Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, 1881-06-29

revenue, they would not have used th,
language thsy did In the concluding sen
tenoe. q Nor shali the sale Of lottery tick
an Be allowed These words clearly
shov thst it vas not intended that snJ
lottery should b. authorised BY this Btst,
~ rhe vords I" b. this State" a used II
our oonstisution. and the words "in thi,
State" "or within this etats," q used
IN he Consultations Of New York. hsvt
virtually the sans mssning. &,
"No lottery shall b authorised By thii
ststs, nor shall the sale Of lottsry tiokstl
bs allowed" -
This Language applies 10 al lotteries
whether public or private. To lotteries
conducted BY the State By the church
by privsss individuals; +; By benevolent and
charitable associations, and BY oorpora
lions.
ixed By the Lsgislsturs under the present
Oonsitution. . . . Q .
We again repsst What, Il ssems 70 a.,
mnst b evident 70 ss.ry unbiased ana In
partial mind. hat ths huguass Of ths
constitutional provifon y TOO plain foi
argument. ThatuS1srn % tAs Lsgislsturs
cannot authorise any lottery in this 6tsts,
and that the ACT approved March ., 1881,
IL mill and void.
We are oonicious Of The fact that u wsi
Unnecessary 70 add anything 70 the reason
Ing Of this Court In - yarts Blanchard.
which 10, OF itself. absolutely oouoiusive
upon both Of the points ws have discussed.
But 10 has been sttempted, by Q desire
upon our part, 70 show that no authority
could 10 found In any OF the sdjudicated
cases In the United States 70 sustain the
position contended for BY respondents
aud that no argument has been advanced
by respondsnta. upon either Of these
points, that has not hsretofors bssn Do.
cided Adversely 10 them By the Courts oi
other States, where the constitutional
provisions are substantially the same q
our own. ....-
Il IL proper 10 add that ws have arrived
st the conclusion stated without consider
Ing the question Of the morality. or i'm
morality Of this particular scheme. Il
makes no difference whether Il wa set Oh
foot purely for the purpose Of raising rev.
enue for the benefit of the "Insane and
Charitable Fund" Of this State, or whether
Il belonged 70 that class Of lotteries thai
are made up Of peounisry prizes and min
lister to the love Of gain whose schemes
address themselves In the grossest and
most revolving form directly 70 that sordid
passion, and TO no other sentiment where
the managers receive . pecuniary prohi
and enlist "a corps Of active seducers 70
draw the weak and unwary into the pur.
chase Of tickets" BY sxtsnsive ADVERTISE
meuts containing brilliant pictures Of the
favorable chances 70 acquire sudden
wealth. ,..
I. may bs admitted for the purposes Of
this decision. q was argued BY respon.
dents' counsel, that the people Of this stats
are essentially . gambling people, ready
ct all times 70 take the desperate chances
which lotteries afford, and that NO In.
furious effects upon the morals Of the peo'
ple would result II this game OF chance
was allowed 70 proceed.
This question 10 ono that must bs CON-
sidsred a. settled BY the adoption Of the
constitutional provision sx parts Darling,
recently decided.
In the Art Union case, 70 which We have
frequently referred, 10 was claimed that
the enterprise was really Of msritorious
character, and that 10 differed, In this 70.
spect, from the lotnriss whsre the mana.
agers were 10 recsivs the lions share Of
the pro8a. The Court, In answer 70 this
argument, said:
"If no lotteries had existed excepting
such q 10 contained In the Art Union
scheme. Il 10 not probable that they would
have been forbidden by the Constitution
or by Law. Its misohisfs are certainly not
20 apparent - II its prizes were to be paid
In money. or - Il would b II framed for
the purpose Of snticing the necessitous md
improviLent into it, hazards. But this
case cannot bs decided according 70
the views We may sntsrtain OF the probable
good or evil consequent upon the execu.
ton Of the scheme. The Constitution
took away the power Of determining
whether this or any other lottery was Of
good or evil tendency, and certainly did
not intend 70 confer that power on the
judicial tribunals. II Il were 70 be I'd.
mitted that the scheme u entirely harm.
less In IL consequences, IL would form no
ground for making it BY Judicial con.
struction an exception 70 the general and
absolute constitutional prohibition"
Courts cannot make any distinction, In
this respect, % 70 the nature OF the trans.
action or the character Of persons engaged
In II. 1t IL their bounden duty 70 declare
the Law.
"The law knows no person II 10 NOT
made for the individual man, but for men.
Al the dew Of heaven falls, 20 IL bears
alike upon the lust and unjust" 6tste
W. Pierce, 8 New, S04.
Il smiles and frowns upon oil alike. II
makes NO distinctions. Submission 10 IL
authority 10 incumbent upon all.
Third-It II Unnecessary 70 discuss any
Of the other points suygsstsd By respon'
dsns' council.
We will not presume. IN advance. that
respondents intend 70 violate tue law.
From the views already expressed IL Il
apparent that 10 would make no dinsrenoe
whether respondents base thsir right tc
act In the premises under the articles oi
incorporation or under the provisions Of
tue Act Of the Legislature. In either event
their Acts would bs without warrant oi
Law.
The judgment Of this Court 10 that the
respondents have no right. liberty, OF
franchise, BY virtue Of any law. 70 adver'
tise, print, circulate or sell any tickets 10
the scheme or enterprise Of the {" "Nevsds
Benevolent Association" within this State,
or 70 do any Of the acts specified In the
statute, "to aid the Nevada Bensvolenl
Assoo,stion," approved March 3. 1881
TStst., 1881, 1851; and that the costs ol
this proceeding BE- taxed against them.
HAwLxY, ].
We concur: LEoxARp, O. j.
BxLxNAP, ].
THE SUN FOR 1881.