Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, 1881-07-28

C8n W 0880Qs
"No lottsry shall bs authorized By this
6hte, nor shall the sale Of lcttsry icken
be allowed" tCoust., Art. ~. beo. 2A.l
The Act In question attempts 70 suthor'
LIE . lottery, and 10 allow the sale OF lot
terry tickets In this State In direct viola
ton Of the plain letter and spirit Of this
provision Of the Constitution. It would
DO Q perversion Of the language Of the Con-
stitution 10 ny that the Act 10 valid.
Respondents. however, contend that the
Constitution does not prohibit private
lotteries, and was BY Ito frsmers intended
only 70 prevent the Legislature from In
volving the State In . syltem OF public
lotteries - . means Of raising money for
the service Of the State,'' or, In other
words, that this constitutional provision
was only intended - . Limitation OF power
10 prevent the State, ~ . State, from en-.
gazing In public lotteries for the purpose
Of raising means for the general revenue
Of the Sate. Hence they claim that the
State has the right 10 authorize private
parties TO conduct and carry on . lottsry
Of the character specified In the informa-
ton.
In support Of this position they refer TO
the debates Of the Constitutional Conven.
ton In California upon the adoption Of .
provision 10 the Constitution Of that State
Identical with ours. II 10 not claimed
that these debates have the weight Of q
judicial decision, bat that u IL proper 10
examine them In case Of doubt % 10 the
intention Of the trainers Of the Constitu-
ton. The remarks Of the different mem.
bsrs shed but little light upon the real
question Of ISSUE. They arc - much In
favor Of the position taken BY the Attorney
General - they arc 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.. Halleck, who was In
favor OF the adoption Of the lottery pro.
vision, In the course Of his argument,
lions you will find this clause. Il was not
contained in the old Constitution. but In
most cases. where they have been
amended, IL has been introduced. In the
old Constitution Of New York. 70 which
reference has been made In the course OF
debate. NO prohibition Vas inserted.
Many gentlemen present would remember
the famous case Of Yates and Mcintyre.
which involved not only individuals Of the
State 10 ruin, bat was the occasion Of So
rious embarrassment 70 the State Govern.
ment itself. The result 80 clearly estab-
lished the evils OF the lottery system that
the Convention OF New York. 10 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 TO him
that this prohibition was one OF the best
that could be inserted In the article limit.
ing the powers Of the Legislature"
The language Of tho 10Th Section OF Ar
ticls l Of the Constitution OF l848. refer
red 10 by Mr.. Halleck 10 a. follows: "Nor
shall any lottery hereafter DO authorised
or any sale Of lottery tickets allowed with.
In this State"
In tho Governors Of the Almshouse ".
American Art Union, supra. IL was con.
tended by Charles O'Connor. counsel for
the Art Union, - IL 10 here, that the Con.
stitution was only intended 10 prevent the
mischievous practice Of raising 0 revenue
by public lotteries, which had been for
many years In full vigor both In England
and In this country. and that the prohibi.
tions OF tho Constitution were only directed
against this particular evil. He referred
to the fact, a. do counsel hero, that ''from
l709 TO 1924 public lotteries were author.
lied Ut every session Of Parliament" He
also referred TO tho debates Of the Consti.
tutional Convention Of 1871. for the pur.
pose Of showing that I" public lotteries for
pecunisry prizes ~ Q means OF raising
revenue were alone within the contempla-
ton Of shat body"
Tho Constitution Of 1921 10 In these
words: "No lottery shall hereafter be
authorized In this State, and tho Legis.
lature shall pass laws to 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 to be sub
stantislly the same % the Constitution Of
1916, said: This prohibition 10 general.
II must be held 10 embrace all lotteries,
unless there DO some very clover and salts.
factory reason for understanding IL In .
more limited sense. It was urged upon
the argument that public lotteries for pc
cuniary prizes a. . means Of raising rev.
enue were alone within the contemplation
Of the trainers Of the Constitution. But
lotteries have never been created within
this State for the purpose Of general rev.
enue, and there 10 therefore no ground for
believing that the prohibition was In.
tended TO DO limited TO lotteries for that
object. This would have been restraining
. mischief which did not exist, and toler.
ating that which did. Lotteries had been
authorized by the Legislature for the benz.
at Of colleges, for the making Of roads, for
the building Of bridges, for the improve
mem Of ferries. for the erection OF hos.
pitfalls, and for various other purposes
equally commendsble and beneficial. All
these were clearly within tho prohibition.
The prohibition was not aimed Ut the OBJ.
jects for which lotteries had been author.
lied, but ct that particular mode Of accom-.
plishing such objects. II was founded on
the moral principle that evil should not be
done that good might follow, and upon the
more cogent practical reason that the evil
consequent on this pernicious kind OF
gambling greatly overbalancsd In the
aggregate any good likely TO result from
II. The promotion Of Se hns arts 10 nm
doubtedly 3 o~ommendabls object, but the
prohibition contains NO exception In Ito
favor on that ground. .
lQ6 lutoubiOu VI buo iEsuuIb W Wv SoA-
stitution undoubtedly was 10 forbid the
future granting Of any such lotteries ~
had Ut any time previously beon author
ICED by law. and BY requiring the Legis.
lsture to pass laws 70 prevent the sale Of
all lottery tickets, 10 put an end 70 all
such distributions Of money or goods BY
lot or chance - had thsretofors been for.
hidden by statute under the name OF
private lotteries"
The argument that the words "by this
State" were inserted for the purpose Of
preventing tho Legislature from suthoris
ing public lotteries asa means OF raising
rsvenus. and that the provision was not
intended to prevent the Legislature from
authorizing private lotteries. 10 wholly IN.
tenable. No authority has been produced
In is support and We are satiiaed that
none can be found.
In constituting this provision Of the Con-
stitution the last sentence II - important
- the frst.
II the trainers Of the Constitution had
intended BY the use Of the words: "No
lottery shall be authorized by this State"
10 only limit the Legislative power 70 pub.
liz lottartoa Nond1nNod and ~anaOod aolalv