New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1876-02-18
TIE LOTTERY SUIT.


pESrED--A MOTION FOR TUE DISMISSAL OF TIE
COMPLIANT GRANTED IN TIE CAsKs or JOHN
SIMMONS JACOB BAUsCH, AND W. ". NORRIS.
The suit of Adam Roediger against Il. f..
sm,nons aud Others for the recovery of S22SiO 81,
was resumed yesterday morning before Juuse D. Il
DAILY, in the Court OF Common Pleas. The COURTROOM
WAS filed with those interested IN the lottery policy
business.
Mr. Putney opened the argument the question as to
whether policy slips were not lottery ncheh
Tho polici q he said their face, by some word
or memorandum or referred TO, the defendants
lotteries and only their lotteries bu the particular
drawing by which il was To be determined whether
prize or blank drawn The lotteries are the piincf
pals on one SIDE the the other and the de-
PENDANTS the owners and managers are the lotteries
Their agents sell their tickets. The prizes offered 10 mo
purchasers OF policy slips offered n and pursuant 10
the defendants lottery scheme The defendants furnish
to the various lottery for each days Dushess l
scheme They advertise that drawings in their lotteries
will be had on certain thata certain number OF bal
lots will be put the wheel that certain lesser number
will be drawn out and that the purchasers OF slips nav
ing on them those numbers drawn out will win prizes
Here there complete held out To the puohc IN
which are prizes be distributed by lottery drawings.
II is to be remembered, Mr.. Puney said, That the de-
PENDANTS have conducted the drawings Of the lot
teres involved with reference to the policy business
at all times, and sometimes without reference to any
other met nod distributing prizes IL differs from
bet between PERSONS who put up certain sums con-
ditioually aud receive back the amount won; III the
policy business person u purchaser VINO pays hs
money absolutely and Internationally, and even II ne
wins, does not receive back his purchase money TIC
claimed that the fact that the OF the lotteries
in quest lon might 100 tickets with like numbers for
the same drawing and 100 like prizes for the lucky
numbers, could not be contended that the chaac
ter of the tickets would altered that they would
cease to lie lottery tickets. Mr. Clinton cihd
the 39th Section Of the Revised Statutes, and
claimed that applied this case. lie said that these
blind playsD were supported by the lotteries, and that
they had the very signature OF the defendants and were
issued by the of lotteries; aud that the moment
the money was received was paid at No 212 Bowey
with the exception OF portion which was retained uh
The end OF te month, when settlement was maze Us
agreed upon by the managers He claimed that schemes
in reference to lotteries known policies ana tiat
the Courts had defined what the word lottery meant lie
also SAID that lottery policy business had more u-
riolls effect upon the community than inc mere lo,ry,
I mar yben tr dealers were disturbed in their course
of business they would alter some little detail IN Their
Mir Craham, who followed in opposition, claimed That
the Paducah Lottery business violation of the law
on the part of the state NJ kentucky uat me lotrs
were chartered tor the benefit OF cil Improvements anu
for the purpose OF founding library ana mat II inc
state OF ntucky Lnew that nc charters were pehg
prOsitnied the benefit 81 the pohcy dealers, me
State would Instantly ahrogate me Quarters, ,,.a
Mr. Grah,Hs point vas that See .oa 80 OF te salies
originally passed ttireae prnalty AGAINST Iotrr,
Unauthorized by when that section was eactei ana
that AL lotteries having been since declared ny Inv hH-
that enactment section ~ ceasei 20 DE- 9perau,,,
aud WAS virtually repealed. These dealers not Dcing sat
sied as u re; meaning OF the statute, "Oh 20 20
awyer, aud /, ceiye suggestions made by which they
can work under the pale OF the law III,
Jud.r J. f. Daly, sustaining the objection, sad ot-
terry p,licus were n fact insurance 10 pay certain
sum certain numbers, or combinations OF hunters,
we've Ora Nu in the lottery This payment was something
wholly apart from the prizes sct up IN the louey, or
ticket OF share in the lottery, TIE p"iho puf"ndhiSs
lottery policy fixing the amount OF his pI of stdh' OF
insurance and payIug the prem charged Therefor.
To purchase such policy person ma moi ic'u 10 u' nc
i,fI IL. AM a
wager between him and tie insurer Of certain STAKE
u RE chan of number DengcfiWn Wheibtr
that number was prize number IN the lottery or h'
SECTION b. neriutlng suit Tor the recovery OF money
maid t,r me purchas,. lottery tickets or shares IN
oltrv gave 40 action for the recovery Oi money pau
for any lottery insurance or lottery policy, or ia pd
~ gstnDllng CANT '''hi hl'u
lie drawings of a lottery. the omission ol any shch
remedy in ayor Of any other persons IMAM tl-e PuI
chasing lottery ticket, shoud DC ue'hion 70 nay %
boud therefore, hold that the recovery IN tr "cuoD
must Tor prices pdii Tor tlcnrls ana not loi any
nancy paid Tor lottery policies Of pohcy s4ips
TIns ~. a decision contrary 10 that of Judge van
Worst In A previous case, who decided tat poles slips
were loter tickets. 1Als ruling Ot the court Icdn..s
the amount OF damages from S-2fSfp - I" aOou lVV
Mn. non however intends referring ms rd ~ 10
a higher jurisdiction. The prosecution ueh onei,d IN
evidence - lottery tickets, wien were dh"Me nueo,
the objection ana eAcePtlou VI 1AS "o'Vii'e as" $1,000
it, -, c-,... - . t,l,,,on.
dismissinl Tie against al OF lhe ueIN''n WI
w., lelrd in the cases OF Zachariah IT, siiious VI
liam T. simmons chester Simmons, j. ll""dld ADAMS;
and Charles H. Murray, aud granted IN We eases oi
John Simmons, Jacob lidiiscA, ana Nilli'n u n ,a
nI,nt. Nh Clinton said that the evidence proved tLat
All except Bauscn and Norris had control oi inc D
Henry l. Clinton aud william b. Putncy appeared lor
the prosecution John Graham. George oven, auu W.,
liam II. Illunen lor the deienhahs' Inc N""i' ava
journed until IL o'clock TINS morning