Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, 1881-12-16

terry tickets In this btate In direct VIOLA
ton Of tho plain letter and spirit Of this
provision OF tho Constitution. II would
DO O perversion Of the language OF tho Con-
s~titution to say that the Act 10 valid.
Respondents, however, contend that the
Constitution "does not prohibit private
lotteries, and was by is trainers intended
only 10 prevent the Legislature from In
yolying tho State In . system OF public
lotteries as . means Of raising money for
the service OF the State" or. In other
words, that this constitutional provision
was only intended % . Limitation OF power
to prevent the State. as . State, from en-
gazing in public lotteries for the purpose
OF raising means for the general revenue
Of tho State. Hence they claim that the
State has the right 10 authorize private
parties 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 0
provision In the Constitution OF that State
Identical with ours. Il II not claimed
that these debates have the weight OF 0
judicial decision, but that It 10 proper to
examine them In case OF doubt IS 10 the
intention Of the trainers Of tho Constitu-
ton. The remarks Of the different mem.
bers shed but little light upon the real
question at ISSUE They are as much In
favor Of the position taken by the Attorney
General a they are In favor Of the respon-
dents. The debates show that the Consti-
tuition Of New York was referred to In
discussing the provision that was adopted
In California. Mr.. Halleok, who was In
favor Of the adoption Of the lottery pro.
vision, In the course Of his argument,
said "In nearly all tho new Constitu-
tons you will find this clause. 1t was not
contained In the old Constitution, but In
most cases, where they have been
amended, II has been introduced. In tho
old Constitution OF Now York, to which
reference has been made In the course OF
debate, no prohibition WA 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 So
rious embarrassment 10 the State Govern
ment itself. The result so clearly estab-
lished the evils Of the lottery system that
the Convention Of New York, In 1876, In.
serted . clause In the very first article OF
the new Constitution [see Section l0l
prohibiting lotteries and tho sale Of lot.
terry tickets. It appeared to him
that this prohibition was n OF tho best
that could be inserted In the article limit.
ing the powers Of the Legislature"
The language Of the 10th Section Of Ar
ticlo / OF tho 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, IL was con.
tended by Charles O'Connor, counsel for
the Art Union, as II Is here, that the Con.
stitution was only intended TO prevent tho
mischievous 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.
tons OF the Constitution were only directed
against this particular evil. He referred
to the fact, as do counsel here, that ''from
1909 to 1874 public lotteries were author.
lied OF every session Of Parliament" He
also referred to tho debates OF the Consti.
tutional Convention Of 1921, for tho pur.
pose Of showing that " public lotteries for
~pecuniary prizes ~ o means OF raising
revenue were alone within the contempla-
ton Of that body"
The Constitution OF 1921 Is in these
words: "No lottery shall hereafter DO
authorized In. this State. and the Legis.
lature shall pass laws to prevent the sale OF
all lottery tickets within this State except
In lotteries already provided for by law"
Tho Court Of Appeals In referring to this
Constitution, which II declared to DO sub
stantially tho Same o. tho Constitution Of
1916, said: "This prohibition is general.
Il must DO held to embrace all lotteries,
unless there be some very clever and salts
factory reason for understanding II In Q
moro limited sense. It was urged upon
the argument that public lotteries for pe-
cuniary prizes a. 0 means OF raising rev.
enuo wero alono within tho contemplation
Of tho trainers Of tho Constitution. But
lotteries have mover been created within
this State for the purpose Of general rev.
enue, and there is therefore no ground for
believing that tho prohibition was In.
tended 10 DO limited to lotteries for that
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 beno-
at Of colleges, for tho making OF roads, for
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. All
these wero clearly within tho prohibition.
The prohibition was not aimed at tho OBJ.
jects for which lotteries had been author.
lied, but at that particular mode Of accom-.
plishing such objects. It was founded on
tho moral principle that evil should not DO
done that good might follow, and upon tho
more cogent practical reason that the OWL
consequent on this pernicious kind OF
gambling greatly overbalanced In tho
aggregate any good likely to result from
II. Tho promotion Of the flno arts 10 un.
doubleday q commendable object, but the
prohibition contains NO exception in Its
favor on that ground. =
The intention Of the trainers Of tho Con.
stitution undoubtedly was 10 forbid tho
future granting Of any such lotteries as
had at any time previously been author
lied by law. and by requiring tho Legis.
lature TO pass laws TO prevent the sale OF
al lOttery uckotsi W put I'll chu w aAA
such distributions Of money or goods by
lot or chance as had heretofore been for.
hidden by statute under tho namo Of
private lotteries"
The argument that the words by this
State" were inserted for the purpose Of
preventing tho Legislature from authorize.
ing public lotteries asa means Of raising
revenue. and that the provision was not
intended to prevent the Legislature from
authorizing private lotteries, is wholly IN.
tenable. No authority has been produced
In Its support and wo are satisfied that
mono can be found.
In constituting this provision OF the Con-
stitution the last sentence h as important
Is tho FIRST.
II tho trainers Of the Constitution had
intended by tho use Of tho words: "No
lottery shall be authorized by this State"
to only limit the legislative power TO pub.
lic lotteries, conducted and managed solely
by tho State for tho purpose Of raising
revenue, they would mot have used the
language they did In the concluding sem
tence. "Nor shall the sale Of lottery tick.
-. q. .t.-.ID ma..- -a.l. .t...l.