Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 3.djvu/434

W. tJ. TELEGBAPH CO. V. V. P. ET. CO. 427 �plaintiiï priôr to, and independently of, the contract. Should the contract be held void, an aecounting between the parties would, nevertheless, be necessary, in order to determine their rights with respect to the line of which the property here mentioned and described constitutes an important part. �2. There is another ground upon which I should feel con- strained to hold that the plaintiff bas, by the amended bill, shown an interest in the telegraph Unes and property in con- troversy which a court of equity should proteet. Even if we assume that the contract is void, the property accumulated or constructed under it must, as between the parties, be dis- posed of according to equity, and the court will not refuse tO deal with that property on the ground that it was acquired under an Ulegal contract. Such is the doctrine established by the supreme court of the United States. The case of Plantera' Bank v. Union Bank, 16 Wall. 483, was a suit to recover money received for the sale of confederate bonds. In the course of the opinion Mr. Justice Strong said : "It may be that no action would lie against a purchaser of the bonds, or against the defendants, on any engagement mado by them to sell. Such a contract would bave been illegal. But when the illegal transaction bas been consummated ; when no court bas been called upon to give aid to it ; when the proceeds of the sale baye been actually received, and received in that which the law recognizes as baving had value ; and when they bave been carried to the credit of the plaintiffs, the case is different. The court is there not asked to enforce an illegal contract. The plaintiffs do not require the aid of any illegal transaction to establish their case. It is enough that the defendants have in hand a thing of value that belongs to them. Some of the authorities show that, though an illegal contract will not be executed, yet, when it bas been executed by the parties themselves, and the illegal object of it has been aecomplished, the money or thing whioh was the price of it may be a legal consideration between the parties for a prom- ise, express or implied, and the court will not unravel the transactions to discover its origin." I<i. 499-500. ����