Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, 1881-05-24
GOLD HILL STOREY CO.. MAY ~ 1881


revenue, they would not have used the
Language thsy did IN The concluding sen.
tenoe, :" Nor shsll the sale Of lottery tick
Ar Be allowed" These words clearly
show that 70 was not intended that any
lottery should b authorized BY this 8tate
The vords /" by this State" q used In
our Ceusti itatiou. and the words " In this
aats." "or within this sats," q used
IN The OopsdtuHons Of New York, have
virtually Tie same meaning.
"No lottsry shall b authorised By this
stats, nor shall ~ sale Of lottsry tloksts
b allowed"
Thls language applies V al lotteries.
vhsthsr public O. privats. To lottsries
ooudustsd b the STATE By The church ;
by privAts individuals BY bsasvolsnt and
ohsritabls associations, and hy -oorpors-
lions. M t
No lottery of any kind csa b suthor.
ised by The tsgislsturs undsr the prsssnt
Consultation. s&&&s&s
We again repeat what, u seems 70 %.
must b evident 70 every unbiased and In.
partial mind, that the language Of the
constitutional provision is TOO plain for
argument. That under 10 the Legislature
oannos aatheeiss any lottery IN This State,
.sad thas ths Asy approved March ., 1881,
10 null and void.
We arc conscious Of the fast that 10 was
unnecessary 10 add snythlngto the reason.
Ing Of this Court IN sx ports Blanchard.
which 10, Of itself. absolutely conclusive
upon both Of the points We have discussed.
But 10 has been attempted, BY desire
upon our part. 10 show that no authority
could 10 found In any OF the adjudioated
cases 10 the United States 70 sustain che
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.
oided adversely to them BY the Courts Of
other States, where the constitutional
provisions are substantially the same -
our own.
Il 10 proper TO add that Va have arrived
at the conslusion stated without consider
ing the question Of the morality. or i'm.
morality Of this particular scheme. II
makes no difference whether 10 was set on
foot purely for the purpose Of raising rev.
enus for the bsneht OF the "lnsane 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 10 tho love Of gain whose schemes
address themselves In the grossest and
most revolving form directly 70 that sordid
passion, and 70 no other sentiment; whore
the managers receive . pecunisry proft
aud enlist "a corps Of active seducers TO
draw the weak and unwary into the pur.
chase Of tickets" BY extensive advertise.
msnts containing brilliant pictures Of the
favorable chances 10 acquire sudden
wealth. !.
Il may be admitted for the purposes Of
this decision. % was argued BY respon-
dents' counsel, that the people OF this Stats
are essentially . gambling people, ready
at all times to take the desperate ohances
which lotteries afford, and that NO In.
jurieus effects upon the morals Of the peo.
pie would result II this game OF chance
was allowed 10 proceed.
This question 10 one that must be con-
sidsred ~ settled by the adoption Of the
constitutional provision lex parte Darling,
recently decided.
In the Art Union case, 70 which ws have
frequently referred, IL was claimed that
the enterprise was really Of meritorious
character, and that It differed, IN this 70.
spect, from the lotteries whore the mana.
aRers were 10 receive the lions share Of
the profits. The Court. In answer 10 this
argument, said:
II 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 mischiefs arc certainly not
30 apparent - II its prizes were to be paid
In money, or - II would be II framed for
the purpose Of entioing the necessitous and
improvident into its hazards. But this
case cannot bs decided according to
the views We may entertain Of the probable
good or evil consequent upon the execu.
ton Of the scheme. The Constitution
took away the power Of determining
whether this or any other lottery was Of
good or evil tendency. and certainly did
not intend 70 confer that power on the
judicial tribunals. II IL were 70 be ad'
mitted that the scheme 10 entirely harm
less In its consequences, IL 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, % to the nature Of the trans.
action or the character Of persons engaged
In Il. 1t IL their bounden duty 70 declare
the law.
"The law knows no person II 10 not
made for tho individual man. but for men.
Az the dew Of heaven falls, 20 IL bsars
alike upon the Just and unjust" State
W. Pierce, 8 New, 90A.
1t smiles and frowns upon all Alike. ~
makes no distinctions. Submission 70 its
authority 10 Incumbent upon all.
Third-It IL unnecessary 70 discus any
Of the other points suggested By rsspon'
dsnts' council.
We will not presume, In advance, that
respondents intend 10 violate the law.
From the views already expressed u 10
apparent that 10 would make no difference
whether respondents base their right TO
act iu the premises under the articles OF
incorporation or under the provisions Of
the Act Of the Legislature. In either event
their Acts would be without warrant o.
Law.
The Judgment Of this Court Il that the
respondents have NO right. liberty. or
franchise. BY virtue Of any law. TO Adver'
tiss, print, circulate or sell any tickets in
the scheme or enterprise Of the :" Nevads
Benevolent Association" within this State,
or W do ahy Of the acts specified In the
statute, "to aid <he Nevada Benevolent
Association" approved March Q. 1881
(Stat., 1881, lee1; and that the costs OF
this proceeding bs taxed against them.
HAwLIY, ].
We concur; LEoxAap, O. J.
BxLKSAP. ].
NOTHING SHORT OF
r,r,,...s.hls bsnsdts coufsrrsd upon tens Of