no prohibitory words in the statute. (x) And in a very recent case, (y) Lord Eldon said, "It is quite clear that a court of justice can give no assistance to the enforcement of contracts which the law of the land has interdicted." So, a contract which is declared by a particular statute to be illegal, is not made good by a repeal of that statute after the contract has been executed. (z) And the circumstance of the contracting parties being ignorant of the law, and being innocent of any intention to violate it, will be no excuse.

1. OF CONTRACTS MADE ON SUNDAY.] - Every contract made on a Sunday by a person in the exercise of his ordinary calling is void by the stat. 29 Car. 2. c. 7. But, a sale of goods made on that day, which is not made in the exercise of the ordinary calling of the vendor or his agent, is not void either at common law or by statute. (a)

2. Of Sale oF OFFICES.] - By the statutes 12 R. 2. c. 2. and 5 & 6 Ed. 6. c. 16. the sale of certain public offices, and the deputations thereof are prohibited, and by the latter statute it is enacted, that all agreements, covenants, bonds, or assurance for any of the said offices, or the deputation thereof, shall be void. (b)

any cause

3. SHERIFFS.] By the stat. 23 Hen. 6. c. 9. the sheriff is directed to let out of prison all persons by them arrested on mesne process, or by cause of indictment of trespass, upon reasonable sureties of sufficient persons. And it is enacted, "that no sheriff shall take any obligation for therein directed, but only to themselves, of any person, nor by any person which shall be in their ward by the course of the law, but by the name of their office, and upon condition written, that the said ⚫ prisoners shall appear at the day contained in the writ, bill, or warrant, and in such places as the said writs, bills, or warrants, shall require. And that if any of the said sheriffs, or other officers or ministers, take any obligation in other form, by colour of their offices, it shall be void." Upon this statute it has been holden, that if a sheriff let a prisoner, who is not bailable, go at large upon his single bond; such obligation is void. (c) And this statute also extends to promises, as well as to obligations and accordingly it has been holden, (d) that an agreement in writing to put in good bail for a person arrested on mesne process, at the return of the writ, or surrender the body, or pay debt and costs, made by a third person with the bailiff of a sheriff, in consideration of his discharging the party arrested, was void by the statute of Hen. 6.; for, since the passing of that statute, the usage has been to take the security by bond; and that bond, by the words of the statute,

:

must be entered into to the sheriff, or to such officer as has the return of process; whereas here was no bond, but a mere simple contract, and that with the sheriff's officer; and farther the bond must be given only for the appearance of the party, and for no other purpose.

4. OF USURIOUS CONTRACTS.] - By the stat. 12 Ann. st. 2. c. 16. to prevent usury, it is enacted, "that no person or persons whatsoever, upon any contract, shall take directly, or indirectly, for loan of any monies, wares, merchandize, or other commodities whatsoever, above the value of 51. for the forbearance of 100l. for a year, and so after that rate for a greater or lesser sum, or for a longer or shorter time; and that all bonds, contracts, and assurances whatsoever, made for payment of any principal, or money to be lent or covenanted to be performed upon or for any usury, whereupon or whereby there shall be reserved or taken above the rate of 51. in the hundred as aforesaid, shall be utterly void." These restrictions, however, do not apply to contracts made in foreign countries; for on such contracts our courts will direct the payment of interest according to the law of the country in which such contract was made. (e) Thus Irish, American, Turkish, and Indian interest have been allowed in our courts to the amount of even 12. per cent. For the moderation or exorbitance of interest depends upon local circumstances, and the refusal to enforce such contracts would put a stop to all foreign trade. (f)

Every security given upon an usurious consideration is so contaminated by it, that the statute of usury makes the security absolutely null and void; so that it cannot be enforced by law by any person, however innocent. Therefore it has been held, (g) that a bill of exchange, or a promissory note given upon an usurious consideration, is void, even in the hands of an indorsee for a valuable consideration without notice of the usury. But, by a recent statute of the 58 Geo. 3. c. 93. such bills of exchange are made valid in the hands of a bona fide indorsee for a valuable consideration, without notice of the usury between the original parties.

