There are many agreements which, though not tending to injure the public service, injuriously affect the government itself in some other way, and which are therefore illegal, as contrary to public policy.84 These agreements are collected by Greenhood,85 and may be shortly stated as follows: (1) Agreements contemplating the appropriation of public money for purposes not sanctioned by law.86 (2) Agreements which seek to secure to strangers a gratuity which the public has offered for services rendered; as in the case of an agreement to secure to a stranger bounties offered by the government for military services.87 (3) Agreements which seek to secure to a stranger the benefit of a privilege granted by the government to the promisor; as, for instance, where a person who has received from the government a license to trade with the Indians agrees for a consideration to share the profits with a stranger.88 (4) Agreements with an alien enemy.89

An agreement, the object or natural tendency of which is to diminish competition among the applicants or bidders for a public contract or for a public franchise, is illegal as against public policy.90

83 Georgia R. & Banking Co. v. Atlantic Postal Telegraph Cable Co. (C. C.) 152 Fed. 991; Western Union Telegraph Co. v. Telegraph Co., 65 Ga. 160, 38 Am. Rep. 781. Contra, Western Union Telegraph Co. v. Railroad Co., 86 I11. 246, 29 Am. Rep. 28; Canadian Pae. R. Co. v. Telegraph Co., 17 Can. S. C. R. 151. See "Contracts," Dec Dig. (Key-No.) §§ 116, 123; Cent. Dig. §§ 51,2-552, 570-575.

84 Fisher Electric Co. v. Iron Works, 116 Mich. 293, 74 N. W. 493. "Contracts which take advantage of the depreciation of the national currency, or which contemplate speculation on such depreciation, are valid." Greenh. Pub. Pol. rule 305, p. 370; Cox v. Smith, 1 Nev. 161, 90 Am. Dec. 476. Agreements for the purchase and sale of gold. Brown v. Speyers, 20 Grat (Va.) 296; Cooke v. Davis, 53 N. Y. 318; Cameron v. Durkheim, 55 N. Y. 425; Peabody v. Speyers, 56 N. Y. 230. See "Contracts;' Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 123; Cent. Dig. §§ 570-575.

85 Greenh. Pub. Pol. rules 302-315.

86Capehart v. Rankin, 3 W. Va. 571, 100 Am Dec. 779. See "Contracts," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 103; Cent. Dig. §§ 468-476.

87 Decker v. Saltsman, 1 Hun (N. Y.) 421. See "Bounties" Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 1; Cent. Dig. §§ 1-35.

88 Gould v. Kendall, 15 Neb. 549, 19 N. W. 4S3. See "Contracts," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) $ 105; Cent. Dig. §§ .480-487.

89 Ante, p. 182. See Greenh. Pub. Pol. rules 306-315. "It was a principle of the common law that trading with an enemy, without the king's license, was illegal in British subjects." Potts v. Bell, 8 Term R. 548. Some writers class such agreements among those in breach of express rules of the common law. See "Contracts," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 133; Cent. Dig. §§ 662-680.

Same - Agreements Promotive Of Nonofficial Corruption

157. The illegal agreements which may be classified under this head are:

(a) Agreements by a private citizen to violate a duty which he owes to the public.

(b) Agreements tending to impair the integrity of public elections.

Among the agreements which may be treated under the first head, and which are deemed contrary to public policy and illegal, are agreements in consideration of a person's forbearing to petition for the repeal of a public law,92 or to oppose on public grounds any measure or proceeding before a legislative body,93 agreements tending to suppress inquiry by the legislature into matters of public concern,94 agreements in consideration of a person's opposing95 or of his approving or not opposing a public improvement or other public project,96 or withdrawing his petition for such an improvement.97

90 McMullen v. Hoffman, 174 U. S. 639, 19 Sup. Ct. 839, 43 L. Ed. 1117; Boyle v. Adams, 50 Minn. 255, 52 N. W. 860, 17 L. R. A. 96; Conway v. Post Co., 190 I11. 89, 60 N. E. 82; Baird v. Sheehan, 38 App. Div. 7, 56 N. Y. Supp. 228, affirmed 166 N. Y. 631, 60 N. E. 1107; Pendleton v. Asbury, 104 Mo. App. 723, 78 S. W. 651. See, also, Kine v. Turner, 27 Or. 356, 41 Pac. 664. Cf. Hyer v. Traction Co., 168 U. S. 471, 18 Sup. Ct. 115, 42 L. Ed. 547; ante, p. 318. See "Contracts," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 132; Cent. Dig. §§ 659-661.

91 Greenh. Pub. Pol. p. 383.

92 Reed v. Warehouse Co., 2 Mo. App. 82. See "Contracts" Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 126; Cent. Dig. §§ 5S6-593.

