These contracts are wholly void.1 It has been held, that a promise to a woman to marry no one but her was such a contract. (f) So a bond by a widow not to marry again. (g) So a wagering contract that the party would not marry within six years. (h) But a promise by one with whom a woman had cohabited, to pay her an annuity for life provided she remained single, was held to be good. (i)

* There are certain contracts spoken of in English books as "marriage brocage (or brokerage) contracts." They are contracts for payment of money, or some other compensation, for the procuring a marriage; and they are held to be void, both in law and equity, as against policy and morality. Courts in England are very hostile to any contract of this nature or effect; particularly if made with a guardian, or with a servant, or one to whose selfish and injurious influence the party would be much exposed. Such a contract is set aside, without reference to the propriety or expediency of the marriage. (j)

(ee) Fowler v. Trebein, 16 Ohio, 403. (ef) Eddies v. Buck, 23 Ark. 607. (eg) Burdeno v. Amperse, 14 Mich. 91. (eh) Smith v. Allen, 80 Miss. 469. (f) Lowe v. Peers, 4 Burr. 2226.

(g ) Baker v. White, 2 Vera. 216. (h) Hartley v. Rice, 10 East, 22, cited ante, p. *64, note (q). In Sterling v. Sinnickson, 2 Southard, 766, a bond to pay $1,000, if the obligee (the plaintiff) were not married within six months, was declared void.

(i) Gibson v. Dickie, 3 M. & Sel. 468. See also Lloyd v. Lloyd, 10 E. L. & E. 189.

1 A gift or legacy conditioned on the donee's or legatee's remaining unmarried, is void, both as to capital and income, Bellairs v. Bellairs, L. R. 18 Eq. 510; but valid if made or left to a widow or widower, Allen v. Jackson, 1 Ch. D. 399. Arthur v. Cole, 56 Md. 100, was to the effect that a conveyance to one's sister to hold "so long as she shall remain unmarried," is valid.