Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, 1881-08-10

ing Of this Court In &c parts Blanchard
which Is, Of itself. absolutely oonclusive
upon both Of the points We have discussed.
But IL has BEEN attempted, By . desire
upon our part. 10 show that NO authority
could DO found In any Of the sdjudicated
cases In the United States 70 sustain the
position oontendsd for BY r~espondents
and that no argument has been advanced
by respondents, upon either OF these
points, that has not heretofore bean do.
cided adversely TO them BY the Courts OF
other States, where the constitutional
provisions arc substantially tho same ~
d owl.
II Is proper TO add that We have arrived
st the conclusion stated without consider
ing tho question Of tho 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 rev.
enue for the beneHt Of the "lnsane and
Charitable Fund" Of this State. or whether
Il belonged TO that class Of lotteries that
are made up Of pecunisry 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 10 no other sentiment; where
the managers receive . pecunisry profit
and enlist "a corps Of sotye seducers 70
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 DO 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 70 take the desperate chances
which lotteries afford, and that no In.
furious effects upon the morals Of the peo.
pie would result II this game Of chance
was allowed 10 proceed.
This question 10 ono that must DO CON-
siderod Is settled by the adoption Of the
constitutional provision OK parte Darling,
recently decided
In tho Art Union osse, TO which NO have
frequently referred, IL was claimed that
the enterprise was really Of . meritorious
character, and that IL differed. In this 70.
spect, from the lotteries where the mana.
ayers were 10 receive the lions share Of
the profits. The Court, In answer TO this
argument, said:
"Ifn NO lotteries had existed excepting
such q Ia contained In tho Art Union
scheme, Il Is not probable that they would
have boon forbidden by tho Consultation
or by law. It's mischiefs are certainly not
20 apparent - II It's prizes were to be paid
In money, or as IL would be II framed for
the purpose Of enticing the neoessitous 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 eIeou-
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 10 confer that power on the
judicial tribunals. II II were 10 DO I'D.
mitted that the scheme Is entirely harm.
less In its consequences, IL would form no
ground for making IL BY Judicial con.
structiou an exception TO the general and
absolute constitutional prohibition"
"The Law knows no person ; IL 10 not
made for tho individual man. but for men.
As the dew OF heaven falls, 20 IL bears
alike upon the Just and unjust" Estate
vs.. Pierce, 8 New, 304.l
II smiles aud frowns upon all alike. II
makes no distinctions. Submission to It's
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 TO violate the law.
From the views already expressed IL 10
apparent that 10 would make no difference
whether respondents base their right 70
act In the premises under the articles Of
incorporation or under tho provisions oil