93 Pingry v. Washburn, 1 Aikens (Vt.) 264, 15 Am. Dec. 676. This rule does not apply to opposition to private legislation on purely private grounds. Greenh. Pub. Pol. rule 317, p. 384. See "Contracts," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 126; Cent. Dig. §§ 586-593.

94 Usher v. McBratney, 3 Dill. 385, Fed. Cas. No. 16,805. See "Contracts," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 126; Cent. Dig. §§ 586-593.

95 Slocum v. Wooley, 43 N. J. Eq. 451, 11 Atl. 264. See "Contracts," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 131; Cent. Dig. §§ 594-607.

96 Howard v. Independent Church, 18 Md. 451; Maguire v. Smock, 42 Ind. 1, 13 Am. Rep. 353; Smith v. Applegate, 23 N. J. Law, 352; Doane v. Railway Co., 1G0 I11. 22, 45 N. E. 507, 35 L. R. A. 588; Greer, Hawes & Co. v. Sever-son, 119 Iowa, 84, 93 N. W. 72 (consent of property holder required by statute to establishment of saloon). Where the opposition is on purely private grounds, it has been held that the rule does not apply. Weeks v. Lippencott, 42 Pa. 474. Cf. Montclair Military Academy v. Railway Co., 65 N. J. Law, 328, 47 Atl. 890. See "Contracts," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 131; Cent. Dig. §§ 594-607.

97 Jacobs v. Tobiason, 65 Iowa, 245, 21 N. W. 590, 54 Am. Rep. 9. See "Contracts," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 131; Cent. Dig. §§ 594-607.

Any agreement which tends to impair the integrity of public elections is clearly contrary to public policy.98 "Every voter is bound to use his influence to promote the public good according to his own honest opinions and convictions of duty, and if, for money or other personal profit, he agrees to exert his influence against what he believes to be for the public good, he is corrupt, and the agreement void." 99 A promise, therefore, in consideration of the promisee's voting for the promisor for a public office,1 or procuring his nomination,2 or aiding in procuring his election,8 or of withdrawing himself as a candidate for election,4 or a promise to pay money if a certain candidate shall be elected, is illegal and void. A bet on the result of an election is illegal even in the absence of a statutory prohibition.6

98 A person who furnishes liquor or refreshments to electors at the request of another, for the purpose of influencing them in their votes, cannot recover therefor. Duke v. Asbee, 33 N. C. 112; Greenh. Pub. Pol. p. 389. See "Contracts," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 124; Cent. Dig. §§ 576-585.

99 Nichols v. Mudgett, 32 Vt. 546; Roby v. Carter, 6 Tex. Civ. App. 295, 25 S. W. 725; Burden Bank v. Phelps, 5 Kan. App. 685, 48 Pac 938. See "Contracts," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 124; Cent. Dig. §§ 576-5S5.

1 Nichols v. Mudgett, 32 Vt. 546; ante, p. 356. See "Contracts," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 124; Cent. Dig. §§ 576-585.

2 Liness v. Hesing, 44 I11. 113, 92 Am. Dec. 153; LIVINGSTON v. PAGE, 74 Vt. 356, 52 Atl. 965, 59 L. R. A. 336, 93 Am. St. Rep. 901, Throckmorton Cas. Contracts, 246 (to use influence of newspaper to secure nomination). See "Contracts," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 124; Cent. Dig. §§ 576-585.

3 Stout v. Ennis, 28 Kan. 706; Swayze v. Hull, 8 N. J. Law, 54, 14 Am. Dec. 399; Ham v. Smith, 87 Pa. 63. This does not apply to "an agreement to pay for open advocacy of the election of a candidate, or for legitimate political work." Greenh. Pub. Pol. 393; Murpby v. English, 64 How. Prac. (N. Y.) 362; Sizer v. Daniels, 66 Barb. (N. Y.) 426. See "Contracts," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 124; Cent. Dig. §§ 576-585.

4Robinson v. Kalbfleisch, 5 Thomp. & C. (N. Y.) 212. See "Contracts," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 124; Cent. Dig. §§ 576-585.

5Lockhart v. Hullinger, 2 I11. App. 465; Gordon v. Casey, 23 I11. 70; Guy-man v. Burlingame, 36 I11. 201; Vischer v. Yates, 11 Johns. (N. Y.) 23; McAllister v. Hoffman, 16 Serg. & R. (Pa.) 147, 16 Am. Dec. 556; Wroth v. Johnson, 4 Har. & McH. (Md.) 284; Gregory v. King, 58 I11. 169, 11 Am. Rep. 56 (bet in one state on result of presidential election in another); Greenh. Pub. Pol. 391. See "Gaming," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 5; Cent. Dig. § 18.