Peyton v. Veitch

*125Bills of exception were taken, but no writ of error prosecuted.

Upon the question whether the illegality of the payment should prevent the plaintiff from recovering, the defendants’ counsel cited 1 Esp. N. P. 89, 21 and 23; Mabin v. Colson, 4 Dall. 298; Belding v. Pitkin, 2 Caines, 147; and the plaintiff’s counsel cited Holman v. Johnson, Cowp. 341; Digges v. Lawrence, 3 T. R. 454; Waymell v. Reed, 5 T. R. 599, and Esp. N. P. 20, Am. Ed.