Fisher v. Lord

• Decision Date: 31 March 1886
• Parties: FISHER and another v. LORD.
• Court: New Hampshire Supreme Court

3 A. 927

63 N.H. 514

FISHER and another

v. LORD.¹

SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE.

Filed March, 12, 1886.

Assumpsit to recover on a sale of intoxicating liquor. Facts found by the court, which are stated in the opinion.

F. Weeks, for plaintiffs.

J. H. Hobbs, for defendant.

BINGHAM, J. The plaintiffs reside in Massachusetts, and the defendant in New Hampshire. The liquors sued for were sold in Massachusetts, to be resold in New Hampshire, in violation of law. The plaintiffs, to aid the defendant in the resale, and enable him to evade the law and avoid detection, agreed, as a part of their contract of sale, to pack the liquors so as to avoid suspicion, and in executing this part of the contract they concealed the liquors by sending 20-gallon kegs in sugar barrels, and smaller kegs in boxes packed in sawdust.

The fact that the defendant was a town agent does not change the case, as he was acting outside of his agency, which was known and understood, between the parties.

The mere knowledge of the unlawful intent of the defendant by the plaintiffs would not bar them from enforcing their contract to recover in our courts; yet, if they in any way aid the defendant in his unlawful design to violate our laws, such participation will prevent them from maintaining an action. The participation by them must be active to some extent. They must do something in furtherance of the vendee's design to violate our laws; but positive acts in aid of the unlawful purpose, though slight, are sufficient. No nation or state is bound to recognize or enforce contracts which are injurious to its interests, the welfare of its people, or which are in fraud or violation of its own laws. Hill v. Spear, 50 N. H. 253; Smith v. Godfrey, 28 N. H. 379, 385; Skiff v. Johnson, 57 N. H. 475; Gaylord v. Soragen, 32 Vt. 110; Feineman v. Sachs, 33 Kan. 621; "S. C. 7 Pae. Rep. 222.

The plaintiffs, in effect, ask the court to aid them in collecting of the defendant pay for services rendered him in so packing and disguising the liquors forwarded to New Hampshire as to enable him to avoid and violate the laws of the state. These acts of the plaintiffs were positive, were required by the contract of sale, and bar their right to maintain this action. Exception overruled.

ALLEN, J., did not sit. The others concurred.

NOTE.

The mere knowledge of the vendor that the purchaser intends to make an Illegal or unmoral use of the thing purchased is not sufficient to defeat an action for the purchase price. Wallace v. Lark, 12 S. C. 576. See Tracy v. Talniage, 14 N. Y. 162.

Where a bank discounted a note, its officers knowing that the proceeds were to be used for an unlawful purpose, but not intending to aid in such purpose, the note is not invalid. Henderson v. Waggoner, 2 Lea, 133.

The sale of an article by one merchant...