Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, 1881-08-03

csptibls Of but one meaning. There ID no
room for construction. Nothing upon
which any real or substantial argument
can be based. m
"No lottery shall DO authorized By this
State, nor shall the sale Of lottery tickets
b allowed" (Const., Art, ~. Bee. ~.
The Act In question attempts 70 author
Lee . lottery. and 70 allow the sale Of lot
tery tickets In this State In direct viola
ton Of the plain lettor and spirit Of this
provision OF the Consultation. II would
DO . perversion Of the language Of the Con-
sitution to say that the Act 10 valid.
Respondents. however, contend that the
Constitution "doss NOT prohibit private
lotteries, and wn BY It, trainers intended
only 70 prevent the Legislature from In.
volving the State In . system Of public
lotteries % . means Of raising money for
the service OF the Sate," or, In other
words, that this constitutional provision
was only intended q . limitation Of power
10 prevent the State, - Q State, from on.
gazing In public lotteries for the purpose
Of raising means for the general revenue
Of the State. Hence they claim that the
State has the right 10 authorize private
parties 10 conduct and carry on . lottsry
Of the character specified In the informs'
ton.
In support Of this position they refer 70
the debates Of the Constitutional Conven-
ton In California upon the adoption OF .
provision In the Constitution OF that State
Identical with our. II 10 not claimed
that these debates have the weight Of .
judicial decision, bot that II ID proper 10
examine them In case Of doubt - TO the
intention Of the trainers Of the oonstitu.
ton. The remarks Of the different mem.
bera shed but little light upon the real
question st issue. They arc - much In
favor Of the position taken BY the Attorney
General % they are In favor Of the respon-
dents. The debates show that the Consti-
tuition Of New York was referred 10 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. II was not
contained In the old Constitution, but In
most cases. where they have been
amended. 10 has been introduced. In the
old Constitution 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 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 90 clearly estab.
lished tho evils Of the lottery system that
the Convention Of New York. In 1886, In.
serted . clause In the very frst article OF
the new Constitution lseo Section l0l
prohibiting lotteries aud the sale Of lot.
terry tickets. It appeared 70 him
that this prohibition was one Of the best
that could DO inserted In tho article limit.
ing the powers Of the Legislature"
The language Of the 10th Section OF Ar
ticle I Of the Constitution Of 1886. refer
red to by Mr.. Hslleok 10 % 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. IL was con.
tended by Charles O'Connor, counsel for
the Art Union, a. IL IL hero, that tho Con.
stitution was only intended TO prevent the
mlschievous practice Of raising Q revenue
by public lotteries, which had been for
many years in full vigor both In England
and In this country. and that the prohibi.
tious Of the Constitution were only directed
against this particular evil. He referred
10 the fact, a. do counsel here, that ''from
100 to 1874 public lotteries were author.
lied at every session Of Parliament" He
also referred to the debates Of the Consti.
tutional Convention Of 1891, for the pur.
pose Of showing that public lotteries for
pecuniary prizes a. . means OF raising
revenue we're alone within the contompla.
ton Of that body"
The Constitution Of 1891 10 In these
words: "No lottery shall hereafter DO
authorized In this State, and the Legis.
lature shall pass laws 70 prevent the sale OF
all lottery tickets within this State except
In lotteries already provided for BY law"
The Court Of Appeals In referring to this
Constitution, which IL declared 70 DO sub.
stantially the same % the Constitution OF
1916, said: "This prohibition Is general.
It must DO 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.
enue were alone within the contemplation
Of tho trainers Of the Constitution. But
lotteries have never been created within
this State for the purpose Of general rev.
enue. and there Ia therefore no ground for
believing that the prohibition was In
tended 70 be limited TO 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 the bens'
at Of colleges, for the making Of roads, for
the building Of bridges, for the improve
pitfalls, and for various other purposes
equally commendable aud beneficial. AL
these were clearly within the prohibition.
The prohibition was not aimed st the OBJ.
jects for which lotteries had been suthor'
lied, but 1t that particular mode OF accom-
plishing such objects. II was founded on
the moral principle that evil should not b.
dono that good might follow. and upon the
moro cosent practical reason that the evil
consequent on this peruicious kind OF
gambling greatly overbalanced In the
aggregate any good likely TO result from
1t. The promotion Of the nne arts 10 nm.
doubtedly Q commendable object, but the
prohibition contains NO exception In its
favor on that ground. .
The intention Of the trainers Of the Con.
stitution undoubtedly was 70 forbid the
future granting Of any such lotteries 81
had at any time previously been author
lied by law. and by requiring the Legis.
t.,ur. to o..a lsws to orsvant thu sala NJ