Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, 1881-12-20
SUPREME COURT DECISION.
UNANIMOUS OPINION

business Of providing for and giving pub
lie entertainments, In the State OF Nevada,
of q musical and scientific character, TO
sell tickets OF admission to such entertain
ments, and TO purchase, hold and dis
tribute among tho holders OF such tickets
personal property, real estate, chooses In
such terms and conditions and In such
manner and ct such times as may be do.
termined by . Board Of Managers to be
selected for that purpose by the Board OF
Trustees Of this company" 1t IL pro.
vided that 30 much Of the proceeds Of said
entertainments "as may be deemed proper
by the Board Of Trustees, but not less than
$50. 900, from each entertainment, are TO
be placed In the State Treasury Of tho
STATE Of Nevada TO be used only for such
charitable and benevolent a. may
DO determined By the Legislature Of the
State Of Nevada"
The "Act to Aid the Nevada Benevolent
Association In aiding In providing means
for the care and maintenance OF the In.
q Of Nevada, and for other charitable
purposes approved March 0, 1881, dc.
clares that sit shall be lawful for the Ne.
vada Benevolent Association Of the State
Of Nevada to give not exceeding fyo public
entertainments or concerts; to sell tickets
OF admission TO the same /; to distribute
among the holders Of such tickets personal
| property, real estate, things In action, de-
mands or other valuables, and to regulate
the distribution Of all such property or
gifts by rattle or other schemes Of like char.
acter." (Stat. 1881, l66, Bee. ~
The information filed by the Attorney.
General alleges that respondents, - Trus-
tees Of said association, are. without war.
rant OF law, advertising, printing,
circulating and selling tickets for public
entertainments = -" and that they
base their rights to advertise, print, cir.
culate and sell tickets for the said public
exhibitions or entertainments, and 10 pur-
chase. use, hold and distribute amongst
the holders Of such tickets personal pro.
perty, real estate, chooses In action and
other valuable things" upon the Act Of
the Legislature above referred to.
The facts set forth In the information
are admitted by respondents to DO true.
Are the acts Of respondents without war
rant Of lswp
Is tho Act Of tho Legislature, approved
March 0, 1881, co%nstitutional2
First-Is tho scheme or enterprise In
which the "Nevada Benevolent Associa-
ton I" Is engaged . lotteryf
This question IL answered In the aflrma-
tive by the decision Of this Court In sr
parts blanchard, 0 New, l0i. Is that dc.
cision correct2 1t certainly is. It 10 sus.
taiped by every decision that has been
rendered by tho various courts 10 the
United States upon this question.
Notwithstanding this fact, we are now
earnestly asked to declare that the musical
entertainment which the Nevada Benevo-
lent Association proposes to give IL not Q
lottery. Why not2 What Is Q lottery 2
Every scheme for the distribution Of prizes
by chance ID . lottery. Governors Of the
Almshouse Of New York W. American Art
Union. z N. ". $50; Dunn VS.. Tho PEG.
pie, 40 Ills. ACT State vs.. Shorts, % N.
j.; L., 40l Randle W.. State, "A Tex,
585 /; Chavannah W. State, 40 Ala. 396 ;
Commonwealth W. Manderfeld, . Phil,
459 United States W. 0lney, l Abb, U.
g., 279.)
A lottery IL Q game Of hazard In which
small sums are ventured for the chance Of
obtaining greater. tBell vs.. State, 8
sneed., 609.l
ga contrivsnco for tho distribution OF
prizes by chance . reliance upon tho
results Of hazard ; o decision Of tho values
Of the adventures investment Of the
favors OF fortune" 10 . lottery. (Wooden
W. Shotwell, 4 Zab., 1857
where . pecuniary consideration 10
paid. aud II 10 determined by lot or chance.
according TO some scheme held out to the
public what the party who pays tho money
Is 10 have for II, or whether he 10 10 have
anything. 1t IL Q lottery" Estate vs..
Clarke, So N. H., Ss5 Hull vs.. Rugsles.
SO N. Y, 427.j $50 .
II makes no difference what name 10
given to the scheme.
When the element OF chance enters into
tho distribution Of prizes IL is Q lottery.
without reference TO the name by which II
ID called.
"He may choose 10 call his business q
gift SALE" said the Court In Dunn vs.. PEG.
plo, supra, "but IL 10 mono the less . lot.
terry, and we cannot permit him to evado
the penalties OF the law by 30 transparent
o device IS Q nero change Of name. II II
differs from ordinary lotteries the differ.
ence lies chiefly In the fact that IL 70 more
artfully contrived to impose upon the ig.
norant and credulous, and IL, therefore,
more thoroughly dishonest and injurious
TO society,""
1.-THE name given to the process and the
form Of tho machinery used to accomplish
the object are not material, provided the
substance Of the transaction IL . distribu.
ton or disposition Of property by lot"
Estate ". Clarke. supra.)
Courts will not inquire into the nsme,
but will determine tho character Of the
scheme by the nature OF tho transaction
or business In which the parties are en-.
gagged" handle VI. State, supra.)
1.-THE character OF the scheme 10 In no
wise changed by tho charitable purpose
expressed In It's title, nor by calling tho
drawings entertainments or gift con.
certs.'" (Ex parte Blanchard, supra.)
"The fact that nc plan Of distribution has
boon determined upon does not relieve the
schome OF lie character as . lottery"
(Thomas vs.. People. 80 Ills. 1881
"Nor 10 II material" said the Court Of
Appeals In tho American Art Union case,
"toc the question In hand that tho prizes
were not known and designated when the
tickets or chances were subscribed and
paid for. The scheme In this respect Is
more Objectionable than . scheme In which
the prizes are previously flxed. because II
Affords less security 10 the subscribers that
tho chance purchased is worth the money
paid for It."
We are Of opinion that the facts stated
In tho articles Of incorporation, in the
statutes, and In the information, show that
the scheme 10 one whereby tho Legislature
Of this State, In consideration Of the sum
Of $3.50. 900, to be placed In the State
Treasury, to the credit Of the "Insane and
Charitable Fund.-" attempted TO authorize
the managers Of the "Nevada Benevolent
Association " to enrich their own pockets.
at the expense Of the people Of this and
other States, by holding out promises OF
the great and sudden gains that might be
acquired by tho ticket holders; that
golden prizes would DO " the lure 10 in
cite tho credulous and unsuspocting into
this scheme"
In the light Of all the facts that hsvo
been presented II would DO absurd to say
that tho managers Of this scheme are sim.
ply prompted by deeds Of charity aud pure
benevolenco.