. Bank, D.C.Ariz.1976, 411 F.Supp. 308, affirmed in part, appeal dismissed in part > 604 F.2d 32.