Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, 1881-05-21

revenue, tney Wouio not nave USED tne
language they did In the concluding sen.
tenoe, "Nor shall the sale Of lottery tick.
ets Be allowed" These words clearly
ahov that u wss not intended that any
lottery should bs authorised BY this State
for any purpose.
The words "by this sats," ~ used In
our Constitution, and the words "in this
STATE" cor within this State" - used
In the Constitutions Of New York, have
virtually the ssuAs meaning.
"No lottery shall b authorised By thii
State, nor shall III sale Of lottery tickets
be allowed"
This language applies 10 all lotteries.
whether public o. private. To lotteries
conducted BY the STATE BY the church
by uriyats individuals b. bsnsvoisnt and
chsritsbls associations, and By. corpora
lions. -
No lottsry Of any kind osn b. author.
issd By the LeSislaturs under the present
Constitution. =
We again repeat what, 10 seems 10 n.
mpst be evident 70 every unbiassd and i'm.
partial mind. that the language Of the
coma utioaL provision q too plain for
argument. That under Il ths Lsgislature
cannot authoriss any lottery In this'6tats.
and that the Aot approved March ., 1881,
10 null and void.
We are conscious Of the fact that u was
unnecessary 70 add anything 10 the resson-
Ing Of this Court Ia 90 parts Blanchard,
which 10, Of itself, absolutsly conclusive
upon both Of the points ws have discussed.
But u has been attempted. BY . dsaire
upon our part. TO show that no authority
could bs found In any Of the sdludicated
cases In the United States 10 sustain the
position contended for BY respondents ;
and that no argument has bsen advanced
BY respondents, upon either OF these
points. that has not hsretofore bsen de-.
cidsd adversely 10 them BY the Courts Of
other States, where the constitutional
provisions are substantially the same -
our own.
Il is proper TO add that we have arrived
ss the consiuslon stated without consider.
ing the question Of the morality. or i'm.
morality Of this particular scheme. II
makes NO difference whether IL ives set on
foot purely for the purpose OF raising rev.
enue for the bsneft OF the "lnsane and
Charitable Fund" Of this State, or whether
lt belonged 10 that class Of lotteries that
are made up Of pecuniary prizes and min.
lister to the love Of gain whose schemes
address themselves In the grossest and
most revolving form directly 10 that sordid
passion, and to no other sentiment where
the managers receive . pecuniary profit
and enlist - corps OF active seducers 10
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 State
are essentially . gambling people, ready
at all times to take the desperate chances
which lotteries afford, and that no In.
jurious effects upon the morals Of the peo.
pie would result II this game Of chance
was allowed TO proceed.
This question 10 one that must be con.
sidered a. settled by the adoption Of the
constitutional provision lsx parts Darling,
recently decided.
In the Art Union case, 10 which We have
frequently referred, it was claimed that
the enterprise was really Of msritorious
character, and that IL differed, In this 70.
spect, from the lottsries where the mana.
ayers were TO receive the lions share Of
the profits. The Court. in answer 10 this
argument, said:
"If no lottefies bad existed excepting
such - IL contained In the Art Union
scheme. u IL not probable that they would
have been forbidden by the Copstitution
or by law. Its misohiefs are certainly not
20 apparent - II its prizes were to be paid
In money. or as II would be II framed for
the purpose Of entieing the necessitous and
improviient into ia hazards. But this
case cannot be decided according to
the views we may entertain Of the probable
good or evil consequent upon the execu.
tion Of the icheme. Tho Constitution
took away tho power Of determining
whether this or any other lottery was Of
good or evil tendency. and certainly did
not intend 10 confer that power on the
Judicial tribunals. II Il we're to be i'd.
mittsd that the scheme 10 entirely harm.
less In its consequences, IL would form no
ground for making IL BY judicial con.
structlon an exception 10 the general and
absolute constitutional prohibition"
Courts cannot make any distinction, In
this respect, a. to the nature Of the trans.
action or the character Of persons engaged
In II. 1t 10 their bounden duty 10 declare
the Law.
"Ths law knows no person II 10 not
made for the individual man. but for men.
Al the dew Of heaven falls, % Il besrs
alike upon the Just and unjust" State
". Pierce, 8 New. 80A.l
Il amiles and frowns upon all alike. II
makes no distinctions. Submission TO its
authority IL incumbent upon all.
Third-It u unnecessary 10 discus any
Of the other points suggested BY respon.
dsuts' council.
We will not presume. In advance. that
respondents intend TO violate the law.
From the views already expressed II 10
apparent that 10 would make no difference
whether respondents base their right 10
oct In 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 Of
Law.
The Judgment Of this Court 10 that the
respondents have no right, liberty. or
franchise, BY virtue Of any law, 70 adver.
tise, print, ciroulsts or sell any tickets In
the scheme or enterprise OF the :" Nevada
Benevolent Association" within this State,
or 10 do any Of the acts specified In the
statute, "to aid the Nevada Benevolent
Association" approved March Q. 1881
fStat., 1881, 1861; and that tbs costs Of
this proceeding bs taxed against them.
HAwLxY, ].
We concur LEoNARp, O. ].
BxLxNAP, ].
NOTHING SHORT OF
rInmistsksble benefits conferred upon tens Of