Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, 1881-06-06

I. has the essential elements and atlrl.
bu.es Of lottery; the distribution u prizes
by chance. Il Is . lottery within the dsAn.
ition given In the dictionaries; IL 10 lot.
t<ry according 70 the Ordinary aoceptation
Of that word |; IL is . lottery within the
terms specified BY the Legislature OF this
State In the "Act 70 prohibit lotteries :"
Istst., 1873. 1851; 10 10 . lottery within the
meaning Of thai word - used In the Con.
sututiou.
Second ia the Act approved March Q,
1881. CONSTITUTIONAL
This question 10 - clear and plain 70
our minds - the one already decided. II
will not admit Of any reasonable doubt.
The language Of the Consultation 10 sus.
o<ptibls Of but one meaning. There In no
room for construction. Nothing upon
which any real or substantial argument
can be based.
"No lottery shall bs authorised BY this
State, nor shall the sale Of lottery tickets
bs allowed" [Const.. Art. Nv. Sso. a.
The Act In question attempts TO author
ize lottery, and 10 allow the sale OF lot
tery tickets In this State In direct viola
tion Of .hs plain letter and spirit Of this
provision Of the Consultation. u would
be q perversion Of the language Of the Con-
stltution to say that the Act 10 valid.
Respondents. however. contend that the
Constitution "does NOT prohibit private
lotteries, and was BY its trainers intended
only to prevent the Legislature from In
volving the State in . system OF public
lotteries a. Q means OF raising money Tor
the service OF the State" or. In other
words, that this constitutional provision
was only intended a. Limitation OF power
to 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
VI the character specified In the informa-
ton.
In support Of this position they refer to
the debates Of the Constitutional Conven-
ton In California upon the adoption OF .
provision In the Constitution OF that State
identical with ours. II 10 not claimed
that these debates have the weight Of
judicial decision, but that IL 10 proper 10
examine them in case OF doubt ~ 10 the
intention Of the trainers Of the Constitu.
ton. The remarks Of the different mem
bers shed but little light upon the real
question at issue. They are a. much In
favor Of the position taken BY the Attorney
General as they are In favor OF the respon.
dents. The debates show that the Consti-
tuition Of New York was referred to In
discussing the provision that was adopted
iu California. Mr.. Halleck. who was in
favor Of the adoption Of the lottery pro.
vision, In the course OF his argument,
ssid !: "In nearly. all the new Coustitu.
contained Ia the old Constitution, but In
Amended. N has been introduced. In the
ola Coustitution Of New York, TO which
Reference las been made In the course OF
debate. NO prohibition was inserted.
Msny oentlemen present vould remstnber
,hs is1ons o.ss Of Yates and McIutyre
-hich inSolvrd moi onIy indiyidu.ls of tbs
St.,a In min. bnt Vas tbs O ,cssion Of ne.
rious emb.rrsssme Mt to the State Govern.
ment itself. This result 10 clearly estab.
ii.hsd tha evils M the lottery systsm ths,
the C,n,sn,,on M New YorL, In isi6. In.
.sr,sS - : clsnss In the verv frst article of
liz nsw Con.,i,p,ion Isse Section l0I
nrobib;,inS In,tsriss and the ssls of LOT.
tsry tickets. II sppesred TO him
~, ~ ~. r,.h;h;i,pn 80 ans q, m. be.,
,L., oan,5 @ ha ;n.sr,sa In ,bs srtiels limit.
inc ,hs novs,. oS ,bs I.evisl,ture."
Tbs ,snvn,ea Of the ioth Section Of Ar.
,,,i. of ~. Con.titntion of Isi6. rrfsr.
red 10 bv NJ. HsileoE II A. follow "Nor
sh,Ii .ny lottery hereafter be authorized
ar ,nv s.Ie of lottsry tickets allowed with.
in this st.te.''
In the Goyernors Of the Almshouse W.
American Art Union, supra, IL was con.
tended by Charles U'Connor, counsel for
the Art Union, a. IL 10 here, that tho Con.
stitutiou was only Intended to prevent the
mischievous 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.
lions Of the Consiitu tiou were only directed
against this particular svil. DC referred
70 the fact, ~ do counsel nere' that from
l709 to 1874 public lotteries were antnor.
lied At every session Of Parliament. ne
also referred to the debates OF the Consu.
tutional Convention Of 1871, Tor ths pur'
pose Of showing that "publio lottsries Tor
pecuniary prizes as an . means OF r.i.ins
revenue were Alone w''nih 'ne con'elnP'A'
aon OF tnat poay; ,oo, =. a. .,...
Inc Consutuuon VI ii ~ aes. i.
Woius: No .Sue M ~
authorised 10 WIS o..N, Anu 'ro nSS,
isture snaii pas. i"sE ~, en-. .o s.s 49,. s
all lottery ueke's Wl'nIn ,uis oAS 1.oeP.
IN lotteries .leAay Pr1siaea ~. " nu vi.
rne ooui. o' Apps,; s,, =, - a..,..ad s ~ ~ " 'nh. MI
Cousu,uuoh, Nnien ue'u naUs..,;.S ~ ~ y,
.tantaliy 'ne Ssne ,s,,S"n - 'nI Go''sar !. asns,.
isio, s.id: In: Paoulo.ou Pos,o.o. -, ,s%,,.r;s. %
!. mus. 20 nslu " e.no..yI 80. 80 .OS % ..,,.'
unless 'nero 20 ,ome yus,,a VIZ s.., q, IN .
factory rou iol unI w.. ,,.s.a 800
more limited sense. ~ W. @ usse1 apor