Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, 1881-07-01

revenue, they would not have used the
| language they did In the concluding sen.
| tence, "Nor shall the sale OF lottery tick.
cts be allowed" These words clearly
| show that IL was not intended that any
lottery should be authorised BY this State
for any purpose.
The words "by this State" a. used In
our Constitution, and the words "in thil
State" cor within this State" a used
| In the Constitutions Of New York, havs
virtually the same meaning.
"No lottery shall bs authorised by this
State, nor shall the sale Of lottsry tickets
be allowed"
This language applies TO oil lottsries.
whether public or private. To lotteries
conducted BY the State BY the church
BY private individuals /; BY benevolent and
charitable associations, and by corpora.
| tions.
No lottery Of any kind can be author.
lied by the Legislature under the present
Constitution. . q = . .
We again repeat what, 10 seems to us,
must be evident TO every unbiased and I'm.
partial mind. that the language Of the
constitutional provision IL TOO plain for
argument. That under Il the Legislature
cannot suthoriss any iottsry in this 6tsts,
and that the Aot approved March ., 1881,
10 null and void.
We are conscious Of the fact that u was
unnecessary 70 add anything 10 the reason.
Ing Of this Court In &c parts Blanchard.
which 10. OF itself, absolutely conclusive
upon both Of the points We have discussed.
But IL has been attempted. BY desire
upon our part. to show that no authority
could Le found In any OF the adjudicated
cases In tho United States 70 sustain the
position contended for by respondents |;
aud that no argument has been advanced
by respondents, upon either OF these
points. that has not heretofore been dc.
cided adversely to them BY the Courts Of
other States, where the constitutional
provisions are substantially the same -
our own.
It Ia proper to add that We have arrived
at the conclusion stated without consider
ing the question Of tho morality, or i'm.
morality Of this particular scheme. II
makes no difference whether Il was set on
foot purely for the purpose Of raising rev.
enue for tho benefit OF the "Insane and
Charitable Fund" OF this State, or whether
IL belonged 10 that class Of lotteries that
are made up Of pecuniary prizes and min.
lister to tho love Of gain whose schemes
address themselves In the grossest and
most revolving form directly to that sordid
passion, and TO no other sentiment where
the managers receive . pecunisry proht
aud enlist "a corps OF active seducers TO
draw the weak aud unwsry into the pur.
chase of tickets" by extensive ADVERTISE
ments containing brilliant pictures Of the
favorable chances TO acquire sudden
wealth.
It may be admitted for the purposes Of
this decision. as was srgued 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 the morals Of the peo.
pie would result II this game Of chance
was allowed to proceed.
This question 10 one that mus. be con.
sidsred Is settled by the adoption Of the
constitutional provision OK parte Darling,
recently decided.
In the Art Union case, 70 which we have
frequently referred, IL was claimed that
the enterprise was really Of . meritorious
character, and that 1t differed, In this re.
spect, from the lotteries whore the mana.
ayers were TO receive the lions share OF
the profits. The Court, In answer to this
argument, said:
III 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 misohiefs are certainly not
20 apparent a. II lite prizes were TO be paid
In money, or ~ II would be II framed for
the purpose Of enticing the neoessitous and
improvident into It's hazards. But this
case cannot be decided according 10
the views We may entertain OF the probable
good or evil consequent upon the execu.
ton Of the scheme. The Constitution
took away tho 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 II we're to be id.
mitted that the scheme 10 entirely harm.
less In its consequences. II would form no
ground for making IL by Judicial con.
struction an exception to the general and
absolute constitutional prohibition"
Courts cannot make any distinction, In
this respect, as 10 the nature Of the trans.
action or the character Of persons engaged
In 1t. 1t 10 their bounden duty 10 declare
the law.
"The law knows no person; II 10 not
made for the individual man, but for men.
A the dew Of heaven falls. 20 IL bears
alike upon the just and unjust" State
W. Pierce, 8 New. 804.
1t smiles and frowns upon all alike. II
makes no distinctions. Submission 70 IT.
authority 10 incumbent upon oil.
Third-It 10 unnecessary 70 discuss any
Of the other points suggested BY respon.
dents oounoil.
We will not presume. In advance, that
respondents intend to violate the law.
From the visws already expressed IL 10
apparent that II would make no difference
whether respondents base their right 10
act 10 the premises under the articles Of
incorporation or under the provisions Of
tue Act Of the Legislature. In either event
their Acts would be without warrant OF
law.
The Judgment Of this Cour. is that the
respondents have no right. liberty. or
franchise, BY virtue Of any law, to sdver.
tise, print, circulate or sell any tickets In
the scheme or enterprise Of the ' Nevada
Benevolent Association" within this State,
or to do any Of the acts specified In the
statute, "to aid the Nevada Benevolent
Association" approved March 8. 1881
tstat.. 1881, 1861; and that the costs OF
this proceeding be taxed against them.
HAwLEY, ].
We concur: LEONARD, O. j.
BELxSAP. ].
THE SUN FOR 1881.