A contract binding the maker to do some thing opposed to the public policy of the state or nation, or which conflicts with the wants, interest, or prevailing sentiment of the people, or our obligations to the world, or is repugnant to the morals of the times, is void, however solemnly the same may be made; Greenh. Pub. Pol. Rule II., citing Jones v. Knowles, 30 Me. 402 ; and see Standard Lumber Co. v. ice Co., 146 Fed. 359, 76 C. C. A. 639, 7 L. R. A. (N. S.) 467; and though made in another country where its validity is undoubted ; L. R. 14 Ch. D. 351; Logan & Bryan v. Cable Co., 157 Fed. 570 (see LEx Loa). The assignor of a contract has no better rights therein than the party to it, even if he had no notice of its illegal ity ; Stevens v. Wood, 127 Mass. 123.
Among those contrary to public policy and illegal at common law are contracts In re straint of marriage or of trade, or of bidding at public auctions, or relating to marriage brokerage, to hinder legislation, whether pub lic or private (see LOBBYING), or to promote the appointment of a party to an office, to influence public elections to office, or to re munerate officers in addition to their lawful fees for acts which they are bound to do by virtue of their office or to assign fees and profits of official positions requiring personal supervision (see OFFICER) ; or any contract involving the sale of personal influence; Oscanyan v. Arms Co., 103 U. S. 276, 26 L. Ed. 539; Findlay v. Pertz, 66 Fed. 427, 13 C. C. A. 559, 29 L. R. A. 188; or to defraud the government; Fisher Electric Co. v. Iron Works, 116 Mich. 293, 74 N. W. 493; a con tract between two contractors submitting separate bids for municipal work by which they agree to share the profits therefrom, should either of their bids be accepted; Mc Mullen v. Hoffman, 174 U. S. 639, 19 Sup. Ct. 839, 43 L. Ed. 1117 (the parties were held to have committed a fraud in combining their interests and concealing the fact); a contract by which one public officer con tracts to perform the duties of another ; Moore v. Cassily, 16 Ohio Cir. Ct 708; a contract.for services in securing contracts by favoritism from state officers by reason of social and political relations with_ such offi cers; Drake v. Lauer, 182 N. Y. 533, 75 N. E. 1129; a contract by a mother surrendering her child to a charitable institution ; In re Sleep, 6 Pa. Dist. Rep. 256; contracts where the consideration is the commission of some crime or some flagrantly immoral act (see CONSIDERATION) ; Porn. Contr. § 282. So of
a promise to marry after the death of a wife, the plaintiff knowing at the time that defendant had a wife; [1908] 1 K. B. 729; Paddock v. Robinson, 63 Ill. 99, 14 Am. Rep. 112; Noice Brown, 38 N. J. L. 228, 20 Am. Rep. 388; but not so of a promise to marry on the death of a divorced wife ; Brown v. Odill, 104 Tenn. 250, 56 S. W. 840, 52 L. R. A. 660, 78 Am. St. Rep. 914. A promise of marriage in consideration of il licit sexual intercourse is void ; Edmonds v. Hughes, 115 Ky. 561, 74 S. W. 283.
Contracts to locate and maintain railroad stations at specified points, or not to main tain them at other points, are void ; Beasley v. IL Co., 115 Fed. 952, 53 C. C. A. 434; Florida C. & P. R. Co. v. State, 31 Fla. 509, 13 South. 103, 20 L. R. A. 419, 34 Am. St. Rep. 30; Holladay v. Patterson, 5 Or. 177; Currie v. R. Co., 61 Miss. 725; and to main tain forever a terminus, shops and offices at a particular place ; Texas & P. R. Co. v. Marshall, 136 U. S. 393, 10 Sup. Ct. 846, 34 L. Ed. 385. A contract by which a stock holder is to receive the par value of his stock before the corporate debts are paid is void ; Guaranty Trust Co. v. R. Co., 107 Fed. 311, 46 C. C. A. 305. So is a contract between a county and a bidder for an issue of its bonds, by which the latter agrees to prosecute a feigned suit to test their validity, the county to pay the expenses of the suit; Van Horn v. Kittitas County, 112 Fed. 1. A contract to furnish evidence to establish that a certain person was heir of a mining prop erty, to sue, if necessary, and in such event to control the suit and pay the expenses, re ceiving two-thirds of the value recovered, is voidable and will not be specifically en forced ; Casserleigh v. Wood, 119 Fed. 308, 56 C. C. A. 212.
Where an invalid contract has been per formed, its invalidity is not important ; St. Louis H. & G. Co. v. U. S., 191 U. S. 163, 24 Sup. Ct. 47, 48 L. Ed. 130.
Property delivered under an executed il legal sale cannot be recovered back by any party in pari delicto; Harriman V. Securities Co., 197 U. S. 244, 25 Sup. Ct. 493, 49 L. Ed. 739. But where a great swindle had been perpetrated, it was held that a victim might sue for his money, though he was in pari delicto; Falk enberg v. Allen, 18 Old. 210, 90 Pac. 415, 10 L. R. A. (N. S.) 494.
As to the effect of war upon contracts, see WAR. As to particular cases, see the several titles upon the subjects involved.