Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, 1881-08-13


ing Of This Court In e parss blanchard.
which 10. Of ttsef. sb(oluhty conclusive
upon both Of the points We have discussed.
But 10 has been attempted, BY Q desire
upon o part. 10 show that NJ authority
could b found In any Of the sdjudicated
cases In the United States 70 sustain the
position commanded for BY respondents /;
and that no argument has been advanced
BY respondents, upon either Of thess
points. that has NOT heretofore bean do.
cided adversely 70 them BY the Courts OF
other States, where the constitutional
provisions are substantially tho same -
our own.
II 10 proper 10 add that Ne have arrived
at the conclusion stated without consider
ing the question Of The morality. or i'm
morality Of this particular scheme. II
makes no difference whether u was set on
foot purely for tho purpose Of raising rev.
enue for the benefit o. the "Inssne and
Charitable FUND.- Of this sats. or whether
IL belonged 70 that class Of lotteries that
are made up Of pecuniary prisss and min
istsr 10 the love OF gain /; whose schemee
address themselves In the grossest and
most revolving form directly 70 that sordid
passion, and 70 no other sentiment; where
the managers receive . pecuniary proht
and enlist " . corps Of sotve seduosrs TO
draw the weak and unwary into the pur.
chase Of tickets" BY extensive advertise
ments containing brilliant pictures Of the
favorable chances 10 acquire sudden
wealth.
Il may be 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 10 take the desperate chances
which lotteries afford. and that no In.
furious effects upon tho morals Of the peo.
pie would result II this game Of chance
was allowed TO proceed.
This question 10 ono that must DO con.
sidsrsd - settled BY the adoption Of tho
constitutional provision OF parts Darling,
recently dscided.l
In the Art Union case, 10 which va have
frequently referred, 10 was claimed that
character, and that IL differed, In this re-
spect, from the lotteries where the mana.
ayers were TO receive the lions share Of
the profts. The Court. In answer 70 this
argument, said:
"If no lotteries had existed excepting
such % IL contained In the Art Union
sohsme, II Is not probable that they would
have been forbidden by the Consitution
or by Law. It's misohisfs are certainly not
90 apparent - II its prizes we're to be paid
In money, or - 10 would DO II framed for
the purpose Of entioing the neoessitous and
improvident into is 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. 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 IL we're 70 be I'd.
mitted that the scheme 10 entirely harm.
less In Its consequences, IL would form no
ground for making IL BY Judicial con.
struction An exception 70 the general and
absolute constitutional prohibition"
"The law knows no person; II 10 not
made for the individual man, but for men.
Az the dew Of heaven falls, 30 IL bears
alike upon the Just and unjust" Estate
W. Pierce, y New, 304.l
Il smiles and frowns upon all alike. 1t
makes no distinctions. Submission 10 its
authority Is incumbent upon all.
Third-It IL unnecessary 10 discuss any
OF the 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 70
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.
The judgment Of this Court Is that the
respondents have no right. liberty. or
franchise, by virtue Of any Law, 10 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. "to aid the Nevada Benevolent
Association" approved March Q. 1881
Stat, 1881, 1861 and that the costs Of
this proceeding bs taxed against them.
HAwLEY, j.
We concur: LEONARD, O. ].
BELKNAP, ].