Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, 1881-07-22

can DO bssed. ,,-
"No lottery shall DO authorized BY this
State, NOR shall the sale OF lottery ackeu
be allowed" (Const., Art. ~. Seo. 2A.l
The Act In question attempts 70 autoor'
ixe Q lottery, and 70 allow the sale Of lot
terry tickets In this State In direct viols-
tion Of the plain letter and spirit OF this
proyision Of the Consultation. II would
be q perversion Of the language Of the Con-
stitution to say that the Actis valid.
Respondents, however, contend that the
Constitution "does not prohibit private
lotteries, and WAS by It's trainers intended
only to prevent the Legislature from in-
volving the State In . system OF public
lotteries ~ . means Of raising money for
the service Of the State" or, In other
words, that this constitutional provision
was only Intended - . Limitation Of power
10 prevent the State, - . State, from en-
gazing In public lotteries for the purpose
Of raising means for the general revenue
Of the State. Hence they claim that The
State has the right TO authorize private
parties TO conduct and carry on . lottery
Of the character specified In the informa.
tion.
In support Of this position they refer 10
the debates Of the Constitutional Conven-
ton In California upon the adoption OF .
provision 10 the C~onstitution OF that State
Identical with ours. II 10 not claimed
that these debates have the weight OF .
Judicial decision, but that II Is proper to
examine them In case OF doubt a. 70 the
intention Of the trainers Of the Constitu.
ton. Tho remarks Of the different mem.
bers shed but little light upon the real
question at issue. They are - much In
favor Of the position taken BY the Attorney
General q they are In favor Of the respon.
dents. The debates show that the Consti-
tuition OF New York was referred 10 10
discussing the provision that was adopted
In California. Mr.. Halleck, who was in
favor Of the adoption Of the lottery pro.
vision, In the course Of his argument
said : "In nearly all the new Constitu.
lions you will dnd this clause. II WAS not
contained In the old Constitution, but In
most cases, whore they have been
amended. 10 has been introduced. In the
old Constitution Of New York, 10 which
reference has been made In tho course Of
debate. NO prohibition wa 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 the occasion OF %.
rious embarrassment 10 the State Govern.
ment Itself. The result 20 clearly estab-
lished tho evils Of the lottery system that
the Convention OF New York, In 1886. In.
serted Q clause In the very first article OF
the new Constitution (see Section 10l
prohibiting lotteries and the sale Of lot.
iery tickets. II appeared 10 him
that this prohibition was one OF the best
that could DO inserted In the article limit.
ing the powers Of the Legislature"
The language Of the 10th Section OF Ar
ticle l OF tho Constitution Of l8i6. refer.
red 10 by Mr.. Halleok 10 ~ follows : "Nor
shall any lottery hereafter be authorized
or any sale Of lottery tickets allowed with.
In this State"
In the Governors Of the Almshouse W.
American Art Union. supra, IL was con.
tended by CHARLES O'Connor, counsel for
the Art Union, % IL 10 here, that the Con.
~stitution was only intended 10 prevent the
mlschievous practice Of raising . revenue
by public lotteries, which had been for
many years In full vigor both In England
aud In this country. and that the prohibi.
tions OF the Constitution were only directed
against this particular evil. He referred
TO the fact, ~ do counsel bore, that from
1909 to 1924 public lotteries were author.
lied at every session Of Parliament" He
also referred to the debates Of the Consti.
tutionai Convention Of 1921, for the pur.
pose Of showing that public lotteries for
pecuniary prizes ~ . means Of raising
revenue were alone within the contempla-
ton OF that body"
The Constitution Of 1891 10 In these
words: "No lottery shall hereafter be
authorized In this State, and tho Legis.
lsturs shall pass laws to prevent the sale OF
all lottery tickets within this State except
In lotteries already provided for by law"
The court OF Appeals In referring to this
Constitution, which II declared to DO sub.
s~tantislly the same % the Constitution Of
1916, said: This prohibition 10 general.
II must be held to embrace all lotteries.
unless there bs some very clever and salts.
factory reason for understanding II In .
more limited sense. It was urged upon
the argument that public lotteries for Pc
cunisry prizes a. . means OF raising rev.
enus were alone within the contemplation
Of the trainers OF the Constitution. But
lotteries have never been created within
this State for the purpose Of general rev.
enue. and there IL therefore no ground for
believing that the prohibition was In.
tended to be limited TO lotteries for that
object. This would have been restraining
Q mischief which did not exist, and toler.
sting that which did. Lotteries had been
authorized by the. Legislature for the bene.
at Of colleges, for the making Of roads, for
the building OF bridges, for the improve
ment Of ferries. for the erection oil hos.
pitfalls, and for various other purposes
equally commendable and beneficial. AL
these were clearly within the prohibition.
The prohibition was not aimed at the OBJ.
jects for which lotteries had been author'
lied. but ct that particular mode Of accom-.
plishing such objects. Il 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
1t. The promotion Of the ino arts 10 IN.
doubtedly . c~ommsndable object, but the
prohibition contains no exception In its
favor on that ground.
The intention Of the trainers Of the Con.
stitution undoubtedly was 10 forbid the
future granting Of any such lotteries -
had ct any time previously been author
ised by law. and by requiring the Legis.
lsturs 70 pass laws 10 prevent the sale Of
all lottery tickets, 70 put an end to all
such distributions OF money or goods BY
lot or chance - had heretofore been for
hidden BY statute under the name OF
private lotteries"
The argument that tho words "by this
State" were inserted for the purpose OF
preventing tho Legislature from authoris
ing public lotteries - meant OF raising
revenue. and that the provision was not
intended to prevent the Legislature from
authorizing private lotteries, 10 wholly nm.
tensble. No authority has been produced
In it, support and We are satished that
can be found.
In constituting this provision Of the Con.
stitution the last sentence 10 u important
a. the first.
II the trainers Of the Constitution bad
intended by the use Of the words: "No
lottery shall be authorised BY this State"
TO only limit the Legislative power 10 pub.
liz lottariaa. conductad and maukQod solely