Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, 1881-12-23

~ e.I tasb - NV - III
Respondents, however, contend that the
Constitution "does not prohibit private
lotteries, and was by Its trainers intended
only to prevent tho Legislature from In.
the State In . system Of public
lotteries as Q means Of raising money for
tho service OF the State" or, In other
that this constitutional provision
only intended 20 Q Limitation Of power
10 prevent the State. as o State, from en-
in public lotteries for tho purpose
Of raising means for the general revenue
Of tho State. Hence they claim that tho
State has the right to authorize private
to conduct and carry on . lottery
Of the character specified in the informa-
ton.
In support Of this position they refer to
the debates Of the Constitutional Conven-
ton In California upon the adoption Of .
provision In the Constitution Of that State
Identical with ours. II IL not claimed
that these debates have the weight Of .
judicial decision, but that II 10 proper to
examine them In case Of doubt a. TO the
intention OF the trainers Of the Constitu.
ton. Tho remarks Of the different mem.
bers shed but little light upon the real
question st Issue. They are as much In
favor Of the position taken by the Attorney
General Is they are In favor Of the respon-
dents. The debates show that the Consti-
OF New York was referred 10 10
discussing the provision that was adopted
In California. Mr.. Halleck, who was in
favor Of tho adoption Of the lottery pro.
In the course OF his argument,
said /: "In nearly all the new Constitu-
tons you will find this clause. It was not
In the old Constitution, but In
most cases, where they have been
amended, u has been introduced. In the
old Constitution Of New York. 10 which
reference has been made In the course Of
no prohibition was inserted.
Many gentlemen present would remember
the famous case OF Yates and Mcintyre,
which involved not only individuals OF the
State In ruin, but was the occasion OF Sc
rious embarrassment to the State Govern.
ment itself. The result so clearly estab-
lished the evils OF the lottery system that
tho Convention Of New York, in 1876, In.
serted Q clause in the very first article Of
the new Constitution [see Section l0l
prohibiting lotteries and the sale OF lot.
terry tickets. 1t appeared TO him
that this prohibition was n OF the best
that could DO inserted In the article limit.
ing the powers Of the legislature"
The language Of the 10th Section Of Ar.
ticle I OF the Constitution Of 1916, refer
red to by Mr.. Halleck Is as follows "Nor
shall any lottery hereafter DO authorized
or any sale Of lottery tickets allowed with.
In this State"
In tho Governors Of tho Almshouso vs..
American Art Union, supra, II was con.
tended by Charles O'Connor, counsel for
the Art Union, as 10 Is here, that the Con.
stitution wa only intended TO prevent the
mlschievous practice Of raising o revenue
by public lotteries, which had been for
many years In full vigor both In England
and In this country, and that tho prohibi.
tions Of the Constitution were only directed
against this particular evil. He referred
to tho fact, as do counsel hero, that ''from
100 to 1874 public lotteries wero author.
lied at every session Of Parliament" He
also referred to tho debates OF the Consti'
tutional Convention Of 1921. for the pur.
pose Of showing that public lotteries for
pecuniary prizes a. q means Of raising
revenue were alone within the contompla.
ton Of that body"
The Constitution OF 1921 Is in these
words: "No lottery shall hereafter be
authorized In this State, and tho Legis.
laturo shall pass laws 10 prevent the sale oil
all lottery tickets within this State except
In lotteries already provided for by law"
Tho Court Of Appeals In referring TO this
n,,ktt,ssan .vhlah ~ 1aalaraI tO la anh-
stantially the same a. tho Constitution OF
1876, said: "This prohibition Is general.
II must be hold TO embrace all lotteries,
unless there DO some very clover and salts.
factory reason for understanding II In q
moro limited sense. It wal urged upon
tho argument that public lotteries for pe-
cuniary prizes a. . means OF raising rev.
enuo were alone within tho contemplation
Of tho trainers OF the Constitution. But
lotteries have never been created within
this State for tho purpose Of general rev.
enue. and there Is therefore no ground for
believing that tho prohibition was In.
tended to be limited to lotteries for thai
object. This would have been restraining
o mischief which did not exist, and toler'
ating that which did. Lotteries had been
authorized by the Legislature for the bene'
at Of colleges, for the making Of roads, fol
the building Of bridges, for tho improve
ment Of ferries. for the erection OF hos
pitfalls, and for various other purposes
equally commendablo and beneficial. Al
these were clearly within the prohibition,
The prohibition was not aimed ct tho OBJ
jects for which lotteries had been author
lied, but at that particular mode OF accom-.
plishing such objects. II was founded on
the moral principle that evil should not be
done that good might follow, and upon the
more cogcnt practical reason that the evil
consequent OF this pernicious kind Of
gambling greatly oyerbalanced In the
aggregate any good likely to result from
1t. Tho promotion Of the fine arts Is un.
doubtedly Q commendablo object, but the
prohibition contains no exception In its
favor on that ground. = .
The intention Of the trainers Of the Con-
stitution undoubtedly was to forbid the
future granting Of any such lotteries al
had ct any time previously been author
lied by law. and by requiring the Legis.
lature TO pass laws TO prevent tho sale Of
all lottery tickets, to put IN end to all
such distributions Of money or goods by
lot or chance O. had heretofore been for.
hidden by statute under the name oil
private lotteries"
The argument that the words "by this
State" were inserted for the purpose Of
preventing tho Legislature from authorize
Ing public lotteries as means Of raising
revenue. and that the provision was moi
intended to prevent the Legislature from
authorizing private lotteries, Is wholly un.
tenablc. No authority has been produced
In Its support and WI arc satished that
none can be found.
In constituting this provision Of the Con.
stitution the last sentence 10 % important
as the first.
II the trainers Of the Constitution had
intended by the use Of the words: "No
lottery shall DO authorized by this State"
to only limit the legislative power 10 pub.
lie lotteries. conducted and managed solely
by the State for the purpose Of raising
revenue, they would mot have used the
language they did In the concluding sen.
tence, "Nor shall the sale Of lottery tick
cts DO allowed" These words clearly
show that II was not intended that any
lottery should be authorized BY this State
for any purpose.
Tho words "by this State" ~ used In
our Constitution. and the words "in this
State" cor within this State" 10 used
In the Constitutions Of New York, have
-G-A--fn- A.