The Daily clarion. [volume] (Jackson, Miss.) 1866-1888, 1867-02-06

a 40.
by the Confederate Government have beoon
valueless, because that Government h
ceased TO exist. But this does not rend
void private contracts made in good fait
aud founded on them, during the war, an
having no connection with tho rebellion
Tho principle Is thus laid down by Ruthe
forth Speaking of the consequences of IL
destruction ola State, he says;
1.-THE debts Of Society are cancelle,
when the Society perishes; and though I'll
members, whilst the Society subsistet
Y were jointly bound to contribute toward
the payment Of the public debts, this obi
Cation willcease when the Society subsist
no longer. But tho destruction If The S0ciet
does mol cancel any debts phioh the members Q
" had contracted ds iHdiuidRals Rp0n their 0p
p'irafe account" Rutherforth's Inst Boo
2, oh. 10, 9I3.
Its the policy of Governments 10 main
tain the inviolability Of contracts between
individuals, because II tends TO promote mo
! rality and public virtue aud the obligation
of such contracts will never be interferet
with, unless they manifestly appear to hav,
been entered into, In CONFIRMATION Of pos
tive law, or of some high principle Of publ,
policy. But such violation will never b,
presumed.
The rule In relation TO the validity of con
tracts which emanated remotely or cOnse
quentially from Illegal acts. is stated with
great clearness In tho case of Toler VS.. Arm
strong, a Wash. G. G. r. 297, by that EN-
inent jurist, Justice Washington, as follows
Does the faint in the original transaction
infect and vitiate every contract growing out
Of II however remotely connected with it 7
This would be to extend the rule beyond the
policy which produced it, and would lead to
the most inc0nvenient consequences; carried
out TO such an extent, 1t would deserve to
be entitled rule to encourage and protect
fraud. SO far as the rule operates to dis
courage the perpetration of an immoral or IL
legal act il is founded In the strongest reason,
but 1t cannot be safely pushed further If,
for example, man who imports goods for
another by means of violation of the laws
of his country, is disqualified from founding
any action upon such illegal transaction for
the value of freight of the goods, or other
advances made on them, he is Justly punish
ed for the immortality of the act, and a pow
erfnl encouragement from the preparation
of it is provided by the rule. But after the
act is accomplished, no new contract ought to
be affected by it it ought not to vitiate the
contract of the retail merchant, who buys
those goods from the importer; that OF the
tailor who purchases from the merchant, or
of the customers of the former, amongst
whom the goods are distributed in clothing,
although the illegality of the act was known
to each OF these persons, ut the time no con-
tracted"
II understand the rule, as now clearly set
tied, to be, that where the contract grows
Immediately out of, and is connected with
an illegal or immoral act, court of justice
will not lend its aid to enforce it," ="
But II the promise be unconnected with the
Illegal act, and is founded on q new conside-
ration it is not tainted by the act, nj hOugh
w I'm 20 n,Nvt 10 L.
promise was made, and although he was the
c0ntriver and conductor Of the illegal act.
Thus, If A. should during war contrive q
plan for importing goods from the country
of the enemy, on his own account, by means
of smuggling or of a collusive capture, and
in the same vessel should be sent goods for
b., aud A. should upon the request of B. be-
come surety for the payment of the duties, or
should undertake to become responsible for |
the expenses on account of prosecution for |
the illegal importation, or should advance |
money to d. to enable him to pay these ex-
penses; these acts constituting no part of the
original scheme-here would be new con-
tract upon valid and legal consideration,
nnconnected with the original act, although |
remotely caused by it; and such contract
would not be so contaminated by the turpi-
Jude of the offensive act, as to turn A. out of
'ourt when seeking to enforce it, although
,he illegal introduction of the goods into the
country was the consequence of the scheme
projected by A. in relation to his own goods
This able and lucid exposition of the law
hows the true distinction between contracts
which are illegal and such as are legal and
,aiid, when founded on, or connected with
N illegal transaction; and states the rule to
,e that in order to render such a contract
Illegal it must grow Immediately out of, and
'e Immediately connected with the original
legal or immoral act, and not be founded
n new consideration and further that
sale of the subjects Of the illegal
ct after the original act is consummated, I
nd contract founded thereon will be valid
t was affirmed in the Supreme Court of the .
Tnited States, by Chief Justice Mar
hall in II Wheat. 25s, after elaborate argu-
tent by distinguished counsel; and it has
cen repeatedly recognized by this court G
Vooten VS.. Miller, s. e. M, and Koontz VS.. :
rice and Dickson at last term.
This case appears to come fully within y
lese principles. The contract here was
'unded on new consideration, not connect G
with the alleged original and illegal act, v
nd between new parties. No ingredient e
an illegal nature is shown except that it
as founded on the notes Illegally issued, as a
assumed, but with which the plaintiff had =
0 connection. He merely received the sub =
ct of the Illegal act for valuable consid-
alton and in the course of his lawful bust. :,
sss, without any connection on his part, II
it'll act of the illegal issue. This APP II
,ars to be analogous to the case put by the 81
armed judge in the case of Toler VS.. Arm. d
rong, Of retail merchant who buys goods e.
ON the illegal importer, or of any other n
,rson who subsequently acquires a right to N
em and POUNDS contract on them. a.
It Is urged, that the plaintiff was bound !,
know that the notes were issued in aid of =
q rebellion and were void, and that he =. =,
INST be presumed in law to have known a,
cir illegality But that does not vitiate b
$ contracts founded on them-there being
law prohibiting their circulation-if his b.
ntract was upon o new consideration and p,
was not connected with the alleged orig Of
al illegal act And this is distinctly held g
both of the learned judges in the case of y !,
,ler vs. Armstrong.
The case Of Kennett vs.. Chambers, IA How. ~
I. S. relied on in behalf of the plaintiffs in -
ror, Is not in conflict with the principle above
tied, and is not in point; for that was suit ~ y.
enforce an illegal contract by the party who ~
d done the original Illegal act. ce
Again. II is insisted that the notes in this NJ
Sc stand upon the same footing as counter ~ "
I notes and are to be governed by the same ~ u
inciple. Gu
But the distinction is very manifest. Coun-
felt notes are founded wholly in fraud, and DC
Z
ltion alone that causes them to pass, and Ut
~ are Of no value, either intrinsicaly or in u,
} market, by consent founded on knowl- ul
&c Of their true character. But notes issued 2
existing corporations, and which are what
" purport on their face to be, and are re-
ynized In the market as money, have a value 4,
fact, which gives them the character of mo- -
j, though they may afterward prove to be una
liable This distinction Is recognizedin many
les, In which 1t has been held, that a pay a
mt in the notes of Bank, supposed by both e, -
rties to be Of specie value at the time, but ~
ieh were deprecated in consequence Of the 81
lure of the bank to redeem its issues-which AZ
{ was unknown to the parties at the time of MI
Fment-was a valid payment. Scruggs vs. pr
IS, 8 Yerger, 175; Bayard VS.. skunk. 1 gu
tits, Sergt. W. LOwreyvs. Murrell, Por- Ell
t, $50. 81 w ts -W OF
from the foregoing views, we are of opinion he
There is no error in the action of the court Tx
ow upon the instructions under eonsidera- VI
4. VII
n coming to this conclusion we cannot
regard the fact that vast amount of the !
hts and property of our citizens depends me-
contracts founded on considerations like rec
It Of the case before US; NOR can We over cor
k the circumstances under which such !
ltracts were made. The currency on =
ich they were founded, was for upwards al
u =