Farrer,  15  Q.  B.  677.  (<?)  EUenborough,   C.  J.,  Janes  v,

(»)    Wade  Y.  Simeon,  2  C.  B.  548  ;  Ashburnham,   4  East,   465  ;  see  The

see  Ex  p.  Sanner,    L.  E.    17   C.  D.  Queen  v.  Fox,  2  Q.  B.  246  ;  Byles,  J.,

480  ;  L.  R.  32  C.  D.  266.  Foster  v.  Dodd,  L.  R.  3  Q.  B.  77  ;  37

(o)    Atkinson    t.    Settree,    Willea,  L.  J.  Q.  B.  32.
482  ;    Serr'mg   v.    Sorrell,   8    Dowl.  ()■)  Braceu-ell  v.  Williams,  L.  E.  2

604  ;   Atkinson  v.  Baynton,    1   Bing.  0.  P.  196.
N.  C.  455  ;  Smith  v.  Montexth,  13  M.
THE  CONSIDERATION.  545

illegal  («).     An  agreement  between  subscribers  to  a  charity  to    Chap,  i.
exchange  votes  for  their  respective  candidates  is  legal  and
valid  ((5).
Marriage  is  a  valid  consideration  between  the  parties  to  the  Cousidera-
marriage ;  as  in  the  contract  of  mutual  promises  to  marry  («) .  marriage.
And  it  is  a  valid  consideration  for  a  promise  by  a  third  party
made  to  either  of  the  parties  to  the  marriage  («).  And  the
rescission  of  mutual  promises  to  marry  is  a  valid  considera-
tion for  a  promise  by  one  of  the  parties  to  pay  a  sum  of
money  to  the  other  [y) .  But  a  contract  of  mutual  promises
to  marry  is  held  not  to  be  an  "  agreement  made  upon  con-
sideration of  marriage "  within  the  fourth  section  of  the
Statute  of  Frauds;  and  therefore  it  does  not  require  evi-
dence in  writing  (z) . — Marriage  or  a  promise  .of  marriage  is  Marriage
a  valid  consideration  for  a  promise  to  convey  or  charge  land  ments.
