7o6 HARVARD LAW REVIEW incorporated under acts of Congress.^^ Congress could by general laws provide for the incorporation of companies as means for carry- ing into execution the powers conferred upon Congress, but it could not permit them to include among the objects the transaction of all lawful business. The question what business is lawful business for companies created by Congress must be determined in each class of cases by reference to the powers conferred upon Congress. The question is a question of the power of the corporation, and it would seem that it would constitute a question involving the appHcation of the doctrine of ultra vires. That doctrine depends upon the extent of the power given to a corporation by the legislature, and in the case of federal corporations this depends upon the power possessed by Congress with regard to the objects for which the corporation is formed and the incidental powers which exist by impHcation. This doctrine, however, is usually invoked in cases involving the private rights of persons dealing with the corporations. There would seem to be no doubt but that the question of the power of the corporation might be challenged by the Attorney- General of the United States. In the recent case in the Supreme Court relating to the powers conferred upon national banks the court declared that the action was properly brought by the state Attorney-General, but only on the ground that the statute made it a condition that the particular functions in question were given "only when not in contravention of state or local laws." Mr. Justice Vandeventer dissented on the ground that this was not sufficient reason for permitting the state court to take juris- diction of a suit relating to a power or franchise conferred by act of Congress. It is undoubtedly true that in the absence of such a limitation in the act creating the corporation, any suit to determine the question what powers the corporation may exercise would be a suit arising under the Constitution and laws of the United States.^^ In such a case the question would not be whether Congress has or has not the right to create a corporation. Of this there is no question. The right to create a corporation is not one of the sub- " Paul V. Virginia, 8 Wall. (U. S.) i68 (1868); Hooper v. California, 155 U. S. 648 (189s); New York Life Ins. Co. v. Cravens, 178 U. S. 389 (1900). 62 Osbom V. Bank of Jthe United States, 9 Wheat. (U. S.) 738, 823-25 (1824).
