Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, 1881-05-18

II has the essential elements and atlri.
bules Of . lottery; the distribution Of prizes
by chance. II 10 lottery Within the dshn'
ition given In the dictionaries 10 b let.
terry according 10 the ordinary aoceptation
Of that word 10 II . lottery within the
tsrms specified BY the Legislature Of thi.
State In the "Aot 70 prohibit lstterise y
Istat.. 1878, 1851; 10 u . lottsry within the
meaning Of that word - used In the Con-
sutution.
seeond-Is The Act approved March ..
1881, constitutionalf
This question Il - clear and plain %
our minds a the one already decided. II
will not admit Of any reasonable doubt.
The language Of the Constitution Il sus.
esptible Of but one meaning. There 10 no
room for construction. Nothing upon
which any real or substantial Argument
can be based.
% No lottery shall bs authorised BY this
State, nor shall the sale Of lottery tickets
b allowed" [Const.. Art. Nv: sec. -. ]
The Act In question attempts to author
ise q lottery, and 10 allow the sale Of lot.
tery tickets In this State IN direct viola
ton OF the plain letter and spirit OF this
provision of the Constitution. II would
be perversion Of the language OF the Con-
stitution 70 say that the Act 10 valid.
Respondents, however. contend that the
Constitution "does not prohibit private
lotteries, and was BY its trainers intended
only to prevent the Legislature from In
volving the State In . system OF public
lotteries ~ Q means Of raising money for
the service Of the State" Or. In other
words, that this constitutional provision
Vas only intended a. . Limitation OF power
70 prevent the State, - State. from en-.
gazing In public lotteries for tho purpose
Of raising means for the general revenue
Of the State. Hence they claim that the
State has the right TO authorize private
parties to conduct and carry on . lottery
Of the character specified In the informa.
ton.
In support Of this position they refer 70
the debates Of the Constitutional Conven-
ton in California upon the adoption Of .
provision 10 the Constitution OF that State
identical with ours. II 10 not claimed
that these debates have the weight Of
Judicial decision, but that IL 10 proper TO
examine them In case OF doubt ~ 70 the
intent tion Of the trainers Of the Constitu.
ton. The remarks Of the different mem
bers shed but little light upon the real
question at issue. They are ~ much In
favor Of the position taken by tho Attorney
General a. they are In favor OF the respon.
dents. The debates show that tho Consti-
tuition Of New York was referred to 10
discussing the provision that was adopted
In California. Mr.. Halleck. who was In
favor Of the adoption Of the lottery pro.
vision, In the course OF his argument.
said: "In nearly all the new Csnstitu-
tions you will hnd this clause. Il was not
contained In the old Constitution. but In
most cases, where they have been
amended. 10 has been introduced. In the
old Consultation Of New York, to which
reference has been made In the course Of
debate. no prohibition was inserted.
Many gentlemen present would remember
the famous case Of Yates and McIntyrs
which involved not only individuals Of the
State 10 ruin. but was the OCCASION Of Sc
rious embarrassment to the State Govern
ment itself. The result 90 clearly estsb.
lished the evils Of the lottery system that
the Convention Of New York, In 1876, 10.
serted clause In the very drst article Of
the nsw Constitution SEQ Section l0l
prohibiting lotteries and the sale Of lot.
terry tickets. 1t appeared TO him . .
that this prohibition was one OF the best
that could be inserted In the article limit.
ing the powers Of the Legislature"
The language Of the 10th Section OF Ar
ticle Of the Constitution OF i8i6, refer
red TO by Mr.. Halleck 10 a. follows: Nor
shall any lottery hereafter be authorized
or any sale Of lottery tickets allowed with.
In this State"
In the Governors Of the Almshouse ".
American Art Union, supra. 10 was con.
tended by Charles O'Connor, counsel for
The Art Union, - IL 10 here, that the Con.
stitution was only intended TO prevent the
mischisvous practice Of raising . revenue
by public lotteries. which had been for
many years in full vigor both In England
aud in this country. aud that the prohibi.
tions Of the Constitution were only directed
against this particular evil. He referred
to the fact, ~ do counsel here, that "from
l709 to 1874 public lotteries were author.
lied ct every session Of Parliament" He
also referred to the debates Of the Consti.
tutional Convention Of 1871. for the pur.
pose Of showing that "public lotteries for
pecuniary prizes a. . means Of raising
revenue were alone within the contempla.
ton Of that body"
The Constitution Of 1871 10 In these
words: "No lottery shall hereafter be
authorized In this State. and tho Legis.
lsture shall pass laws 10 prevent the sale Of
all lottery tickets within this Stats except
in lotteries already provided for by law"
The Court Of Appeals In referring to this
Constitution, which u declared to be sub
stantially the same ~ the Coustitution OF
l8i6, said: "This prohibition II general.
II must bs held to embrace all lotteries,
unless there be some very clever and salts.
factory reason for understanding II In .
more limited sense. 1t was urged upon
the argument that public lotteries for pe.
cuniary prizes a. . means Of raising rev.
enus were alone within the contemplation
Of the trainers Of the Constitution. But
lotteries have never been created within
this State for the purpose Of general rev.
enue, and there 10 therefore no ground for
believing that the prohibition was In.
tended to be limited 70 lotteries for that
object. This would have been restraining
q mischief which did not exist, and toler.
ating that which did. Lotteries had been
authorized by the Legislature for tho bene.
at Of colleges. for the making Of roads. for
the building Of bridges. for the improve
ment Of ferries. for the erection Of hos.
pitfalls, and for various other purposes
equally commendAble and beneficial. All
these were clearly within the prohibition.
The prohibition Was not aimed at the OBJ.
jscts for which lotteries had been author.
lied, but At that particular mode Of accom-.
plishing such objects. 1t was founded on
the moral principle thar evil should not BE-
done that good might follow, and upon the
more cosent practical reason that the evil
cousequsnt on this pernicious kind Of