case hussey vers jacob when a man shall avoid a bill for money lose at play by  the statute of car l ray SC salk SC Carth SC Mod SC Mod SC holt SC l raym burr  assumpsit the plaintiff declare upon the custom of merchant by which if a bill  of exchange be draw upon a person and he accept it he be liable to pay it that  the Lord chandos have draw a bill upon the defendant for the payment of piece  of gold call guinea to the plaintiff and the defendant accept thereof and  afterward refuse payment the defendant plead the statute car c and that the  plaintiff have play with the Lord chandos at a game call hazard and that the  Lord chandos have lose guinea and this bill be give for the security of that  money upon which it be demurrer and argue that sir Barth shower for the  plaintiff that this plea amount to the general issue for on non assumpsit  plead he may give the statute of car c in evidence and therefore be shall not  be admit to plead the special matter where it may be give in evidence upon the  general issue say non allocatur for in every case where the defendant may  avoid the action of the plaintiff for matter of law he may there plead special  notwithstanding that the same matter may be give in evidence upon the general  issue and shall not be oblige to take the general issue and leave the matter  of law to the verdict of a jury as in a action bring upon a bind the defendant  may plead that she be under coverture at the time although such matter may be  give in evidence upon non be factum plead and in conspiracy comens the  defendant may well show a probable cause for his suspicion in his plea and be  not oblige to plead the general issue cro Elizabeth vent vent show SC Carth SC  comb S c a dly that the defendant can have the advantage of the statute car c  for the money be not lose by he but the action lie against he upon another  contract  The endorse by superscribing make in effect a new bill of exchange  comb for the acceptance of the bill make the defendant Chargeable and if a man  promise another that if he will forbear to sue he for so much money which be  win at play he will pay at such a time assumpsit lie upon such promise for  there be another consideration the forbearance be the cause of the promise and  the mischief will be very great if a person may avoid payment upon a bill  after his acceptance of it for that the original cause of such bill be upon a  usurious contract or for game c if the plaintiff have send his bill to  Constantinople and it have be there accept shall it be avoid there for that it  be give for money win at play such a construction will be very prejudicial to  trade so in this case it be not say that the comens er p acceptance by the  defendant be for the security of the money which the plaintiff win at dice say  non allocatur for the acceptance by the defendant be not upon another  consideration but be a better assurance for the money due from the Lord  chandos and the statute avoid all contract judgement bind bill c and other act  deed or security whatsoever give for security or satisfaction of such money so  that the statute be not restrictive as to security make by the party only who  lose the money but also for those make by any other person for he and if a man  give security for money that a have lose at play it be void as much as if he  have give it himself and although the plea do not say that the defendant  accept the bill for a further security c yet it be say that the plaintiff have  win guinea at hazard of the Lord chandos who draw the bill upon the defendant  for the security of the same guinea and the defendant accept of the same bill  by which it appear that it be for security of the same guinea and the mischief  that have be urge be not within the present case and holt c j comens think and  it be not deny by any of the judge that if the plaintiff have assign his bill  to another person for satisfaction of a just debt due to he from the plaintiff  and the defendant have accept it this will have be a lie upon the defendant to  such three person as where a man make a usurious contract to b for payment of  money due to b and b be indebt in the same sum to c and b for satisfaction of  the debt which he owe c make the man give his bind to pay to c the same sum  which he owe to b upon the usurious contract such person shall not avoid the  payment to c because of the usurious contract make with b but sir Bartholomew  shower say that then if a man lose at dice and give a bill Payable to the  winner or order for the money and the winner endorses the bill to another he  shall avoid the statute car c but holt answer that this be not the case in  question but that his opinion be that if such a dote be give to the winner or  order and the winner endorse it to a stranger for a just debt and the person  upon who the bill be draw accept it in the hand of the stranger the acceptor  will be liable dly it do not appear by the plea that the Lord chandos and the  plaintiff play upon tick or credit and the statute do not avoid the payment  where the plaintiff play with ready money say non allocatur for it be say that  the plaintiff and the Lord chandos play together and that the Lord chandos  lose guinea and that for security of they the bill be give which show that the  play be not for ready money and then it be within the statute and holt c j say  that it have be late adjudge that where a agreement be make for a horserace to  run four heat at a heat and as many more as the party shall agree and a action  be bring for the money lose upon two heat only which be within the sum of yet  it be within the statute for the agreement be entire for four heat which  amount to above and although it happen that only two heat be run yet the  plaintiff shall not recover for they see the case now report by Ventris vent  and judgement in the principal case here be give for the defendant