Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, 1881-12-22
SUPREME COURT DECISION.
UNANIMOUS oprS1os.l

county. The object OF the corporation
being ITO establish and carry on the
business Of providing for and giving pub
lie entertainments, In the State Of Nevada,
OF . musical and scientific character, to
sell tickets OF admission to such entertain.
ments, and to purchase, hold and dis
tribute among the holders OF such tickets
personal property, real estate, chooses In
action and other valuable things, upon
such terms and conditions and In such
manner and q such times ss may be dc.
termined by . Board OF Managers to DO
selected for that purpose BY tho Board OF
Trustees Of this company" II ID pro.
vided that 30 much Of the proceeds Of said
entertainments 'as may DO deemed proper
by the Board Of Trustees, but not less than
$50. 900, from each entertainment, are TO
DO placed In the State Treasury Of the
State Of Nevada 10 DO used only for such
charitable and Acknowledgements a. may
Be detsrmined by the Legislature OF tho
State Of Nevada"
The "Aot to Aid the Nevada Benevolent
Association In aiding In providing means
for the care and maintenance Of the In.
sane Of Nevada, and for other charitable
purposes'' approved March 0, 1881, dc.
clares that at shall be lawful for the Ne.
yada Benevolent Association OF the State
Of Nevada 10 give not exceeding Ave public
entertainments or concerts; to sell tickets
Of admission to the same ; to distribute
among tho holders Of such tickets personal
property, real estate, things In action, de-
mands or other valuables, and to regulate
| tho distribution Of all such property or
gifts by rattle or other schemes Of like char
acter." (Stat. 1881, 166, Sec. ~
The information hled by tho Attorney.
General alleges that respondents, a. Trus-
tees OF said association, arc, without war
rant Of law, advertising, printing,
| circulating and selling tickets for public
entertainments = o." and that they
" base their rights 10 advertise, print, cir.
| culate and sell tickets for the said public
| exhibitions or entertainments, and 10 pur-
chase. use, hold and distribute amongst
the holders OF such tickets personal pro.
| perty, real estate, chooses In action and
other valuable things" upon tho Act Of
tho Legislature above referred to.
The facts set forth In tho information
are admitted by respondents to DO true.
Arc the acts Of respondents without war
rant Of law2
Is the Act Of the Legislature, approved
March o, 1881, constitutional2
First-Is the schomo or enterprise In
which the Nevada Benevolent Associa.
tion" Is engaged . lottery2
This question 10 answered In the afirma-
tive by the decision Of this Court In sr
parte Blanchard, Q New, l04. Is that de-
cision correctp 1t certainly Is. It is sus.
taipod by every DECISION that has boon
rendered by the various courts Ia tho
United States upon this question.
Notwithstanding this fact, wo are now
earnestly asked to declare that the musical
entertainment which the Nevada Bonevo-
lent Association proposes to give Is not Q
lottery. Why not2 What Is Q lottery Z
Every scheme for the distribution Of prizes
by chance Is Q lottery. Governors Of tho
Almshouse Of New York vs.. American Art
Union, 2 n. ", $780, Dunn vs.. Tho PEG.
pie, 40 Ills, 467 State VS.. Shorts, 80 N.
j.; L., 40l I; Randlo vs. State, AZ Tex,
$50 T; Chavannah W. State, 40 Ala, 39G
Commonwealth vs.. Msnderheld, 8 Phil,
$50 ; United States vs.. Olney, l Abb, U.
H., 279.)
A lottery Is o game Of hazard In which
small sums are ventured for tho chance OF
obtaining creator. BELL vs.. State, 3
Hneed., 509.l
"a contrivance for the distribution Of
prizes by chance +; . reliance upon the
results Of hazard . decision Of the values
OF tho adventurer's investment Of tho
favors OF fortune" Is . lottery. wooden
VI. shotwell, 4 Zab., 1861
Where Q pecunisry consideration Is
paid, and II Is determined by lot or chance,
according 10 some scheme held out to the
public what tho party who pays the money
10 to have for 1t, or whether he 10 to have
anything, 1t Is q lottery" Estate vs..
Clarke, SO N. H., s35 Hull VS.. Ruggles,
SO N. Y, 427.j
It makes no difference what name Is
given to tho scheme.
When the element OF chance enters into
the distribution OF prizes IL 10 o lottery.
without reference 10 tho namo by which IL
IL called.
"He may choose to call his business q
gift SALE" said tho Court In Dunn W. PEG.
Pile, supra, "but IL 10 zone the less . lot.
terry, and we cannot permit him to ovade
tho penalties OF the law by so transparent
. device as Q nero change OF NAME. II IL
differs from ordinary lotteries tho differ.
ence lies chiefly In the fact that II Is moro
artfully contrived 10 impose upon the ig.
norant and ~credulous, and 10, therefore,
moro thoroughly dishonest and injurious
10 society,""
"Tho namo given TO tho process and the
form OF tho machinery used to accomplish
the object are not material, provided tho
substance Of tho transaction Is Q distribu.
ton or disposition Of property by lot"
State VS.. Clarke, supra.)
Courts will not inquire into tho name,
but will determine tho character Of the
scheme by the nature OF tho transaction
or business In which the parties are en-
gagged" (Handlo vs.. State, supra.)
"The character Of tho scheme Is In no
wise changed by tho charitable purpose
expressed In Its title, moi by calling tho
drawings entertainments or gift con-
certs.'" (Ex parte blanchard, suprs.)
"Tho fact thatn plan Of distribution has
been determined upon does not relieve tho
scheme OF lis character a. 0 lottery"
Thomas vs.. People, so Ills, 1851
"Nor 10 Il material" said tho Court OF
Appeals In tho American Art Union case,
"to tho question In hand that the prizes
| WeE0 uOt kuOWu huu dooA6heSSa Whcu tuo
| tickets or chances were subscribed and
paid for. The scheme In this respect IL
more Objectionable than . scheme In which
| the prizes are previously fixed, because It
affords less security to the subscribers that
the chance purchased is worth tho money
paid for IT,"
We are Of opinion that the facts stated
In the articles Of incorporation, In the
statutes, and In the information. show that
the scheme Is ono whereby the Legislature
| OF this State, In consideration OF tho sum
Of $780, 600, to DO placed In the State
Treasury, to the credit Of tho "lnsane and
Charitable Fund.-" attempted to authorize
the managers Of tho Nevada Benevolent
Association " TO enrich their own pockets,
at the expense Of tho people Of this and
other States. by holding out promises oil
tho great and sudden gains that might DO
acquired by the ticket holders that
golden prizes would DO the lure to in
cito the credulous and unsuspecting Into
this scheme"
In tho light Of all tho facts that have
been presented II would be absurd to say
that the managers OF this scheme are SIM