Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, 1881-05-30

revenue, they would not have used ID,
language they did In the concluding sen
tence, "Nor shall the sale OF lottery tick
cts BE- allowed" These words clesrl,
show that Il was not intended that anI
lottsry should be authorised by this Stat,
The words "by this stats," - used Il
our Cons ton, and the words " In thil
State" "or within this State" q uset
In the Constitutions Of New York. hsv'
| virtually the same meaning.
"No lottsry shall b authorised BY thil
State, nor shall the sale Of lottery tickstl
be allowed"
This language applies 10 oil lottsriss
whether public OF private. To lotteries
conducted BY the 6tsts BY the church
By private individuals; /; BY benevolent and
charitable assoeisdons. and BY oorpors.
tous.
No lottery Of any hind osu b author.
lied BY the Legislsfurs under the present
Constitution. 80 .
We again repeat what, u seems 70 NJ.
must be evident 70 svery unbiased and i'm.
partial mind. that the language Of the
constitutional provision u too plain for
argument. That under it the Legislature
cannot authoriss any lottery 10 this State,
and ihat the Act approved March Q. 1881.
10 null and void.
We are con, ,,ious Of the fact that u was
unnecessary 70 add anythins 10 the reason.
ing Of this Court In 90 parts Blanchard.
which 10. Of itself. absolutely oonolusivs
upon both Of the points We have discussed.
But II has been attempted. BY . dsaire
upon our part. TO show that no authority
could 10 found In any Of the sdjudioated
cases In the United States 70 sustain the
position commended for By respondents |;
aud that no argument has been advanced
BY respondents, upon either Of these
points, that has not hsrstofore been do.
cided adversely 70 them BY tho Courts Of
other States, where the constitutional
provisions are substantially the same -
our own.
Il is proper 10 add that We have arrived
st the conslusion stated without consider
ing the question Of the morality. or i'm.
morality Of this particular scheme. II
makes no differences whether it was set on
foot purely for the purpose OF raising rev.
enue for the benefit q the "Insans and
Charitable Fund" Of this State, or whether
10 belonged 70 that class Of lotteries that
are made up Of peounisry prizes and min.
ister 10 the love Of. gain whose schemes
address themselves In the grossest and
most revolving form directly 70 that sordid
passion, and 70 no other sentiment; where
the managers receive . pecuniary prodt
aud enlist al corps Of active ssducers To
draw the weak and unwary into the pur.
- - al.I-s- ~, nvkansfea aIRaRfisa-
msnts containing brilliant pictures Of the
favorable chances TO acquire sudden
wealth.
II may bs admitted for the purposes Of
this decision. - was srgued BY respou.
dents' counsel, that the people Of this State
are essentially gambling people, ready
at all times 10 take the desperate chances
which lotteries afford, and that no In.
jurious effects upon the morals Of the peo.
pie would result II this game Of chance
was allowed 10 proceed.
This question 10 one that must bs con.
sidered ~ settled by the adoption Of the
constitutional provision q parts Darling.
recently decided.
In the Art Union case, 10 which We have
frequently referred, 10 was claimed that
the enterprise was really Of . msritorious
character, and that IL differed. In this 70.
spsot, from the lotteries whore the mana.
ayers were TO, receive the lions share Of
the proHts. The Court, In answer 70 this
argument. said:
"If NO lotteries had existed excepting
suuh ~ 10 eeatainsd In ths Ara Dninn \
scheme, Il 10 not probable that they would
have been forbidden BY the Coordination
or by Law. Its mischisfs are certainly not
20 apparent a. II its prises were to Be paid
In money, or - Il would Be II framed for
the purpose Of snticing the nscsssitous and
improviisnt 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 sxeou.
ton ot. 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 10 confer that power on the
judicial tribunals. II t. we're 70 bs id.
mittsd that the scheme 10 entirely harm.
less In its consequences. IL would form no
ground for making II BY Judicial con.
struction an exception 10 the general and
absolute constitutional prohibition.
Courts cannot make any distinction, In
this respect. a 10 the nature OF the trans.
action or the character Of persons engaged
in It. II IL thsir boundsn duty 70 declare
the Law.
"Ths law knows NO person; II II not
made for tho individual man, but for men.
Al the dew Of heaven falls. 20 IL bsars
alike upon the Just and unjust" Estate
". Pierce, 9 New, 604.
II smiles and frowns upon oil Alike. IL
makes no distractions. Submission 70 ih
authority Il incumbent upon Oil.
Third-It 10 unnecessary 70 discuss any
Of the other points suygsstsd By rsspon'
dsnts' council.
. We will not presume, In advance, that
respondents intend 70 violate ths law.
From the views already expressed IL 10
apparent that Il would make no difference
whether respondents base their right 70
act In the premises under the articles OF
incorporation or under the provisions Of
tue Act OF the Legislature. In either event
their Acts would bs without warrant OF
Law.
The Judgment Of this Court q that the
respondents have no right. liberty, or
franchise, BY virtue Of any law. 70 advsr.
tiss, print, cireulsts or sell any tickets IN
the scheme or enterprise Of the Nevada
Benevolent Association" within this stats.
or TO do any Of the acts spseined IN th:
statute, "to aid the Nevada Bsnsvolent
Association" approved March ., 1851
fStat., 1881, l6e |; and that the costs Of
this proceeding b. taxed against them.
HAwLEY, ].
We concur: LroxAlp, Q. ].
BxLKSAP. ].
NOTHING SHORT OF
uum,sssksbls bsnsats conferred upon tens Of