One important qualification to the general doctrine that the place of performance controls as to the validity of the subject-matter is found where the contract is sought to be enforced in a forum to the morals and policy of which the contract is antagonistic.1 Thus courts have refused to enforce a wager contract, though valid where it is to be performed.2 Thus a note given in renewal of a note given to pay a bet on a race,3 or a note on gambling consideration, enforceable in the hands of a bona fide holder where given,4 even though valid where given and payable, has been held unenforceable in an action brought in a jurisdiction where such contracts are illegal. So equity has refused to enforce a foreign judgment rendered on a wager in a jurisdiction where a wager was lawful, even though the illegal character of the transaction was not set up as a defense.5 So a contract to aid in divorce, even if valid where made, will not be enforced in another jurisdiction where against public policy.6

13 Green v. Brewing Co., 103 la. 252; 72 N. W. 655; Carstairs v. O'Donnell, 154 Mass. 357; 28 N. E. 271; Richards v. Woodward, 113 Mass. 285; Durkee v. Moses, 67 N. H. 115; 23 Atl. 793; overruling Dunbar v. Locke., 62 N. H. 442; Jones v. Surprise, 64 X. H. 243; 9 Atl. 384.

14 Lyng v. Michigan. 135 U. S. 161; Leisy v. Hardin, 135 U. S. 100.

15 Bluthenthal v. MeWhorter, 131 Ala. 642; 31 So. 559.

1 Kennett v. Chambers, 14 How. (U. S.) 38; Smith v. Bank, 5 Pet.. (U. S.) 518; Parker v. Moore, 111 Fed. 470; Benton v. Singleton. 114 Ga. 548; 58 L. R. A. 181; 40 S. E. 811; Rhodes v. Savings Co.. 173 111. 621; 42 L. R. A. 93; 50 N. E. 998;

Pope v. Hanke, 155 111. 617; 28 L. R. A. 568; 40 N. E. 839; Rogers v. Rains, 100 Ky. 295; 38 S. W. 483; American, etc., Co. v. Jefferson, 69 Miss. 770; 30 Am. St. Rep. 587; 12 So. 464; True v. Ranney, 21 X. H. 52; 53 Am. Dec. 164; Varnum v. Camp, 13 N. J. L. 326; 25 Am. Dec. 476; Dearing v. Hardware Co., 165 N. Y. 78; SO Am. St. Rep. 708; 58 N. E. 773; Despard v. Churchill, 53 N. Y. 192; Armstrong v. Best, 112 N. C. 59; 34 Am. St. Rep. 473; 25 L. R. A. 188; 17 S. E. 14; Winward v. Lincoln. 23 R. I. 476; 64 L. R. A. 160; 51 Atl. 106; Welling v. Loan Association. 56 S. C. 280; 34 S. E. 409; Ex parte Dickinson, 29 S. C. 453: 1 L. R. A. 6S5; 13 Am. St. Rep. 749; 7 S. E. 593; Pennegar v. State, 87 Tenn. 244;