Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, 1881-08-05

Ing OF shis Court In Z. sars Blanchard.
which is, Of Itself, absolutely conclusive
upon both Of tho points w have discussed.
But IL has been attempted, BY . desire
upon our part, TO show, thai no authority
could DO found In any Of the sdjudioated
cases In the United States TO sustain the
position commended for by respondents ;
and that no argument has bssn advanced
BY respondents, upon either Of these
points, that has not heretofore been do.
cided adversely 70 than BY the Courts Of
other States, where the constitutional
provisions are substantially tho same -
our own. no
II Is proper TO add that We have arrived
ing the question Of the morality, or I'm.
morality Of this particular scheme. II
makes no difference whether IL was set on
foot purely for the purpose Of raising res.
enus for the benefit Of the "Insane and
Charitable Fund" Of this State, or whether
1t belonged 70 that GLASS Of lotteries that
are made up Of peouniary prizes and min.
ister 70 the love Of gain ; whose schemes
address themselves In the grossest and
most revolving form directly 70 that sordid
passion, and 70 no other sentiment; where
the managers receive Q pscuniary prodt
and enlist "s corps Of active seduoers 70
draw the weak and unwsry into the pur.
chase Of tickets" BY extensive advertise
msnts containing brilliant pictures Of the
favorable chances 70 acquire sudden
wealth.
II may bs admitted for the purposes Of
this decision, - was argued BY respon-
dents' counsel, thatth people Of this State
are essentially . gambling people, ready
ct ell timos 10 taks the desperate chances
which lotteries afford, and that no In.
furious effects upon the morals Of the PEG.
Pile would result II this game Of chance
was allowed 70 proceed.
This question 10 y that must b con.
sidered - settled by the adoption Of the
constitutional provision ex psrts Darling,
recently decided.
In the Art Union case, 10 which we have
frequently referred. 10 Was claimed that
tho enterprise was really Of . meritorious
character, and that Il differed, In this 70.
spect, from the lotteries where the mana.
ayers were to receive the lions share Of
the profits. The Court, In answer 70 this
argument, said:
"If no lotteries had existed excepting
such - IL contained In the Art Union
scheme, Il IL not probable that they would
have been forbidden by the Constitution
or by law. Ih misohiefs are certainly not
90 apparent % II Its prizes were to be paid
In money, or - II would DO II framed for
the purpose Of entioing the neoessitous and
improvident into its hazards. But this
case cannot be decided according TO
the views We may entertain Of the probable
good or evil consequent upon the execu.
ton Of the scheme. Tho Constitution
took away the power Of determining
whether this or any other lottery was Of
not intend to confer that power on the
judicial tribunals. II IL we're to DO I'd.
mitted that the scheme 10 entirely harm.
less In It's consequences, II would form no
ground for making It BY judicial con.
struction an exception to the general and
absolute constitutional prohibition"
"The law knows no person |; II 10 not
made for the individual man, but for men.
As the dew Of heaven falls, 90 II bears
alike upon the Just and unjust" Estate
vs.. Pierce, 8 New, 30A.
II smiles aud frowns upon all alike. II
makes no distinctions. Submission 10 Its
authority 10 incumbent upon all.
Third-It 10 unnecessary 10 discuss any
Of tho other points suggested By respon-
dents' council.
We will not presume, In advance, that
respondents intend 70 violate the law.
From the views already expressed II 10
apparent that IL would make no difference
whether respondents base their right to
act In the premises under the articles Of
incorporation or under tho provisions Of
the Act OF the Legislature. In either event
their Acts would be without warrant Of
law.
Tho Judgment Of this Court ID that the
respondents have no right. liberty. or
franchise, BY virtue Of any law. to adver.
tise, print, circulate or sell any tickets In
the scheme or enterprise OF the Nevada
Benevolent Association" within this State,
or 10 do any Of the acts specified In the
statute, 40 aid the Nevada Benevolent
Association" approved March 0, 1881
Stat, 1881. 1861; and that the costs Of
this proceeding DO taxed against them.
HAwLEY, ].
We concur LEONARD, @. ].
BELxNAP, ].