Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, 1881-12-30

cases In the United States TO sustain the
position commended for BY respondentsi
and that no argument has been advanced
poipts, that has not heretofore been do.
cidod adversely TO them BY the Courts Of
other States, where tho constitutional
provisions are substantially the same a.
II is proper to add that we have arrived
At the conclusion stated without consider
ing tho question Of the morality, or i'm
morality Of this particular scheme. 1t
makes no difference whether II wa set on
foot purely for the purpose OF raising rev.
enue for the benefit OF the "lnsane and
Charitable Fund" Of this State, or whether
Il belonged to that class Of lotteries that
arc made up Of pecuniary prizes and min.
lister to tho love Of gain ; whose schemes
address themselves In tho grossest and
most revolving form directly to that sordid
passion, and TO no other sentiment; where
the managers receive . pecuniary proht
and enlist - corps Of active seducers to
draw the weak and unwary into the pur.
chase Of tickets" by extensive advertise
ments containing brilliant pictures OF the
favorable chances to acquire sudden
wealth.
It may DO admitted for the purposes Of
this decision. as was argued 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 tho morals OF the peo.
pie would result II this game OF chance
was allowed 10 proceed.
This question 10 one that must be con-.
sidered as settled by the adoption Of the
constitutional provision lex parte Darling,
recently decided
In the Art Union case, to which we have
frequently referred, IL was claimed that
the enterprise was really Of 0 meritorious
character, and that II differed, In this 70.
spect, from the lotteries where the mana.
ayers were TO receive the lions share Of
the profits. The Court, In answer to this
argument, said:
"If no lotteries had existed excepting
such as Is contained In the Art Union
scheme, Il 10 not probable that they would
have boen forbidden by the Constitution
or by law. Its mischiefs are certainly not
10 apparent a. II Its prizes were to DO paid
In money, or a. IL would be II framed for
the purpose Of enticing the necessitous and
improvident into Its hazards. But this
case cannot be decided according to
tho views We may entertain OF the probable
good or evil consequent upon the execu-
ton Of the 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 IL were to DO ad.
mitted that the scheme IL entirely harm.
less In Its consequences, IL would form NO
ground for making 1t by judicial con.
~struction an exception to the general and
absolute constitutional prohibition"
"Tho law knows nc person IL 10 no
made for tho individual man, but for men.
As the dew OF heaven falls, 80 II bears
alike upon the just and unjust" Estate
". Pierce, 8 New, 30i.
II smiles and frowns upon all alike. II
makes no distinctions. Submission 10 Its
authority 10 incumbent upon all.
Third-It is unnecessary to discuss any
OF the other points suggested by respon.
dents council.
We will not presume, In advance, that
respondents intend to violate the law.
From tho views already expressed IL 10
apparent that 1t would make no difference
whether respondents base their right TO
act In tho premises under the articles Of
incorporation or under tho provisions Of
the Act OF tho Legislature. In either event
their Acts would DO without warrant Of
law.
The Judgment Of this Court Is that the
respondents have nc right. liberty. or
franchise, by virtue Of any law. to adver-
tise, print, circulate or sell any tickets In
tho scheme or enterprise Of the "Nevads
Benevolent Association" within this State,
or to do any OF the acts specified In the
statute, "to aid tho Nevada Benevolent
Association" approved March 0. 1881
Stat, 1881. 1861; and that the costs Of
this proceeding DO taxed against them.
HAwLEY, ].
Wo concur: LEONARD, G.. j.
| HHLHNAP. j.