Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, 1881-07-23
Supreme COURT DECISION.
The Lottery scheme OF the Ne.
vsda osa~veiess Asssciasiss De.
clared Unooastisusional.
UNANIMOUS opIN1os.l

On the lSth DAY OF February, a. ".
1881, articles Of incorporation Of the "Ne-
vsda Benevolent Association" were filed
In the Office OF the County Clerk Of Storey
county. The object Of the corporation
being Ito establish and carry on the
business Of providing for and giving pub
lie entertainments, In tho State OF Nevada,
Of q musical and scientific character. to
sell tickets Of admission 10 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 aud In such
manner and at such times a may DO de-
tsrmined BY . Board Of Managers 10 DO
selected for that purpose by the Board OF
Trustees Of this company" 1t 10 pro.
yided that 20 much Of the proceeds Of said
entertainments .as may be deemed proper
BY the Board Of Trustees, but not less than
$50. 900. from each entertainment, are TO
b placed In the State Treasury OF the
STATE OF Nevada 10 be used only for such
charitable and benevolent purposes - may
BE- determined BY the Legislature OF the
State Of Nevada"
The "Act 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
purpose (spproved March ., 1881. do
| clares that ''it shall be lawful for the Nc.
vada Benevolent Association Of the State
Of Nevada 10 give moi exceeding Ave public
entertainments or concerts; 70 sell tickets
| Of admission to the ame " distribute
among the holders Of such tickets personal
| property, real estate. things In action, de-
| msnds or other valuablss, and 10 regulate
the distribution Of all such property or
Rifts By rsfds or other schemes Of like char.
actsr." tStat. 1851, l66, Sso. ~
The information flsd by the Attorney
General alleges that respondents, - Trus-
tees Of said association. are, without war.
rant Of Law, advertising. printing.
circulating and selling tickets for public
sntsrtsinmeuts a." and that they
" base their rights 10 advertise. print. cir
oulsts and sell tickets for tbs said public
sxhibinons or entertainments, aud ~ pur'
chase, use, hold and distribute amongst
| the holders Of such tickets personal pro.
psrty, real satats, chooses In action and
| other valuable things," upon the Act Of
the Legislature above referred to.
The fActs Set forth In tho Information
are admitted BY respondents 70 DO true.
Are the acts Of respondents without war.
rant Of law7
Il the ACT OF the Legislature. approved
March Q. 1881. consututionalf
First-Is the scheme or enterprise In
which the "Nsvads Benevolent Assoois.
ton I" Ia engaged . lottsry2
This question IL answered In the afhrma-
tive BY the decision Of this Court In sx
parts Blanchard. . New, l04. Is that de-
cision correct2 1t certainly Is. II IL sus.
tairsd BY every decision that has been
rendered by the various courts In the
United States upon this question.
Notwithstanding this fact, We arc now
earnestly asked TO declare that the musical
entertainment which the Nevada Bensvo-
lent Association proposes 70 give Is not =
lottery. Why not2 What Is . lottery 2
Every scheme for the distribution Of prizes
by chance Is . lottery. Governors VI the
Almshouse Of New York W. American Art
Union. z N. w.. 239; Dunn W. The Peo-
pie, ~ Ills, 467 ; State W. Shorts. 81 N.
j.; L., 40l I; Rsndle VI. State. ~ Tex,
085 ChAvannsh W. State, 40 Ala, 3yG |;
Commonwealth W.. Manderfeld. 8 Phil,
$50 T; United States vs.. oinsy, l Abb, u.
b., 279.)
A lottery Is Q game Of hazard In which
small sums are ventured for the chance Of
obtaining greater. tBell W. State, D
Snsed., 609.l
"A continuance for the distribution Of
prizes by chance |; . reliance upon the
results Of hazard I; . decision Of the values
| Of the adventurer's investment OF She
favors OF fortune" 10 = lottery. wooden
". Shotwell, 4 Fab. 1851
Where . %pecuniary consideration 10
paid. and II IL determined BY lot or chance.
according 70 some scheme held out 70 the
public what the party who pays the money
10 70 have for IL, or whether he 10 to have
anything. 1t Is . lottery" Estate vs..
Clarke. IS N. H., S3s Hull vs.. Ruggles.
90 N. Y, ALL
II makes NO difference what name 10
given ~ the scheme.
A rose by aug other name would smell - swset;
= thUrn by any other name would prick a. deep.
When the element Of chance enters into
the distribution OF prizes IL 10 . lottery.
without reference to the name by which IL
10 called.
"Hs may choose TO call his business .
gift SALE" said tho Court In Dunn VI. Poo.
pie, supra, "but Il Ia none the less Q lot.
terry, and we cannot permit him to evsde
the penalties OF the law by 30 transparent
q device % . nero change Of name. II II
differs from ordinary lotteries the differ.
| sncs lies chiefly In the fact that II Ia more
srtfully contrived TO impose upon the ig.
norsnt and crsdulous, and 10. thersfore,
mort thoroughly dishonest and injurious
70 society"
1.-THE name given to the process and the
form Of the machinery used 70 accomplish
the object are not material, provided the
substance Of the Transaction II . distribu.
ton OF disposition Of property BY lot"
(ststs W. Clarke. supra.l
Courts will not Inquire into the name,
but will determine the character Of the
scheme by the nature Of the transaction
or business In which the parties are en-.
gagged" (Rsnde W. State, supra.)
"Ths character Of the scheme 10 In 10
wise changed BY the charitable purpose
expressed In Its title, nor BY calling the
drawings entertainments or gift con.
o~srts.'" (EI parte Blanchard, suprs.)
"The fact that no plan Of distribution has
been determined upon does not relieve the
scheme Of in character - . lottery"
Thomas ". People, SO Ills. 1881
"Eor 10 II material" said the Court Of
Appeals 10 the American Art Union case,
"to the question In hand that the prizes
we're not known and designated when the
tickets or chances were subscribed and
paid for. The scheme In this respect 10
more Objectionable than = scheme In which
the prizes ere previously hxed. because II
affords less security TO the subscribers that
the chance purchased IL worth the money
psid 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 10 one whereby tbs Legislators
Of this State, In consideration {. the sum
Of $25O, 900. to DO placed In the State
Treasury. 70 the credit Of the "Inssns and
Charitable Fund" attempted 10 authorise
the managers Of the "Nevads Benevolent
Association " 10 enrich their own pockets,
At the expense Of the people Of this and
other states, by holding out promises OF
the great and sudden gains that might DO
ac0uired bv tha tioket holders . that