Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, 1881-05-16

revenue, they would net have used the
ispsusge they did IN The concluding ssn.
tenos, !" Nor shall the sale Of lottery tick.
ss b allowed" These words clearly
shov that u was mot intended that any
iottsry should be authorized By this Stats
The words "by this sass." - sssd In
our Constitu ton, and the words In this
STATE" cor within this State" - used
In the Constitutions Of New York, have
virtually the same meaning.
"No iottsry shall b. authorized By this
Stats. NOR shall the sa,s Of lotssgy tieksts
be allowed" -s
This language sppliSs V oil lotteries,
whether public OF pqvsts. 10 lottsriss
conducted BY the Stab By The church
by privsts individuals |; By benevolent and
charitable associations: and By oorpora'
tions.
No lottery Of any hind can b author.
lied by the Legislature under the pressnt
Copsitutiou. . . . q
We again repeat What. u seems 70 %,
mnst BE- evident 70 every unbiased and In
partial mind, that ths language OF The
constitutional provision ID too plain for
argument. That undsr 10 the Legislature
cannot authoriss any lottery 10 this Ststs.
aud that the Act approved March D, issi.
10 null and void.
We are conscious Of the fact that u vas
unnecessary TO add anything 10 the reason.
lug Of this Court In er parts Blanchard.
which 10. Of itself. absolutely conclusive
upon both Of the points We have discussed.
Bot IL has been attempted. BY . deairs
upon our part. 10 show that no authority
could 10 found In any Of the adjudicated
cases In the United States 10 sustain the
position contended for BY respondents
aud that no argument has been advanced
by respondents, upoa either Of these
points, that has not heretofore been do.
cided adversely TO them BY the Courts OF
other States, where the constitutional
provisions are substantially the same -
our own.
Il IL proper to add that We have arrived
n the conclusion stated without consider
ing the question Of the morality, or I'm.
morality OF this particular scheme. II
makes no difference whether IL Was set on
foot purely for the purpose Of raising res.
enus for the benefit Of the "Insans and
Charitable Fund" Of this State, or whether
IL DelOuBe0 W tuht cisss VI Aossoases snss
are made up Of pecuniary prizes and min.
lister to the love OF gain whose scheme.
address themselves In the grossest and
most revolving form directly 10 that sordid
passion, and TO no other sentiment; whero
the managers receive . pecunisry prodt
aud enlist "a corps Of active seducers 70
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.
It may be admitted for the purposes Of
this decision. ~ was sryued by respon.
dents' counsel, that the people Of this State
are essentially . gambling people, ready
at all times to take the desperate chances
which lotteries afford, and that NO In.
furious effects upon the morals OF the peo.
pie would result II this game Of chance
was allowed To proceed.
This question 10 one that must be con.
sidered ss settled by the adoption Of the
constitutional provision ex parte Darling,
recently decided.
In the Art Union case, 10 which We have
frequently referred. IL was claimed that
the enterprise was really Of . meritorious
character, and that II differed, 10 this 70.
spect, from the lotteries where the mana.
ayers were TO receive the lions share oi
the profits. The Court, In answer 70 this
argument, said:
"If no lotteries had existed excepting
such - 10 contained In the Art Union
scheme, It 10 not probable that they would
have been forbidden by the Constitution
or by law. Its mischiefs are certainly not
90 apparent % II Its prizes were to be paid
In money, or - IL would bel II framed for
the purpose Of enticing the necessitous and
improvlient into its hazards. But this
case cannot be decided according TO
the views We may entertain Of the probable
good or evil consequent upon the execu.
tion Of tho 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 TO confer that power on the
judicial tribunals. II 10 we're to 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.
structiou an exception 70 the general ana
absolute constitutional prohibition.
Courts cannot make any distinction, In
this respect, % to the nature OF the trans.
action or the character Of persons engaged
| In Il. 1t 10 their bounden duty 70 declare
| the law.
."Tho law knows no person 10 10 not
made for tho individual man, but Tor men
As the dew Of heaven falls, 20 u 6esrs
alike upon the just and unjust" lshte
W. Pierce, 8 New, eo4. :.
1t smiles aud frowns upon all alike. II
makes no distinctions. Submission 70 It'd
authority 10 incumbent upon oil.
Third-It 10 unnecessary 70 discuss any
Of the other points suggested BY respon'
dsuts' council.
We will not presume. In advance, thai
respondents intend to violate tue law.
From the visws already expressed u ID
apparent that 10 would make no difference
whether respondents base their right 70
act In the premises under the articles ol
incorporation or under the provisions oi
tue Act OF the Legislature. In either event
their Acts would bs without warrant oi
Law.
The Judgment Of this Court 10 that the
respondents have no right. liberty, OF
franchise, BY virtue Of any law, to sdver'
tise, print, circulate or sell any tickets 10
| the scheme or enterprise Of the "Nevadi
Benevolent Association" within this State,
or N do any Of the acts specified In the
statute, "to aid the Nevada Benevolent
Association" approved March 0. 1881
| fStst.. 1881, 1851; and that the costs o'
this proceeding bs taxed against them.
HAwLrY, ].
We concur: LEONARD. @. ].
| BxLKNAP. j.
NOTHING SHORT OF