5. OF GAMING.] - Gaming is also prohibited by statute, though at common law the playing at cards, dice, &c. when practised innocently, and as a recreation, is lawful if it be not within the restriction of any statute. (h) But as the practice was found to encourage idleness and other vices, the statute 33 Hen. 8. c. 9. restrained it among the inferior sort of people. Gentlemen were, however, still left free to pursue it, until the 16 Car. 2. c. 7. by which it is enacted, that "if any person, by playing or betting, shall lose more than 100l. at one time, he shall not be compellable to pay his loss, and the winner shall forfeit treble the value; one moiety to the

king, the other to the informer." This provision of the legislature was, however, soon found to be insufficient to its purpose: it was therefore enacted, by the stat. 9 Anne, c. 14. " that all bonds, and other securities, given for money won at play, or money lent at the time to play with, should be utterly void; that all mortgages or incumbrances of lands, made upon the same consideration, should be and enure to the use of the mortgagor, and that if any person at one time lose 10%. at play, he may, within three months, sue the winner, and recover it back by action of debt at law: and in case the loser does not, within the time limited, sue and prosecute, any other person may sue the winner for treble the sum so lost; and the winner is obliged and compellable to answer upon oath any bill or bills filed against him for discovering the sum or sums of money, or other thing, so won by him at play." Subsequent statutes have superadded further penalties to restrain this fashionable vice, "which," Sir William Blackstone observes, (i) "may shew that our laws against gaming are not so deficient as ourselves and our magistrates in putting these laws in execution.” It is observable, that the stat. 16 Car. 2. declares, that the contract for money lost at play, and all securities given for it, shall be utterly void; but the stat. 9 Anne, confines itself to the securities for money won or lent at play. Upon which it has been determined, that though both the security and the contract are void as to money won at play, only the security is void as to money lent at play; and that the contract remains, and the lender may maintain his action for it. (k) And these acts having declared the security void, it may be observed, that a bill of exchange given for money won at play cannot be recovered upon, though in the hands of an indorsee for a valuable consideration, and who is totally ignorant of the circumstance affecting the security. (2)

-

6. STOCKJOBBING TRANSACTIONS.] So, in order to prevent the pernicious and destructive practice of stockjobbing, it is enacted by the 7 Geo. 2. c. 8. (made perpetual by 10 Geo. 2. c. 8.) "That all contracts and agreements whatsoever which shall be made or entered into by or between any person or persons whatsoever, upon which any premium or consideration in the nature of a premium shall be given or paid for liberty to put upon, or deliver, receive, accept, or refuse any public or joint stock, or other public securities whatsoever, or any part, share, or interest therein, and also all wagers and contracts in the nature of wagers, and all contracts in the nature of putts and refusals, relating to the then present or future price or value of any such stock or securities, as aforesaid, shall be null and void to all

(i) 4 Bl. Com. 173.

(k) Vide Robinson v. Bland, 2 Burr. 1080. Barjeauv.Walmsley, 2 Stra,1249. Hussey v. Jacob, Com. Rep. 4.

(1) Bowyer v. Bampton, 2 Stra. 1155. Lowe v. Waller, Doug. 756.

intents and purposes whatsoever; and all premiums, sum or sums of money whatsoever, which shall be given, received, paid, or delivered, upon all such contracts or agreements, or upon any such wagers, or contracts in the nature of wagers, as aforesaid, shall be restored and repaid to the person or persons who shall give, pay, or deliver the same, who shall be at liberty, within six months from and after the making such contract or agreement, or laying any such wager, to sue for and recover the same from the person or persons to whom the same is or shall be paid or delivered, with double costs of suit, by action of debt founded on this act, to be prosecuted in any of his majesty's courts of record, in which action no essoin, protection, wager of law, or more than one imparlance shall be allowed; and it shall be sufficient therein for the plaintiff to allege that the defendant is indebted to the plaintiff, or has received to the plaintiff's use, the money or premium so paid or received, whereby the plaintiff's action accrued to him, according to the form of this statute, without setting forth the special matter."

