The value of’the cotton at the time'and place *545 of sale and delivery, was the question. As tending to show the value, the plaintiff offered to prove the price of cotton on the other side of the military line between the Confederate and United States forces.14

It was unlawful to trade across the line. ' There was -no market to which the defendant could take the cotton beyond the line, , without violating the laws, of both governments'. The Courts will not investigate - the hazard of committing crime, or the value of successful adventure against the laws. The evidence was, therefore, properly ruled out. ,' ■,, Eor the same purpose the-plaintiff-offered to prove the price at which the defendant sold the cotton. But it did not appear wheh or where he sold;- and, therefore, it could'throw no light on the question, and was irrelevant. .

There was no evidence to; support the first special,instruction asked for by the plaintiff; to'wit, that there was. a'special contract to pay the amount bid in “.good money■' mw¡

, The. second; special instruction, was in substance given ¡ as asked for by. the plaintiff.-

There is.ño error;

• The plaintiff is entitled tb' judgment, here;for;fheusaíne amount as thejudgment below, but he. is not. entitled'to- the costs of the appeal, as it. was -his appeal; -i Judgment against the plaintiff for the -costs of fhis.-Oowrt.-ii

. Per Curiam;. ,,f-,^fdrjnpd.