The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1879-01-28

For that reason, and without expressing any
opinion as to the constitutional question In
volved, nor upon the other questions present.
ed In the majority and minority reports,
concur with the majority in reporting the bill
favorably, with the amendment.
ANDREW s. HEBRON.
senator stubbs Concurring Kepert.
+ To the President and Members of the Senate:
concur In the recommendations In the re-.
port signed by Messrs. zschArie and others,
and submit the following reasons for such
action:
Under the common law all lotteries are
public nuisances, prejudicial to good morals,
but, by statute licenses were issued to per-
init and regulate them. 4 Blackstone 1853.
Article 1896 Of our Civil Code, treating Of con-
tracts, reads: The cause is unlawful when 1t is
forbidden by law; when 1t is contra bonos mores
contrary to moral conduct or to public order.
In Phalen vs. Virginia, 8 Howard tGs, the
Supreme Court Of the United States says:
Experience has shown that the common
forms Of gambling are comparatively in
oeuous, when placed In contrast with the wide
spread pestilence Of lotteries. The former
are confined to few persons and places, but
the latter infests the whole community; 1t
enters every dwelling; it reaches every class;
it preys on the hard earnings of the poor; 1t
plumbers the ignorant and simple" No one
Can doubt the correctness OF this statement,
and we hence conclude that the rights exer-
eised under the acts, the repeal Of which Is
designed by the bill under consideration, are
violative Of good morals, injurious to society,
tend to corrupt the habits Of the people
and educate them In the vice OF gambling.
Can the acts which authorize this nuisance
be repealed2
By Civil Code, AL q corporation, legally
established, may be dissolved by an act of
the Legislature il they deem It necessary or
convenient to the public interest.
The tenth section Of the first article OF the
constitution Of the United States declares
that mo State shall pass any law impairing
the obligation OF contracts
In my judgment the authorities are clear
that the rights exercised by the Lottery
Company do not arise from a contract. In the
sense In which 1t is used In the article above
quoted, but from permissioe license granted,
and under which they maintain the nuisance,
and 1t Is in this fundamental error of mis-
apprehending their prictleoe for contract
the idea prevails that the Lottery cannot be
abolished because 1t has vested rights.
Sedgwick, In his Treatise on Construction,
etc, page 5S1, says: "The Supreme Court has
said that the contracts designed to be pro-
tected by the article quoted are contracts by
which perfect rights, certain, definite, fixed
private rights Of property are vested" as
distinguished from measures or engagements
adopted or undertaken by the body polite or
State government for the benefit OF all, and
which, from the necessity Of the case and &C.
cording to universal understanding, are to be
varied or discontinued as the public good
shall require; and under this head, In his
Licenses from the State to individuals, to
carry on trades and the like. are not contracts
within the constitutional provision, and, citing
In support Com. vs.. Brennan, 103 Mass. 20;
Met. Board OF Excise vs.. Barre, 81 N. Y. 657;
State vs. Holmes, 3s N. III. 225, and Calder vs.. |
Kusby, Gray 597, remarks further: by the |
reasoning in these cases the Legislature has |
power to revoke a grant to hold a lottery at |
all times whether 1t was confirmed with or |
without valuable consideration. Laws |
licensing and regulating lotteries are mere
measures OF police, and, as such, are under
the absolute control Of the Legislature"
Parsons on Contracts, page 556, says the
question has also been raised whether the
clause In the constitution limits or affects the
power Of the State government to enact gen.
eral police regulations for the public health
and morals, and says: "While the authorities
are not uniform, we consider the prevailing
adjudication OF this country to favor the rule,
whether the grant or license were gratuitous
or otherwise, that such laws are not with
In the purview Or prohibition OF the constitu-
tion."
The high obligations Of police over the
health and morals OF the people are inherent
In the sovereign. A State can Ucense and I
permit the exercise OF a calling or trade which
Is injurious In its effects on society. either
physically or morally, but this is the extent of