New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1881-05-12
AGAINST LOTTERIES.


States, and laws in all but two or three others,
absolutely forbid lotteries in all forms. New
York has made it a misdemoanor to take part
in lottery by whatever name called, or 10
let premises for lottery purposes, or to adver-
tise drawings. just now, these laws having
been only loosely enforced, the Governor mas
proclaimed them anew, warning all persons 70
refrain from dsobeyng them and urging dis
trict-attorneys and police to crater vigilance.
What is q lotteryf The popular idea in
cludcs only a distribution of money prizes
made for. the dealers profit. The law uses the
word in a much broader sense. By numerous
decisions il makes no difference whether the
prizes arc cash or other property, OF whether
the purpose is profit or bencvolence. Both
these principles were established for tins
State in the famous American Art Union
prosecutions, about thirty years ago; I'D
which tine management Of very wcll-mean
and fairly conducted distribution of works OF
art. among subscribers, by an annual drawing
of lots. sought To shield their enterprise from
condemnation by showing that the prizes were
paintings and encouragement of art was the
PURPOSE But the Judges sud, in effect, that
any hchrmc is contrary to the lottery laws
which involves Offering for sale shares or
chances in a distribution of property by lot or
hazard. The same has been said throughout
the country; dozen or twenty decisions could
easily be gathered. The principle Is well
shown, also, where the courts override the OBJ
irction. aud say that the concern complained
of j. not a lottery. Last summer, IN the House
of Lords, a ease was heard III which sort OF
ErncGt or Friendly SOcirty had been organized
ON the plan Of members paying in initiation
fees and monthly dues. and then meeting peri
odicnlly and lending the whole fund tO Some
one member on interest for IA term Of years.
Generally these s0cicties, when more members
than one wish the loan, allot it "a the one
who will give the highest interest, or pay a
bonus. This club drew lots; hence com
rlaint. The decision was that it WAS not a
lottery within the English law.
No doubt many of the little schemes so often
seen in full operation at watering places and
resorts of amusement, also at church festivals
and charity fairs, which appeal To the public
to spend a dime or a quarter for "chanre'
of something. are lotteries; though they have
been tolerated, partly because so trivial and
partly because they are scarcely considered H.
LEGAL. But one who sincerely wishes to avoid
violating tllc law Dtfu lOt uh't mum VIM
Guilty ia deciding. You are asked whether 1t Is
"A lottery W offer gold -headcd cane or IA costly
sword to the most popular man; each person
paving ten cents " have one vote In choosing
the recipient. The answer il, No. whose buys
a ticket gets no property. but only right to
vote: and the recipient of the gift obtains it
by suffrage, not by chance. You are asked
whether the candy boy going through the raft
road train to sell "prize packages breaks the
law. Answer: Yes. lie appeals 10 the pas'en-
gers 10 buy chance Of getting an article OF
extra value by good luck.
The law Of this State has long forbidden adj
ycrtising of lotteries; and one instructive de
cision was rendered against the old VAL Street
Rcporicr. That journal advertised the draw
ins, of the Alexandria lottery in the District
of Columbia; and when the proprietor was
prosecuted he argued that, IL the lottery was
lawful in the District, 1t could not he criminal
10 publish an account Of it in this state. But
the Court Of Appeals said that lotteries abroad
were equally within the prohibition with those
at home IL it not equally clear, though 1t
seems not to have been expressly decided, that
advertisements of gift enterprises, rallies ami
other schemes for distributing merchandise by
LOT. are prohibited az well as those OF money
lottcIicsR
Tho Postmaster General was, ut last ac-
counts celebrating how far he will go in ex
crcisng the power which, 80 the Attornoy-Gcn-
cril SAYS is vested in him to the fullest extent
by United States laws, of excluding lottery
corrcspondcncc and circulars from the mails.
We believe he would he justified i'll dealing
with all schemes Offering money prizes as es-
sentially fraudulent. The question of honesty
in management is worth raising only where
other kinds of property are offered 10 con-
duct "A distribution Of NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS.
watches. icwclry, books and the like-so that
each chance sold is worth the price of ticket, may
not be inherently impossible for the manage
mcnt may buy the goods mt wholesale prices
and il they are worth retail price to the WIN
ner, there is a margin for expenses and profit,
vet the winner is not necessarily cheated MOI
80 when money prizes are offered. men no
fairness in management can possibly give him
who buvs a chance an equal return for his
money. The deduction of the least sum for
expenses and profit from the aggregate fund
raised by the sale of uckets-nay, even the
unavoidable loss of interest between the time
of buvipg the ticket and the drawing-neces-
sarilv makes the chance of winning prize
worth less than the sum paid for 1t. This Is
matter of simple mathematical certainty.
fall the Mayors nominations were az deserving
M that of Dr. Woolsey Johnson. who has been
named for Health Commissioner, our citizens wonld
have no criticisms to mako. DIR. johnson is u ply