The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1853-02-22

Mr.. Hubbard the able Postmaster General,
can now make a most graceful bow to the ma
tion and his exit from office, with this browning
act of his short but enterprising administration
Of the department.
The Art Union-The Full Opinion ofthe Court
OF Appeals at Last.
We publish to-day the opinion Of the Court
Of Appeals in the case of the Ten Cover
nors of the Almshouse against the managers
a penalty of three hundred dollars. being three
times the value of a picture distributed by lot
by the defendants. Some months ago we pub
lished such an abstract of this opinion as we
could obtain. but were not certain of the pre-
else terms Of the judgment. We repeatedly APP
piled for copy, but we have only now OBJ
tanned it. 1t will be seen that the Court Of
Appeals unreservedly and unqualifedly affirm
the Judgment of the Supreme Court which de-
cided that the distribution Of the pictures, by
lot or chance, is lottery within the meaning
of the constitution and the laws of this State.
The effect of this decision is not only to recover
three hundred dollars from the defendants for
the recovery Of three times the value Of all the
pictures they have disposed Of in the same man.
ner What tremendous sum that will amount
to! How will the Golfers of the Almshouse
swell with the proceeds 1t will not require
any assistance from the city government for
years; and the unfortunate tax payers have the
prospect of enjoying partial relief from the
oppressive burthens which are bowling them
down to the earth.
This opinion settles the question forever
whether a lottery is lottery or is not a
lottery 1t settles it in the affirmative
and the highest tribunal Of the State, deter
mines that the distribution of the pictures of
the Art Union, by wheels offortune, isa lottery
and illegal; that it is also immoral as tending
to deprave and corrupt the community by gam
bling operations, to guard against which was
the very object Of the prohibitory clause in the
constitution. 1t also establishes another fact;
and that is. that the New YORK HERALD was
right from beginning to end. Mr.. Bennett was
right when, in December, 1851, he declared that
the charter of the Art Union was unconstitu-
tional, and the practices of it's managers illegal
and immoral and their disposal Of the moneys of
the subscribers wasteful misapplication Of the
funds of the institution. An indictment was
levelled at us for this; but that indictment was
quashed by Recorder Tillou, who showed his
sound legal knowledge, and was the first judi
cial authority to sustain our views, while such
men as Judge Jones, Judge Edwards Judge
Daily. Judge Duer, and Charles O'Conor, pro-
nounced contrary opinion. We were right
when, as the representative of one of the sub
scribers, we sought. by injunction, to restrain
the disposal Of the property till the courts Of
law determined what ought to be done with it.
though Judge Duer refused the injunction. The
District Attorney knew we were right, for, after
we had moved in the matter, he headed
us off by suits against the Art Union in the
name Of the people and the Almshouse Cover
for an injunction, and allowed the managers to
sell the property by auction. and to retain the
proceeds, which is just as illegal as the distri-
button by lottery.
The course pursued by Mr.. Chatfield the
Attorney General Of the State, is still more re-
markable Our lawyer-Mr. Galbraith-ad-
dressed him letter. dated, January 25 1852,
calling his attention to the violation of the law
by the managers Of the Art Union. and citing
the sections Of the constitution and of the laws
violated but the Attorney General took no no
tice Of the application, nor instituted any pro-
ceeding to maintain the laws against the infrac-
ton of the rich though he is here now in per-
son, to prosecute perjury case against
single man. He was. then, either ignorant Of
the law, or. knowing it, was unwilling to do his
duty In either case, we should say that he lie
unfit for the post he occupies.
The section on which the Court of Appeals
has affirmed the judgment Of the Supreme Court
is as follows
SECT. %. No person shall set up or propose any
money, goods, chattels, or things in action to be
ratified for, to be distributed by lot or chance, to
any person who shall have paid or contracted to pay
any valuable consideration for the chance of obtain
ing any such money goods or things IN action; Any
three times the sum OF money or value OF the articles
SO set up together with the Of ten dollars to be
recovered by and in the name Of the ovr,,recrs If
the poor Of the town where the offence was com.
mitted.
The defence set up YVES that the act changing
the name Of the institution from the Apollo As
ISOLATION to that of the American Art Union,
had repealed this law against lotteries But
the Court declares that even if that were the
meaning of the act, it would be imperative for
the constitution prohibits all lotteries, and the
Legislature has no power to relax or modify
any law, so as to give them liberation, in any
shape or form. Yet Judge Duer was clear that
the constitutional prohibition did not apply in
the case of the Art Union.
The opinion Of the Court of Appeals, though
so long delayed, was worth waiting for. Itcom-
prises both clear and lucid exposition Of the
laws against lotteries, and at the same time a
history Of these gambling speculations. We refer
the reader to it in another part Of the paper and