Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, 1881-12-26
SUPREME COURT DECISION.
~[uNANrxous oprNIox.l


1881, articles Of incorporation Of tho "Ne.
vsda Benevolent Association" were filed
In the Office OF the County Clerk Of Storey
county. Tho object Of the corporation
being "to establish and carry on tho
business Of providing for and giving pub
lie entertainments, In the State OF Nevada,
Of . musical and scientific character. to
sell tickets OF admission to such entertain
ments, and TO purchase, hold and dis
tribute among the holders Of such tickets
personal property, real estate, chooses In
action and other valuable things, upon
such terms and conditions and In such
manner and ct such times as may DO do.
termined by . Board Of Managers to DO
selected for that purpose by the Board OF
Trustees OF this company" 1t Is pro.
vided that 80 much Of the proceeds OF said
entertainments ''as may be deemed proper
by the Board Of Trustees, but not less than
$4,000, from each entertainment, are 70
be placed In the State Treasury OF the
state Of Nevada TO bs used only for such
charitable and benevolent purposes ~ may
State Of Nevada."
Tho "Act to Aid the Nevada Benevolent
Association In aiding In providing means
for the care and maintenance Of the IN.
sane Of Nevads, and for other charitable
purposes approved March 0, 1851, de-
clares that ''it shall be lawful for tho No.
vadA Benevolent Association OF the State
Of Nevada to give not exceeding five public
entertainments or concerts; TO sell tickets
Of admission TO tho same /; ~ distribute
among the holders Of such tickets personal
property, real estate, things In action, do
mands or other valusbles, and TO regulate
the distribution Of all such property or
gifts by ratio or other schemes Of like char.
acter." (Stat. 1881, l6G, SEQ. ~
The Information filed by the Attorney
General alleges that respondents, ~ Trus-
tees Of said association, are, without war.
rent Of law, advertising, printing,
circulating and selling tickets for public
entertainments y y q" and that they
base their rights To advertise, print, cir.
culate and sell tickets for the said public
exhibitions or entertainments, and 10 pur.
chase. use, hold and distribute amongst
the holders Of such tickets personal pro.
perry, real estate, chooses In action and
other valuable things" upon the Act Of
the Legislature above referred to.
4uo ibCtu pCt AoAth ~ tuO Ahhoh
are admitted by respondents to DO true.
Arc tho acts Of respondents without war
rant OF law2
Is the Act Of the Legislature, approved
March 0, 1881. constitutional2
First-Is the scheme or enterprise In
which the Nevada Benevolent Associa.
ton 10 engaged q lottery2
This question Is answered In the afirma-
tive by the decision Of this Court In er
parts blanchard, D New, l0i. Is that de-
cision correct2 1t certainly is. 1t Is sus.
taired by every decision that has been
rendered by tho various courts In the
United States upon this question.
Notwithstanding this fact. We arc now
earnestly asked to declare that tho musical
entertainment which the Nevada Benevo-
lent Association proposes to give 10 not .
lottery. Why not? What Is Q lottery 2
Every scheme for the distribution Of prizes
by chance Is \ lottery. (Governor's VI the
Almshouse Of New York W. American Art
Union. z N. ". 239; Dunn vs.. The Peo-
pie, AZ Ills, ACT State W. Shorts, 81 N.
j.; L., 40l Handle vs.. State, AZ Tex,
585 ; Chavannah W. State, 40 Ala. 800 I;
Commonwealth vs.. Manderield, . Phil,
$50 ; United States vs.. 0lney, 1 Abb, U.
b., 270.)
A lottery IL o gamo OF hazard In which
small sums are ventured for the chance OF
obtaining greater. BELL vs.. State, 8
Sneed., 609.l
"a continuance for tho distribution Of
prizes by chance /; . reliance upon the
results Of hazard |; o decision Of the values
Of the adventurer's investment Of the
fsvors Of fortune" Is . lottery. wooden
vs.. Shotwell, 4 Zab., 1867
"whero Q pecuniary consideration 10
paid. and 1t IL determined by lot or chance.
according TO somo scheme held out to the
public what tho party who pays the money
IL to have for II, or whether he 10 to have
anything, IL 10 Q lottery" Estate VS..
Clarke. SO N. H., 1856 Hull vs.. Ruggles.
60 N. Y, 427.)
1t makes no difference what name 10
given to the scheme.
When tho element Of chance onters into
the distribution Of prizes 1t Is o lottery.
without reference to the namo by which II
10 called.
"Ho may choose to call his business o
gift SALE" said the Court In Dunn vs.. PEG.
pie, supra, "but II 10 mono the less . lot.
terry, and we cannot permit him to ovado
the penalties OF tho law by SO transparent
Q device rs . mere change Of name. II IL
differs from ordinary lotteries tho differ.
ence lies chiefly In the fact that IL 10 more
artfully contrived to impose upon tho ig-
norant and credulous, and Is, therefore,
moro thoroughly dishonest and injurious
to society"
"Tho name given to tho process and the
form Of tho machinery used to accomplish
tho object arc not material, provided the
substance OF the transaction IL q distribu.
tion or disposition Of property by lot"
Estate vs.. Clarke, supra.)
"Courts will not inquire into tho name,
but will determine tho character Of the
scheme by tho nature OF tho transaction
| or business In which tho parties are en-
gagged" (Randlo vs.. State, supra.)
"Tho character OF the scheme IL In no
wise changed by tho charitable purpose
expressed in Its title, nor by calling tho
drawings entertainments or gift con.
ccrts.'" (Ex parte Blanchard, supra.)
"Thc fact that no plan OF distribution has
been determined upon does not relieve the
scheme Of its character as . lottery"
Thomas vs.. People. 50 Ills, 1881
"Nor 10 II MATERIAL" said tho Court OF
Appeals In the American Art Union case.
"to the question In hand that the prizes
were not known and designated when the
tickets or chances were subscribed and
paid for. The scheme In this respect Is
more Objectionable than . scheme In which
the prizes are previously fxed. because II
affords less security to tho subscribers that
tho chance purchased Is worth the money
paid for It,"
We are Of opinion that tho facts stated
In the articles Of incorporation, In the
statutes, and In the information. show that
tho scheme Is one whereby the Legislature
Of this State, In consideration Of the sum
Of $3.50, 600, to DO placed In the State
Treasury. to the credit Of tho "Insane and
Charitable Fund.-" attempted to authorize
the managers Of tho "Nevada Benevolent
Association " to enrich their own pockets.
at the expense Of tho people OF this and
other States, by holding out promises OF
tho great and sudden gains that might DO
acquired by the ticket holders that
golden prizes would DO the lure to In
cite the credulous and unsuspecting into
this scheme"
T. a.. ,t.ll - ~ A.. Fat. th.k hava