Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, 1881-06-02

revenue, they would not have used th,
Language they did In the concluding sen
tencs, I" Nor shall the sale Of lottery tick
sn be allowed" These words clearly
shov that it was not intended that snJ
lottery should b authorised BY this Stst.
The words "by Vii; State" q. used ID
our Constit tiou. and the words "in thii
STATE" cor within this STATE" - used
| In the Constitutions Of New York. havs
virtually che same meaning.
"No iottsry shall b authorised By thil
STATE, nor shall ths sale Of lottery tlekstI
bs allowed"
This language sppliss 70 all lotteries
whether public or private. To lotteries
conducted by the Stats BY the church
by private individuals /; BY benevolent and
charitable associations. and By corpors
lions.
No lottery Of any kind can b author
ised By tbs Legislaturs under the present
Constitution.
We again repeat what, u seems 10 ~,
mpst be evident V every unbiased and In
partial mind. that The language Of the
constitutional provision 10 too plain foi
erRumout 4uss unosf ~ toS A98tstssoAe
cannot authories spy lottery IN this Biate,
and that the Act approved March Q, 1881
II null and void.
We arc conscious Of the fact that II wa
unnecessary 10 add anything 10 the reason
ing Of this Court In "a parts Blanchard.
which 10, Of itself. absolutely conclusive
upon both Of the points We have discussed.
But 10 has been attempted. BY . deaire
upsn our part. TO show that no authority
could 10 found In any Of the adjudicated
cases In the United States 10 sustain the
position oontended for By respondents
aud that NO argument has been advanced
by respondents, upon either Of these
points, that has not heretofore been do.
cided adversely TO them BY the Courts oi
other States, whore the constitutional
provisions are substantially the same ~
our own.
II is proper to add that ws have arrived
at 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 tf raising rev.
enus for ths benefit Of the "lnsane and
Charitable Fund" Of this State. or whether
Il belonged 10 that class Of lotteries that
arc made up Of peouniary prizes and min
lister 10 the love Of gain whose schemes
address themselves In the grossest and
most revolving form directly 10 that sordid
passion, and 70 no other sentiment; where
the managers receive . pecuniary proni
and enlist go corps Of sotlve seducers 10
draw the weak and unwary into the pur.
chase Of tickets" by extensive advertise
msnts containing brilliant pictures OF the
favorable chances to acquire sudden
wealth.
Il may be admitted for the purposes oi
this decision, - was srgued BY respon'
dents' counsel, that the people OF this State
are essentially Q 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 ~ settled by the adoption Of the
constitutional provision lex parte Darling,
recently decided.
In the Art Union case, 10 which we have
frequently referred. IL was claimed that
the enterprise was really Of . meritorioua
character, and that IL differed, In this 70.
spect, from the lotteries where the mana
ayers were 10 receive the lions share oi
the profits. Tho Court, IN anawsr 70 this
argument, said:
"If no lotteries had existed excepting
such - 10 contained In the Art Union
scheme, IL 10 not probable that they would
have been forbidden BY the Constitution
or BY Law. It's misohisfs are certainly not
90 apparent - II Its prizes were to be paid
In money, or - IL would be II framed for
the purpose Of entieing the necessitous and
improvident 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.
ton Of the scheme. Tho Constitution
took away the power Of determining
whether this or any other lottery was Of
good or evil tendency. and certainly did
not intend 10 confer that power on the
Judicial tribunals. II IL we're TO be sd'
mitted that the schems 10 entirely harm
less In its consequence, IL would form nc
ground for making IL BY judicial con.
struction IN exception 70 the general AND
absolute constitutional prohibition"
Courts cannot make any distinction, In
this respect, 40 10 the nature Of the trans.
action or the character Of persons engaged
In IL. 1t IL their bounden duty 70 declare
the Law.
"The law kpows no person; II 10 mol
made for the individual man, but for men,
As the dew Of heaven falls. 90 IL bear
alike upon the just and unjust" Stats
W. Pierce, 8 New, 90k-
II smiles and frowns upon all alike. II
makes no distinctions. Submission 70 ii
authority 10 incumbent upon oil.
Third-It 10 unnecessary 70 discuss any
OF the other points suggested By respon
dents council.
We will not presume, In advance, thai
respondents intend 10 violate tie law.
From the views already expressed IL II
apparent that IL would mako no difference
whether respondents base their right ts
| act in the premises under the articles o.
incorporation or under the provisions ol
the Act Of tho Legislature. In either even,
their Acts would bs without warrant o.
Law.
The Judgment Of this Court 70 that thu
respondents have no right. liberty. ol
franchise, by virtue Of any law. TO sdver
tiss, print, circulate or sell any tickets II
the scheme or enterprise Of the Nsvsd'
Benevolent Association" within this State
or 10 do any Of the acts specified IN th'
| statute, "to aid the Nevada Benevolen
Association" approved March o, lSSl
[stat.. 1881. 1861; and that the costs o
this proceeding bs taxed against them.
HAwLEY,J
We concur; LHoxARp, O. ].
BrLxsAf. j.
NOTHING SHORT OF
unm,st.ksbls benefits conferred upon tsns o