The New Orleans bulletin. [volume] (New Orleans [La.]) 1874-1876, 1874-05-24
'.-'F The Courts.
SUPERIOR CRIMINAL COURT
CONsTITUTIONAILTY OF THE LOTTERY LAW
JUDGE ATOCHA sUsTAINs THE LAW.

Certain parties having been arrested anG
fined for selling lottery tickets, contrary to
law, and refusing to pay the fine imposed by
Recorder Staes, they were remanded to
S1zis0p. whereupon an application for writ
Of babeas corpus was sued out before Judge
Atocha, who, in passing upon the case, said
The relssor In hts petition forth that he is I'll
legally deprived OF his liberty, and held in conne.
by the keeper OF the Parish Prison by virtu OF
. commitment wrongfuIly and illegally issued by the
Hon. A. II. Macarthur, Judge of the First Munici al
Police Court Tor o volat of the provision Of act
No. Of the General Assembly Of the Stale Lou
ana passed Ut the sesson Of the year one thousand
eight hundred and seventy fonr under which fine
twenty I'VE d liars has been imposed In default
payment. that the relatar be mprs in the Parish
PRISON for the term Of five and he asks to be re-
leased from custody on the following grounds:
First-1hst the act is unconstitutional. because,
/. The title does not express the object of the law
2. The right Of trial by jury is denied
3. Judicial powers are conferred, in contraventiou
% article "a OF the constitution
6ecOnd- hat act No 8 is an attempt by the Legis-
ture to enfore by criminal process doubtful private
rights.
1t il proper TO onsider the grounds Of this appca
ton they presented The tte of the act is as
follows: IAN act relative to the unlicensed "a OF
lottery tickets in the ciy Of New Orleans and confer
ring on tie police courts the power suppress the
same" Tie title to an act i, unquestonaby intend.
ed aud qued 70 give notice OF tue object
Of the Law; IL tnst lie accomplished the constitutional
prov sion IL conn LIED with. To demand or expect
more w0rn necersiate that the it'll sh uld contain
would be simply absurd " Tue title OF law il not to
Be strictly construed; if it state the object &C
cordins TO The understanding OF reasonable
No. v. Michoud A. COS; Ciy Nation
q Bank Va. Mshan. No. q a. 752: d A.
7%5; ~ 694; "A So That the title of the act up-
DER review reasonably expresses the OBJ il so pa
pably evident that it ms " to require dis.
cassi n Il CO hot be even pretended that there is
ambiguity in the language used. Any person of or.
binary sense. upon reading the title cannot fail 10
understand that the act intends provide against
sell ng lottery tickets without license and for en-
forcing the prohibition through the acti N of police
courts. which necessarily implies the imp sing OF
some penalty That 10 all h. act provides for. 1 cou-
Cnde that the objection to the title 10 without reason
The next digestion Is that The es the right OF
trial by Ju y, guaranteed by the on. titution. The
article OF tae constitution here inv is the same a.
found In he Constitution OF the United states. in
the previous Constitution of this State almost IN the
nam worus. Tue m aiming aud intent OF the Article
have eeen the subject OF frequent intertretsto in
snis sAte Stte ~ Gutter q. is A. 1870; tate No
ble - A, S25 In Verm Mt tn DUAL provision
10 similar Il at OF hts State with slight variation
In language but all to the purport ana in that
eeae has been held a. In the decsiuns this stat
refer ed TO- that the rvison is not inten, ed TO
apply 10 small onenses against the police reyuls.
TIN OF the state The state vs. Collin, 7 Vermont.
ue; In 70 Dougherty. ~ Vermont, 32S So that
1t 10 we'll CO.. siaered and set led pric ple that there
may be cases In which jury IL ay not he awarded
without violating the article Of the Consult ton on
the subject. A great deal OF the outcry stDut the
nctisy Of the privilege of jury trial. arises from the
fAct o for the purpose of evading enaitaes the
most petty violation of city ordinsncss aud Office
re3uataohs niagnined into ofenses. The Copsti.
tuition b . no reference Whatever 10 suythng except
that which IL proper an ofense, crime Act No
aoes mot ate any ofense any me; p. obibi,s
the ryIng Of certain tr nc within the limits Of
the city of New O. leans. without complying with
named conditions tended to prot. ct the ri guar
ante+d oy tie i tate to certain parties
Unoi urged In srgu ent, on the return Of the writ
mao SUI losed that the right Of tate Legislature
10 enecS police regulations was NO 10. ge an opep
question under the decssi0us of the Supreme Courts
Of the United states an of this tate; md by
reference 70 the suthorties thst my snppositiun ws
corrct DiamoLd vs.. lain, 81 A., SU9; state Va Eos.
dch. u A., ~: slaaghts, nous cages. ID Vail. .,
Raj road Con pany vs. Fuller, y Wall, b6s In the
latter cAse, IN, Supr,me Count OF the ~, a, ed
otates. speaking Of . poics reGu alton re.
pest and adopt the language in the case Of
Gibbon ". o. den. Wheaton. /, ~ follows: "tis
police regulation and ~ such forms 20 ,io OF the
ana<ps nass Of leg station which embrsc.s eve, v
thing ~ithin the terrific Of >tate, surrendered
TO the 0anesA 0sverpDent. al " ich be most NJ.
vansageo1sly exercue1 by the 6tstes ihemsel, es"
There Can 10 NO question Of the right o. State Lsgis-
Asure - esta'l1b police regu atoms for any part
: o. ior lhe whda o. the territory Of State.
IA % WI sher the provisions Of act No. constitute
aponce reeuisaon.t win now conGher in connection
WIN the objection that judicial powers conferred