The shipowner is usually bound by the master’s signature to a bill of lading, unless the master, in signing the bill of lading, exceeds his authority.
Per Channell J. in Compania Naviera Vasconzada v Churchill & Sim, Compania Naviera Vasconzada v Burton & Co  1 KB 237 at p.245:
It seems to me that with reference to some things and to some defects in them "condition" and "quality" may mean the same thing, yet that they do not either necessarily or even usually do so. I think that "condition" refers to external and apparent condition, and "quality" to something which is usually no apparent, at all events to an unskilled person. I think a captain is expected to notice the condition of the goods, though not the quality. He may qualify or (except perhaps when the Harter Act applies) erase the words "good order and condition"; but if he leaves them in he does not, in my opinion, get rid of the admission as to condition (meaning thereby apparent condition) by saying that the quality is unknown.