Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, 1881-12-17

cases In tho United States to sustain the
position commanded for by respondents /;
and that NO argument has been advanced
by respondents, upon either of these
points, that has not heretofore been do.
cidod adversely TO them by tho Courts Of
other States, where tho constitutional
provisions arc substantially the same %
our "
II Is proper to add that NO have arrived
at the conclusion stated without consider
ing the question Of the morality, or i'm
morality Of this particular scheme. 1t
makes no difference whether II was set on
foot purely for the purpose Of raising rov.
onue for the beneft Of the "lnsane and
Charitable Fund" Of this State, or whether
Il belonged To that class Of lotteries that
are made up Of pocuniary prizes and min
lister to the love Of gain (; whose schemes
address themselves In tho grossest and
most revolving form directly to that sordid
passion, and to no other sentiment whore
the managers receive . pecuniary profit
and enlist ga corps Of active seducers 10
draw the weak and unwary into the pur-
chase Of tickets" by extensive advertise.
ments containing brilliant pictures Of the
favorable chances to acquire sudden
wealth.
II may be admitted for the purposes Of
this decision. ~ was argued BY respon.
dents counsel, that the people Of this State
are essentially . gambling people, ready
at all times to take the desperate chances
which lotteries afford, and that no In.
furious effects upon the morals Of the PEG.
Die would result II this game Of chance
was allowed to proceed.
This question 10 ono that must DO con.
sidered Is settled by the adoption Of the
constitutional provision ex parte Darling,
recently decided
In the Art Union case, 10 which We have
frequently referred, IL was claimed that
the enterprise was really Of . meritorious
character, and that II differed, In this 70.
spect, from the lotteries where the mana.
ayers were to receive the lions share Of
the profits. Tho Court, In answer 10 this
argument, said:
eft no lotteries had existed excepting
such 10 is contained In the Art Union
scheme, II IL not probable that they would
have been forbidden by tho Constitution
or by law. Ib mischiefs are certainly not
30 apparent a. II Its prizes were to DO paid
In money. or 90 II would be II framed for
the purpose Of cnticing the necessitous and
improvident into Its hazards. But this
case cannot DO decided according TO
the views We may entertain Of the probable
good or evil consequent upon the execu-
ton OF tho scheme. The Constitution
took away the power Of determining
whether this or any other lottery was OF
good or evil tendency, and certainly did
not intend to confer that power on the
judicial tribunals. II II wore to be id.
mitted that the scheme Is entirely harm.
less In Its consequences, IL would form NO
ground for making 1t By judicial ION;
struction an exception TO the general and
absolute constitutional prohibition"
"Tho law knows no person II ID no
made for tho individual man, but for men.
As tho dow OF heaven falls, 10 II bears
alike upon tho just and unjust" Estate
vs.. Pierce, 8 New, 30i.
II smiles and frowns upon all alike. II
makes nc distinctions. Submission 10 Its
authority Is incumbent upon all.
Third-It 10 unnecessary to discuss any
Of the other points suggested by respon.
dents council.
We will not presume. In advance. that
respondents intend to violate the law.
From tho views already expressed IL 10
apparent that II would mako no difference
whether respondents base their right to
act In the premises under the articles Of
incorporation or under the provisions Of
tho Act Of the Legislature. In sither event
their Acts would DO without warrant Of
law.
Tho judgment Of this Court Is that the
respondents have no right. liberty. or
franchise, by virtue Of any law, TO adver.
tiso, print, circulate or sell any tickets In
the scheme or enterprise Of the "Nevads
Benevolent Association" within this State,
or to do any Of the acts specified In the
statute. Ito aid tho Nevada Benevolent
Association" approved March o. 1881
Stat. 1881. 1861 and that the costs Of
this proceeding DO taxed against them.
HAwLEY, ].
We concur: LEONARD, @. ].
ByIRNlp. J..