The Floyd Acceptances was a case heard by the United States Supreme Court in 1868. The case involved a dispute between the United States government and the Floyd Acceptance Corporation, a private company. The government had issued bonds to the company in order to finance the construction of a railroad. The company then issued its own bonds, known as "acceptances," to raise money to pay for the construction. The government argued that the acceptances were invalid because they had not been authorized by Congress. The Supreme Court disagreed, ruling that the acceptances were valid and enforceable. The Court held that the government had impliedly authorized the acceptances by issuing the bonds in the first place. The Court also held that the acceptances were not subject to the same restrictions as other government bonds, and that the government could not revoke them without just cause. The decision was a victory for the Floyd Acceptance Corporation, and it established the principle that private companies could issue their own bonds without the approval of Congress.

In the case of The Floyd Acceptances, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a contract between two parties could be enforced when it had been made in violation of an existing law. The majority opinion held that such contracts were not enforceable and should be declared void. However, Justice Field dissented from this decision and argued that while it may have been illegal for the parties to enter into such a contract, they should still be allowed to do so if both sides agreed on its terms. He further argued that since there was no evidence of fraud or bad faith by either party involved in making the agreement, denying them their right to enforce it would amount to punishing them for something which they did not intend nor commit any wrong doing with respect thereto. As such he concluded that enforcing these agreements would serve as an incentive for people who wish to engage in honest business transactions without fear of being punished later on down the line due simply because one side violated some law at some point during negotiations or execution thereof.