Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, 1881-06-25

II has the essential elements and attri.
butes Of Q lottery; the distribution Of prizes
by chance. It is lottery within the de6n-
ition given In the dictionaries; IL is . lot.
tery according 10 the ordinary acceptation
Of that wore II IL . lottery within the
terms specified by the Legislature OF this
State In the "Act to prohibit lotteries :"
IStat., 1878, 1861; IL 10 . lottery within the
meaning OF that word a. used In the Con-
stitution.
Second -Is the Act approved March 0,
1881, CONSTITUTIONAL
This question is a clear and plain TO
our minds as the one already decided. 1t
win not admit Of any reasonable doubt.
Tho language OF the Constitution 10 sus-
csptible Of but one meaning. There Is no
room for construction. Nothing upon
which any real or substantial argument
can be based. al,
"No lottery shall be authorized by this
State. nor shall the sale OF lottery tickets
be allowed" Const., Art, Nv. Bee. ISL
The Act In question attempts 70 author'
ixe q lottery. and TO allow the sale of lot'
terry tickets in this State In direct viola
tion Of the plain letter aud spirit OF this
provision OF the Constitution. IL would
be . peryersion OF the language Of the Con-
.titution 10 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.
yolying tho State in = system OF public
lotteries a. means Of raising money for
tba seryioe Of lie state" or, In other
words that This constitutional provision
vss only Intended ss a Limitation OF power
,o nreysnt tbe STATE. "A a State, from en-
s.aino in nnblie lotteries for the purpose
Of rsisinr 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 TO
tho debates Of the Constitutional Conven-
ton In California upon the adoption OF .
proyision In the Constitution OF that State
Identical with ours. II 10 not claimed
that tlnse debates have the weight OF q
indici,i Jscision. but that Il Ia proper TO
,Iamine them In case OF doubt rs TO the
in,ention of ths trainers Of tho Constitu.
tion- The remarks OF the different mem
hers sbed hut little light upon the real
onestion At issue. They. are as much in
f.vor of tbe nosition taken by the Attorney
Gsnor.I ss tbev sre In favor of the respon.
dsnts. The debates show that the Consti-
sn,;on n Nav YORK. vxa referred 70 In
Jiscrss,no tbe nrovi.ion that was xdopted
IN Canfopni, Mr.. Balleok. Who vas in
t.vor ~ ,hs sdon,ion Of the lottery pro.
-, ,n ,ie corrsa M bis arqument.
.sa', ,uiVa =. IT, as.-,v a .,, ,ha nsv Gonsti,n.
s;nn. ,, III, ana thi. cjsn.a II was mot
sNn'.;n"d 1vu 49, a. ,ha ola constitntion. but In
'. e..,s vhsra thev have been
moss ~ ' =. H.. haan ,n,rcdro.d Tn the
~. seu Tua.,,,.;.. E - NJ YnrL N which
oia oousu'uvn , " - 80 a.. .ha n,rrsa of
reference mas ,,,a,sNu oeeu Iaue ~ ss' - ;usas,.S
deoate' no pronioiuon was iuso,Iu.
Many gentlemen present wouia rsmenoei
the famous case OF iAtes ana MsinYIo,
which involved not only individnAls oi .ne
stae IN fuin. Out We ~ ,"s ,ho ~ s,.,a Goxe,n.
Iiou: s.S Tha ,asrI, sn c,s.r,v est.b.
I'h, Myn' '.son .S =, ,Sa io,,srv systsr tbst
t1S ,ha Taa.sn,,nn VIZ s ~ Nsv yort In isi6. I'm.
s suo oV . ",.nso ~ ,hs vsrv frst .r,icis Of
C.S..i,,,io, Ia, sso,;on mi
tne neM .vnso. 's.na;s. '' ,ha ~ .sia ~ io,i
-, ,;,L.,s II, nn..red IN him 4
mry .Ise W., a.u w.s - ana % ~ Tho bes,
.i,s. @ oon,d @ ha ;n.sr,ad in ,be srticle limit.
;na' ;na ,So toua nawsrs uv ~ ,bs Isgisl.tpre."
~ M W. ,ln.n.ca ~ ,ha io,h Ssction NJ Ar.
~, SSn.,;,n,;or ~ isie r.fsr.
uo,e y. =. NJ NJ ~ T"i,.cS a. a. Soi,ows, "Nor
stu " ia,,.rr hsreaf,er ho Authorized
sn.n aay .o ~ ,o,,arv ,icSo,s sj,ovsd with.
sny S.N,,
~ tu,S NJ, 80. 1a.-or. -, tho A,r.bouse Va.
,, sno ~, tin,or .nn,s n Was con.
s.n -. Hh.rIss 1'oonnor. counsel for
nnu.u ~ Hn;nr ss a, ia here. that the Con.
s.v s.,,.,;o, n -ss oniv In tsndeJ IN preyept the
u,is.t,,..ons nr.ctice of raisipR a revenue
-, nnhiic latteries. which hsd been for
~ 30, "a In fniI vigor both In England
sna In this coun,ry. and that the prohibi.
,,ons M ,be Constitution were only directed
scainst this psrticulsr evil, He referred
~ the fact. a. do counsel here, that "irom
i70e to Islt public lotteries were author.
;,.d M every session of Parliament" Ho
.,.o r.,erred 10 tho debates of the Consti.
,,,;on.i Copvention of 1921. for the pur.
''.,s.. - showino that :. publio lotteries for
pecnniary prizes az q means OF raising
rsvsnne vere alope within the contompls.
tion Of ths. body"
The Constitution OF 1891 Is In these
words: "No lottery shall hereafter be
authorized in this State, and the Legis.
lsture shsll pass laws 70 prevent tho sale Of
siilottery tickets within this State except
In lotteries already provided for by law"
The Court Of Appeals In referring to this
Constitution, which IL declared to be sub
stautially the same a the Constitution Of