Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, 1881-12-23
SUPREME COURT DECISION.
UNANIMOUS orrsros.l

county. Tho object Of the corporation
being Ito establish and carry ON the
business Of providing for and giving pub
lie entertainments, In the State OF Nevada,
Of o musical and scientific character, to
sell tickets Of admission to such entertain.
ments, and to purchase, hold and dis
tribute among the holders Of such tickets
personal property, real estate, chooses In
action and other valuable things, upon
such terms and conditions and In such
manner and ct such times as may DO do
termined by . Board Of Managers to be
selected for that purpose by the Board OF
Trustees OF this company" II Ia pro.
vided that 10 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 70
be placed In the State Treasury OF the
State Of Nevada TO be used only for such
charitable and benevolentpurposes - may
be determined By the Legislature Of the
The "Act to Aid tho Nevada Benevolent
Association In aiding In providing means
for the care and maintenance Of the In.
zane Of Nevada. and for other charitable
purposes'' approved March 0, 1881, de-
clares that "it shall be lawful for the Ne.
vada Benevolent Association OF the State
Of Nevada 10 give not exceeding Ave 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, l6G, 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 y y q" and that they
" base their rights 10 advertise, print, cir.
culate and sell tickets for the said public
exhibitions or entertainments, and to 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 tho Act Of
tho Legislature above referred TO.
The facts set forth In tho information
are admitted by respondents to be true.
Arc tho acts Of respondents without war
rant Of lAwf
Is tho Act Of the Legislature, approved
March 0, 1881. constitutional
First-Is the scheme or enterprise In
which the "Nevada Benevolent Associa.
tion" Is engaged . lottery2
This question Is answered In the afirma-
| tive by the decision Of this Court In er
parte Blanchard, 0 New, l0i. Is that de-
cision corroct2 It certainly Is. 1t Is sus.
taired by every decision that has been
rendered by the various courts In tho
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 10 give Ii not o
lottery. Why not2 What Is . lottery 2
Every scheme for the distribution Of prizes
by chance IL o lottery. Governors Of tho
| Almshouse OF New York vs.. American Art
Union, z N. Y.., $50; Dunn vs.. The PEG.
pie, 40 Ills, ACT State vs.. Shorts, ~ N.
j.; L., 40l I; handle vs.. State, AZ Tex,
585 Chavannsh W. State, 40 Ala. 500 ;
Commonwealth vs.. Manderfeld, 8 Phil,
459 United States VS.. Olney, 1 Abb, U.
g., 279.)
A lottery Is Q game OF hazard In which
small sums arc ventured for the chance Of
obtaining greater. BELL W.. State, 8
Sneed., 509.)
"a continuance for the distribution OF
| prizes by chance ; o reliance upon tho
results Of hazard /; . decision Of the values
Of the adventurer's investment OF tho
favors OF fortune" Is . lottery. Wooden
vs.. Shotwell. 4 Zab.. 1861
"Whero o ~pecunisry consideration Is
paid, and II is determined by lot or chance.
according to some scheme held out to the
public what the party who pays the money
Is to have for II, or whether ho 10 to have
anything. 1t is Q lottery" Estate VS..
Clarke, IS N. H., 335 Hull vs.. Ruggles,
Sc N. Y, 427.)
1t makes no difference what name Is
given TO tho scheme.
Whom the element OF chance enters into
tho distribution Of prizes II Is o lottery.
without reference to the name by which 1t
IL called.
"Ho may choose to call his business 0
gift SALE" said the Court In Dunn W. Peo-
| pie, supra, "but IL IL none tho less 0 lot.
terry, and we cannot permit him to evade
the penalties Of tho law by so transparent
. device as o mere change Of name. II II
differs from ordinary lotteries the differ.
ence lies chiefly In the fact that IL Is more
artfully contrivcd to impose upon the ig-
norant and ~credulous, and 10, therefore,
moro thoroughly dishonest and injurious
10 society,""
"The name given 10 tho process and tho
form Of the machinery used TO accomplish
the object arc not material, provided tho
substance Of the transaction Is o distribu.
tion or disposition Of property by lot"
(State Va. Clarke, supra.)
Courts will not inquire into tho name,
but will determine tho character Of the
scheme by the nature Of tho transaction
or business In which tho parties are On.
gagged" (landle vs.. State, supra.)
"Tho character OF the scheme 10 In NO
wise changed by the charitable purpose
expressed In Its title, nor by calling the
drawings entertainments or gift con.
certs.'" (Ex parte blanchard. supra.)
"The fact that no plan OF distribution has
been determined upon does not relieve the
scheme OF Its character a. 0 lottery"
Thomas vs.. People, so Ills, 1881
"Nor Is IL MATERIAL" said tho Court OF
Appeals In the American Art Union case.
"to the question In hand that the prizes
were not known and designated when tho
tickets or chances were subscribed and
paid for. Tho scheme In this respect 10
moro Objectionable than scheme In which
tho prizes arc previously fixed. because 1t
affords less security to tho subscribers that
the chance purchased IL worth the money
paid for It,"
We are Of opinion that tho facts stated
In tho articles Of incorporation, In tho
statutes, and In the information. show that
the scheme Is me whereby the Legislature
Of this State, In consideration Of the sum
OF $3.50. 600. to be placed In tho State
Treasury. to tho credit Of the Insane and
Charitable Fund.-" attempted to authorize
the managers Of the Nevada Benevolent
Association I" 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 DO
acquired by the ticket holders; that
golden prizes would DO "the lure to In
cite the crodulous and unsuspecting into
this scheme"
In the light Of all the facts that have
been presented II would DO absurd to say
that the managers Of this scheme are sim
ply prompted by deeds Of charity and pure