The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1879-07-03
TIE NEW ORLEANS DEMOCRAT THURSDAY, JULY 8, 1879

n NEW ORLEANS DEMO1
Convention should adopt any article In the
constitution which proposed to license Inn
morality. He protested against the State en-
tering INTO any arrangements t. i make slt money
| that the Supreme Court would affirm the de-
| cisiOn OF the lower court In the lottery case.
The Legislature which passed the lottery
bill transcended IT powers and violated the
| fundamental rights Of the people, and he did
not believe it's act could stand. The Con-
vention had no more authority than the Leg
islature to do this. Neither The Legislature
nor the Convention could interfere with
mans right to remove moral pest. The
people were opposed to the lottery, and It
could not be charged that the people Of New
Orleans were In favor Of the lottery bill, at
least It was indigenous In the Legislature.
city, as candidate for office, and avow him
self In favor of the Lottery Company. He
could not believe that the Convention would
| favor the introduction Jof such an immoral
| feature In the constitution.
QUESTION OF PRIVILEGE.
Delegate Lott rose TO question Of privi-
lege. In reply to an article In the Eyentng
Times concerning the proceedings before the
Investigating committee, he desired to say
that the testimony had contained reflection
upon him, charging that he was Interested in
bearing down the price Of bonds and 10 secur-
ing funding Of outstanding warrants. He
branded the statement as false His views
upon the debt question were we'll known. AS
| far as the statement connecting him with any
proposition to fund outstanding warrants
was concerned, he had opposed that bill In
committee and should oppose it on the floor.
| He had heard a day or two since that an at
tempt was to be made to injure him, and it
had come In this form. He wanted 1t distinct
i NJ ~ In. intn Writ tn h1n
the men who had taken brides for their votes.
Tt had been developed that q fund had been
raised for that purpose. and, II possible. he
intended to ferret this matter out The man
who had made the charges against him could
not be found, nor could be learn who he was
| to hold him responsible for 1t. He was too
cowardly and too mean to come forward and
make 1t publicly.
| The consideration OF the lottery question
was then resumed.
Delegate George opposed the adoption Of
the article OF the majority. lie believed that
the licensing OF lotteries was wrong in morals,
and poor as the State was she could not afford
to secure money from such q source. He be-
lieved that the Supreme Court would declare
the law lately passed by the Legislature to
be constitutional. In the interest Of pub
lie morals he hoped the Convention would
vote the article down.
Delegate Bell favored the article and should
support It. The present lottery had vested
rights, which had been confirmed by the Dis
LElCG VOuEG Ol tu6 'lulbeu JBhueS. IOT LliB
reason he should vote for the article.
Delegate Lyons had consistently opposed
lotteries and should vote against the article
He believed that the proposition In the article
that other lottery companies could be licensed
depended, from Its peculiar construction,
upon the will Of the present company He
would not say the proposition was a catch,
but the fact was that Il the article was
adopted, the licensing Of other companies
would depend upon the consent Of the pres.
emit nEmnnnV
Delegate Davidson. OF 1berville, opposed
the article. He could not favor it and go home
and face his people. They would believe he
had been bTibed If he should vote for 1t. One
pealed to the Convention not to establish one
In every parish. He should vote for the adop-
ton OF the minority report.
Delegate Robertson said he must confess that
be was surprised at the amount Of morality
exhibited by a majority OF the speakers. There
was no great opposition exhibited against
whisky shops and other immoralities Lot
terry tickets had always been sold here, and
favored the article for other reasons than
this. He favored it for the reason that he
was Democrat, and that the present Dem
ocratic State government was established
Lottery Company. Il was sustained at Odd
Fellows Hall by this money, and it was be
cause of this that the Senate Of the Nichols
Legislature had unanimously postponed con-
company, upon his motion. The fact was well
known.
Delegate George said that he knew Of no
bargain between the Legislature and the Lot
consideration he was forced to favor that, as
1t had been imposed upon Democratic Sena-
tors by the caucus.
Delegate Robertson explained that he had
never said there was bargain. He had only |
claimed that the money OF the Lottery Com
pany had sustained the Nichols govern
ment Id its hour Of need and the party |
recognized this service by indefinitely post |
ponlng the bill. He did not feel at liberty to
say what had TRANSFERRED In caucus.
Delegate Bridger again urged the adoption
OF the article, and hoped that the members of
the Convention would not be deferred from
doing their duty to the State by the intima-
5s hF 5s Hnt hat the people pn would
their votes. The. constituents OF delegates
were the best judges OF their capability for
being bribed. He moved to lay on the table
all alt, the pending amendments, which motion
Delegate Cunningham moved to amend the
substitute by striking out the words s'no lot |
teries shall be authorized by and insert fall
Lotteries are prohibited in, :, and add the words
the final clause of act A of 1879, unless PRO
vides for punishment of offenses therein de-
nounced by fine and Imprisonment in the
Penitentiary.
Dbl6Rbl6 IGODhE uSOu moved To LAY Inc amend
ment on the table.
On this motion the yeas and nays were de-
manded, resulting a, nays ~, and the
amendment was laid on the table.
Delegate Todd then closed the debate. He
insisted that 1t behooved the Convention and
the people Of the State to occupy high
moral ground on this question. No one had
defended the traffic ia lottery tickets. The
only argument used by the friends of the
article was that other evils prevailed. This
was no reason why the evil now under con
sideration should be continued He insisted |
Of the people Of the State, and hoped it would
be voted down.
The yeas and nays were then demanded on
the adoption of the substitute and 1T was de-
feated-yeas 81, nays 62.
Delegate Stone changed his vote to the neg
alive. and gave notice that he should at flu |
ture day move a reconsideration Of the vote
int fol-