Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, 1881-12-21

ton Of the plain letter and spirit Of this
provision OF the Constitution. II would
DO o perversion Of the language OF tho Con-
stitution to say that tho Act 10 valid.
Respondents, however. contend that tho
Constitution "Soes not prohibit private
lotteries, and was by It's trainers intended
only to prevent the Legislature from In
volving the State in Q system Of public
lotteries as 0 means Of raising money for
the service OF the State" or, In other
words, that this constitutional provision
was only intended % 0 Limitation ofpower
TO prevent the State, a. . State, from en-.
gazing In public lotteries for tho purpose
OF raising means for tho general revenue
Of the State. Hence they claim that tho
State has the right TO authorize private
parties TO conduct and carry on . lottery
Of the character specified in the informa-
ton.
In support Of this position they refer 10
the debates Of the Constitutional Conven.
ton In California upon the adoption Of Q
provision In the Constitution Of that State
Identical with ours. II II not claimed
that these debates have the weight Of .
judicial decision, but that 10 IL proper to
examine them In case Of doubt a. to the
intention Of the trainers Of the Constitu.
ton. The remarks Of the different mem.
bers shed but little light upon the real
question ct issue. They are as much In
favor Of the position taken by the Attorney
General as they are In favor OF tho respon.
dents. The debates show that the Consti-
tuition Of New York was referred TO In
discussing the provision that was adopted
In California. Mr.. Halleck, who was in
favor Of the adoption Of the lottery pro.
vision, In tho course Of his argument,
said : "In nearly all the new Constitu-
tions you will find this clause. II was not
contained In the old Constitution, but In
most cases, where they have been
amended, u has been introduced. In tho
old Constitution Of New York, TO which
reference has been made In the course OF
debate. no prohibition was inserted.
Many gentlemen present would remember
the famous case OF Yates and Mcintyre,
which involved not only individuals OF the
State In ruin, but was tho occasion OF Sc
rious embarrassment to the State Govern.
ment itself. The result 80 clearly estab.
lished the evils Of the lottery system that
the Convention Of New York, In 1886, In.
serted o clause In tho very first article OF
the new Constitution lsee Section lol
prohibiting lotteries and the sale OF lot.
terry tickets. It appeared 10 him .
that this prohibition was one OF the best
that could DO inserted In the article limit.
ing tho powers Of the Legislature"
The language Of the 10th Section Of Ar
ticle l OF the Constitution Of 1916, refer.
red to by Mr.. Halleck Is as follows "Nor
shall any lottery hereafter DO authorized
or any sale Of lottery tickets allowed with
In this State"
In the Governors OF tho Almshouse Va.
American Art Union, supra, II was con.
tended by Charles O'Connor, counsel for
the Art Union, a. II is here, that tho Con.
stitution was only intended to prevent the
mischievous practice Of raising Q revenue
by public lotteries, which had been for
many years In full vigor both In England
and In this country, and that the prohibi.
tions Of the Constitution were only directed
against this particular evil. He referred
to the fact, as do counsel here, that ''from
1909 to 1894 public lotteries were author.
lied at every session Of Parliament" He
also referred to the debates OF the Consti'
tutional Convention Of 1921, for the pur'
pose OF showing that public lotteries fol-
pecuniary prizes as Q means Of raising
revenue were alone within the contempla'
ton Of that body"
Tho Constitution Of 1921 Is In these
words: "No lottery shall hereafter be
authorized In this State, and tho Legis
laturo shall pass laws to prevent tho sale oil
all lottery tickets within this State except
In lotteries already provided for by law
Tho Courtof Appeals In referring to this
Constitution, which IL declared to DO sub.
stantially tho same Is the Constitution oil
1876, said: "This prohibition is general.
II must DO held to embrace all lotteries,
unless there DO some very clover and salts
factory reason for understanding II In q
moro limited sense. 1t was urged upon
the argument that public lotteries for pe-
cuniary prizes as 0 means OF raising rev.
enuo were slono within the contemplation
Of tho trainers OF the Constitution. Bun
lotteries have mover been created within
this State for the purpose OF general rev.
enuo, and there is therefore no ground for
believing that the prohibition was In
tended to be limited to lotteries for that
object. This would have been restraining
o mischief which did not exist, and toler'
ating that which did. Lotteries had been
authorized by the Legislature for the bene.
at OF colleges, for tho making OF roads, Tor
the building Of bridges, for the improve
mont Of ferries. for the erection OF hos
pitfalls, and for various other purposes
equally commendablo aud beneficial. AL
these were clearly within tho prohibition
The prohibition was not aimed at tho OBJ
jects for which lotteries had been author
lied, but ak that particular mode Of accom-
plishing such objects. It was founded on
the moral principle that evil should not be
done that good might follow. and upon the
moro cogent practical reason that the evil
consequent on this pernicious kind OF
gambling greatly overbalanced In the
aggregate any good likely to result from
IT,. Tho promotion OF the fine arts Is un.
doubtedly o commendablo object, but the
prohibition contains 10 exception in its
favor on that ground. q
The intention OF the trainers Of the Con.
stitution undoubtedly was to forbid the
future granting Of any such lotteries az
had at any time previously been author
lied by law. and by requiring the Legis.
lature TO pass laws 70 prevent the sale OF
al lUtpeIy uckotsi w put ~ YIN 49,"
such distributions Of money or goods by
lot or chance as had heretofore been for.
hidden by statute under the name oil
private lotteries"
Tho argument that tho words "by this
State" were inserted for the purpose Of
preventing tho Legislature from authorize
Ing public lotteries IS Q means OF raising
revenue. and that the provision was moi
intended to prevent tho Legislature from
authorizing private lotteries, is wholly un.
tenable. No authority has been produced
In Its support and NO arc satisfed that
none can be found.
In constituting this provision OF the Con.
stitution the last sentence 10 - important
a. the first.
II tho trainers Of tho Constitution had
intended by the use Of tho words: "No
lottery shall be authorized by this State"
to only limit the legislative power to pub
lilo lotteries, conducted and managed solely
by the State for the purpose Of raising
revenue, they would not have used the
language they did In tho concluding sen.
tence. "Nor shall the sale Of lottery tick
cts DO allowed" These words clearly
show that IL wal not intended that any
Iottorv shortd Ia suthor;vad nv thia Hkata