Upon this statute it has been determined, (m) that where A., being employed as a broker for B. in stock-jobbing transactions, paid the differences for him, a dispute arising between them respecting the amount of A.'s demand, the matter was referred to C., who awarded 6037. to be due: on which A. drew on B. for 100%. part of the above, and indorsed the bill to C. after B. had accepted it: held, that C. could not recover on the bill. So, if a broker draw on his employer for differences paid for him in stock-jobbing transactions, and the employer accept the bill, and then the broker indorse it to a third person after it is due, the latter cannot recover on the bill. (n) But an agreement to sell out omnium to be afterwards replaced in stock is not within the above act. (0)

7. LOTTERY.]-All contracts or agreements for the sale of any tickets, or shares of tickets, or chances, in any private lottery; or, for the sale of any chances of tickets in any public lottery; and all insurances of numbers in any lottery, except by the holders of tickets in the public lottery, are prohibited by various statutes. (p)

8. WAGER POLICIES, &c.] — In order to prevent another species of gaming, called wager policies, or insurances of interest or no interest, the 19 Geo. 2. c. 37. s. 1. enacts," that no assurance shall be made by any person or persons, on any ship or ships belonging to his majesty, or any of his subjects, or on any goods, merchandizes, or effects laden or to be laden on board of any ship or ships, interest or no interest, or without further proof or interest than the policy, or, by way of gaming or wagering, or, without benefit of salvage to the insurer; and that every such in

(m) Steers v. Lashley, 6 Term Rep. 61. (n) Browny. Turner, 7 Term Rep. 630. (9), Oliverson v. Coles, 1 Stark. 496..

(p) Vide 5Geo. 1. c. 9. s. 43. 6 Geo.2. c.35. 12 Geo. 2. c. 28. 22 Geo.3. c. 47. See also Deey v. Shee, 2 Term Rep. 617.

surance shall be void to all intents and purposes." (q) And by the fourth section of this act, which was made to prevent all re-assurances, it is enacted, "that it shall not be lawful to make re-assurance, unless the assurer shall be insolvent, become a bankrupt, or die; in either of which cases, such assurer, his executors, administrators or assigns, may make re-assurance to the amount of the sum before by him assured; provided it shall be expressed in the policy to be a re-assurance. (r)

By the stat. 6 Geo. 1. c. 18. s. 12. it is enacted, that all policies of insurance upon ships at sea, made by any corporation (other than the two corporations therein mentioned) or by persons acting in partnership, shall be void. (s) So, all insurances upon prohibited goods, or relating to contraband trading, are void by the statutes 9 & 10 W. and M. c. 44. and 33 Geo. 3. c. 52. (t)

9. SMUGGLING, &c.] — All contracts made in contravention of the revenue. laws of this country are void. Thus, where an agreement was made between two parties, (u) subjects of this country, for the sale and delivery of goods in Guernsey, for the purpose of being smuggled into England, it was holden, that the vendor could not maintain an action for the value of the goods. And in a subsequent case, (v) it was decided, that the circumstance of the vendor being an inhabitant of Guernsey would not alter the case, for he was still a subject of this country. So, where the defendant, an Englishman, living in England, contracted with the plaintiff, a foreigner, living at Lisle, for a quantity of lace, which the plaintiff knew was to be smuggled into England, and the plaintiff for that purpose had it packed in a particular manner by the direction of the defendant, for the more easy conveyance of it into England without a discovery, the Court held that the contract was void, and that the plaintiff could not recover the value of the goods. (w) But the merely selling goods, knowing that the buyer will make an illegal use of them, is not of itself sufficient to deprive the vendor of his right of payment; but to affect him it is necessary to show that he is either a sharer in the illegal transaction, or that he aided and assisted in the act of smuggling. Thus, in the case of Holman v. Johnson, (x) where it appeared that the plaintiff, residing at Dunkirk, sold and delivered a quantity of tea, for the price of which the action was brought, to the order of the defendant, knowing it was intended to be smuggled into England; but the plaintiff had no concern in the smuggling himself; it was held by the Court of King's Bench that this was a legal contract, and that an action might be supported on it: and Lord Mansfield, in giving judgment, lays it down,

(q) For the cases upon this stat. vide Park on Insurance, chap. 14.

(r) Ibid. chap. 15.

(s) Ibid. chap 1.

(†) Ibid. chap. 12, 13.

(u) Biggs v. Lawrence, 3 Term Rep. 454. Vide post, Part II. tit. Sale of Goods, &c.

(v) Clugas v. Penaluna, 4 T. R. 466. (w) Waymell v. Reed, 5 T. R. 599. (x) Cowp. 341. See also Hodgson v. Temple, 5 Taunt. Rep. 181. Accord.