Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, 1881-12-21

cases in the United States to sustain the
position commended for BY respondents
and that no argument has been advanced
by respondents, upon either OF these
points, that has not heretofore been do.
cided adversely to them by the Courts OF
other States, where the constitutional
provisions arc substantially tho same %
our own.
II Is proper to add that We have arrived
at the conclusion stated without consider
ing the question Of tho morality, or i'm.
morality Of this particular scheme. 1t
makes no difference whether II was set on
foot purely for tho purpose OF raising rev.
enue for the benefit OF the "lnsane and
Charitable Fund" OF this State, or whether
Il belonged TO that class Of lotteries that
arc made up Of pecunisry prizes and min
lister 70 tho love Of gain ; whose schemes
most revolving form directly 10 that sordid
passion, and to NO other sentiment ; where
the managers receive . pecuniary proht
and enlist ga corps Of active seducers to
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.
It may be admitted for tho purposes Of
this decision, as was srgued by respon-
dents counsel, that the people Of this State
are essentially . gambling people. ready
ct all times to take the desperate chances
which lotteries afford, and that no In.
furious effects upon the morals Of the PEG.
pie would result II this game Of chance
was allowed to proceed.
This question 10 one that must be con-
sidered as settled by the adoption OF tho
constitutional provision ex psrte Darling.
recently decided
In tho Art Union case, TO which We have
frequently referred, IL was claimed that
the enterprise was really Of 0 m~eritorious
character, and that II differed, In this re-
spect, from the lotteries whore the lana.
ayers were 10 receive the lions share OF
the profits. The Court, In answer to this
argument, said:
elf no lotteries had existed excepting
such % is contained In the Art Union
scheme, II Ii not probable that they would
have been forbidden by the Constitution
or by law. Its mischiefs are certainly not
80 apparent as II Its prizes were to be paid
In money, or ~ IL would DO II framed for
the purpose Of enticing the necessitous and
improvident into Its hazards. But this
case cannot DO decided according to
tho views we may entertain OF the probable
good or evil consequent upon the execu-
ton Of tho scheme. The Constitution
took away the powor OF determining
whether this or any other lottery was Of
good or evil tendency, and certainly did
mt INLAND tn nn0far that rnwar nm thu
judicial tribunals. II IL we're to DO I'D.
mitted that the scheme Is entirely harm.
less In It's consequences, II would form no
ground for making 1t by judicial con.
struction IN exception to tho general and
absolute constitutional prohibition"
"Tho law knows NO person I; II Is no
made for the individual man, but for men.
As tho dew OF heaven falls, 80 It bears
alike upon tho just and unjust" Estate
VS.. Pierce, 8 New, 30i.
Il smiles and frowns upon all alike. II
makes no distinctions. Submission to Its
authority Is incumbent upon nl.
Third-It Is unnecessary TO discuss any
OF the other points suggested by respon-
dents council.
We will not presume. In advance, that
respondents intend TO violate tho law.
From the views already expressed Il 10
apparent that II would make no difference
whether respondents base their right to
act In the premises under the articles Of
incorporation or under tho provisions OF
tho Act OF the Legislature. In either event
their Acts would DO without warrant OF
law.
The Judgment Of this Court Is that the
respondents have no right. liberty, or
franchise, by virtue Of any law, to adver-
tise, print, circulate or sell any tickets In
the scheme or enterprise Of the Nevada
Benevolent Association" within this State,
or to do any Of tho acts specified In tho
statute, "to aid tho Nevada Benevolent
Association" approved March 0. 1881
Stat, 1881. 1861; and that tho costs OF
this proceeding DO taxed against them.
HAwLEY, ].
Wo concur: LEONARD, @. j.
BELXNAP, j.