Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, 1881-08-02

ooptUio VI uukou1 noAoAo8. 1900
room for construction. Nothing upon
which any real or substantial arguments
can DO based.
"No lottery shall be authorized By this
State, nor shall the sale Of lottery ticket:
be allowed" tIConst., Art, ". Bee. a.
The Act In question attempts 70 author.
ixs Q lottery. aud 10 allow the sale OF lot
tory tickets In this State In direct viola
ton Of the plain letter and spirit OF this
provision OF the Constitution. II would
Be- Q perversion Of the language Of the Con.
stitution TO say that tho Act 10 valid.
Respondents. however. oonteud that the
Constitution "does not prohibit private
lotteries, and was BY Ii frsmsrs intended
only 70 prevent the Legislature from In.
volving the State In . systsm OF public
~ Q 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, - . Btate, from en-
gazing In public lotteries for the purpose
Of raising means for the general revenue
Of the State. Hence they claim that tho
State has the right 10 authorize private
TO conduct and carry on . lottery
Of the character specified In the informs-
ton.
In support Of this position they refer 70
the debates Of the Constitutional Conyen.
ton In California upon the adoption OF .
provision In the Constitution Of that State
Identical with ours. II is not claimed
that these debates have the weight OF .
judicial decision. but that IL 10 proper 70
examine them In case Of doubt a. 10 tho
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 are - much In
favor OF the position taken BY the Attorney
General % they are In favor Of the respon.
dents. The debates show that the Consti-
tuition OF New York Was referred 70 In
discussing the provision that was adopted
In California. Mr.. Hsllsck, who was In
favor Of the adoption OF the lottery pro.
vision, In the course Of his argument.
said : "In nearly all the new Constitu-
lions you will And this CLAUSE. II was not
contained In the old Constitution, but In
most cases. where they have been
amended. 4. has been introduced. In the
old Constitution Of New York, 10 which
reference has been made In the course Of
debate, no prohibition VA inserted.
Many gentlemen present would remember
the famous case OF Yates and Mcintyre.
which involved mot only individuals OF the
State In ruin, but wa tho occasion OF So
rious embarrassment TO the State Govern.
ment itself. The result 90 clearly estab-
lished tho evils Of the lottery system that
the Convention OF New York, In 1886. In.
serted . clause In the very first article Of
the new Constitution lsee Section l0l
prohibiting lotteries and the sale OF lot.
terry tickets. It appeared 70 him So
that this prohibition was q OF the best
that could be inserted In the article limit.
Ing the powers Of the Legislature."
The language Of the 10th Section OF Ar
ticle I Of the Constitution OF 1886. refer
red 10 by Mr.. Halleck Ii q follows: "Nor
shall any lottery hereafter be authorized
or any sale Of lottery tickets allowed with.
In this State"
In the Governors Of the Almshouss W.
American Art Union. supra, 10 was con-
tended by Charles 0'Connor, counsel for
the Art Union, a. IL 10 here, that the Con-
stitution Wal only intended To prevent the
mischievous practice OF raising . revenue
by public lotteries, which had been for
many years In full vigor both In England
aud In this country. and that the prohibi.
tions Of the Constitution were only directed
against this particular evil. He referred
to the fact, a. do counsel here, that ''from
l709 to 1924 public lotteries were author.
lied at every session Of Parliament" He
also referred to the debates Of the Consti-
tutional Convention Of 1921, for thepur.
pose OF showing that " public lotteries for
pecuniary prizes - . means OF raising
revenue were alone within the contempla-
ton Of that body"
Tho Constitution OF 1871 is In these
words: "No lottery shall hereafter DO
authorized In this State, and the Legis.
laturs shall pass laws 70 prevent the sale OF
all lottery tickets within this State except
In lotteries already provided for BY law"
Tho Court OF Appeals In referring 10 this
Constitution, which II declared TO DO sub
stautislly tho same - the Constitution Of
1916, said: "This prohibition 10 general.
II must DO held 70 embrace all lotteries,
unless there be some very clever and salts.
factory reason for understanding II In Q
more limited sense. Il 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 Consultation. 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 10 lotteries for that
1ht>.t Till. .nrtl hsva ham raatrsfnfnO
Q mischief which did not exist, and toler-
ating that which did. Lotteries had been
authorized by the Legislature for the bens-
at Of colleges, for tho making Of roads, for
the building OF bridges, for the improve
msnt Of f~srries. for the erection Of hos.
pitfalls, and for various other purposes
equally oommendsble and beneficial. All
these were clearly within the prohibition.
The prohibition was not aimed Ut the OBJ.
jects for which lotteries had been author.
lied, but at 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 overbalanced In tho
aggregate any good likely 10 result from
IL. The promotion Of the hne arts 10 I'M
doubtedly . commondable object, but the
prohibition contains no exception In its
favor on that ground. =
The intention Of the trainers Of the Con.
shtution undoubtedly Wal 10 forbid the
future granting Of any such lotteries -
had ct any time previously been author
lied by law. and BY requiring the Legif-
lsturs TO pass laws 70 prevent the sale OF
all lottery tickets, 10 put an end to all
such distributions Of money or goods BY
lot or chance - had heretofore been for.
hidden BY statute under the name OF
private lotteries"
The argument that the words "by this
State" we're inserted for the purpose Of
preventing the Legislature from authoris
Ing public lotteries asa means OF rsising
revenue. and that the provision was not
intended 10 prevent the Legislature from
authorizing private lotteries. IL wholly nm.
tensble. No authority has been produced
In it, support and We are satisned that
none can DO found.
In constituting this provision OF the Con.