bartlet and viner upon motion in arrest of judgement the case be in a action  on the case bring by the administrator of Bartlet against the executor of sir  Robert viner upon such a promise make by sir Robert to the intestate sure if  you will procure l to be pay into the exchequer upon the aid of d in the pound  in my name or the name of such person as I shall direct I will give you c upon  the trial a verdict be give for the plaintiff and darnel say that the action  do not lie because it be brocage and against the statute of usury and it be a  promise against law it be not Obligatory but upon consideration of the case  the court seriatim deliver their opinion that the plaintiff ought to have his  judgement for nothing appear here in the declaration against law for the  borrower do not pay brocage nor the lender receive it but the agreement be  between two person not concern but only in the procure the money and this be a  advantage to the defendant and may be in many case as if a be in debt to b and  can pay he and b have occasion for his money or mistrust that be shall lose it  and a say to b that he can pay he but if he will procure c to lend he the  money that he will pay he and b say to c that if he will lend to a l that he  will give he this be a lawful agreement and not within the Skinner statute for  b have a benefit by it and a the borrower do not pay any thing but c the  lender have from b the which he be Willing to abate for his own conveniency  but the case at the bar be strong for here neither the borrower pay nor the  lender receive any thing but the consideration be whole between person not  interest in the money but if any thing have appear against law in the  declaration or upon the plead though it be not prohibit in the statute but  only a penalty annex the agreement be void for though the difference in hob  Jones vers Jones stand yet in every case where a penalty be annex to the do of  such a act though it be not prohibit yet if such a thing appear upon the  record to be the consideration the agreement be void for it will be ridiculous  to give judgement that the plaintiff shall recover such a thing the which if  be take be shall be subject to the penalty of a statute and therefore in every  case where a statute inflict a penalty for do such a act though the act be not  prohibit yet the thing be unlawful for it can be intend that a statute will  inflict a penalty for a lawful act One voice rule that the plaintiff shall  have his judgement