Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, 1881-12-13
SUPREME COURT DECISION.
UNANIMOUS oprSros.l

UNANIMOUS oPINIoN.l
On tho 10th day OF February, A. d.
1881, articles Of incorporation Of the "'Ne-
ysda Benevolent Association" wore filed
In the Office OF the County Clerk Of Storey
| county. Tho object Of the corporation
being "to establish and carry ON tho
business Of providing for and giving pub
lie entertainments, In the State Of Nevada,
| Of a musical and scientific character, TO
| sell tickets Of admission TO such entertain
ments, and TO purchase, hold and dis
| tribute among the holders Of such tickets
| personal property, real estate, chooses In
| action and other valuable things, upon
such terms and conditions and In such
manner and ct such times - may be do.
termined by . Board Of Managers 10 DO
selected for that purpose by the Board OF
Trustees Of this company" II IL pro-
| yided that DO much Of the proceeds Of said
entertainments ''ss may DO deemed proper
by the Board OF Trustees, but not less than
$50. 900. from each entertainment, are 70
DO placed In the State Treasury OF the
6taie Of Nevada 10 DO used only for such
charitable and benevolent purposes - may
be determined BY the Legislature Of the
State Of Nevada"
The "Act to Aid the Nevada Benevolent
Association In aiding In providing means
for the care and maintenance Of the In
sane Of Nevada, and for other charitable
purposes" approved March o, 1881, de-
clares that alt shall be lawful for the Ne.
yada Benevolent Association Of the State
Of Nevada 10 give not exceeding 1--we public
entertainments or concerts; to sell tickets
Of admission 10 the same /; u distribute
among the holders Of such tickets personal
property, real estate, things In action, de-
mands or other valuables, and to regulate
the distribution Of all such property or
gifts by rattle or other schemes Of like char
actor" tStat. 1881, 166, Bee. ~
The information filed by the Attorney
General alleges that respondents, a. Trus-
tees Of said association, are. without war.
rant Of law, advertising, printing,
circulating and selling tickets for public
entertainments = y o." and that they
base their rights 10 advertise, print, cir.
culste aud sell tickets for the said public
exhibitions or entertainments, and 10 pur-
chase, use, hold and distribute amongst
the holders Of such tickets personal pro-
perty, real estate, chooses In action and
other valuable things" upon the Act OF
the Legislature above referred to.
The facts set forth In the information
are admitted by respondents to DO true.
Are the acts Of respondents without war
rant Of lawf
Is the Act Of the Legislature, approved
March 0, 1881, con~stitutionAl2
First-Is the scheme or enterprise In
which the "NevadA Benevolent Associa-
ton is engaged . lottery2
MIR nuaatinn In anawarad In tla af1rmne
tive by the decision Of this Court In &C
parts Blanchard, 0 New, l0i. Is that de-
cision corrcct2 II certainly 10. 1t Is 9
taired by every decision that has been
rendered by the various courts In tho
United States upon this question.
Notwithstanding this fact, wo are now
earnestly asked to declare that the musical
entertainment which the Nevada Bonevo-
lent Association proposes to give 10 not Q
lottery. Why not? What Is . lottery 2
Every scheme for the distribution OF prizes
by chance 10 . lottery. Governors Of the
Almshouse Of New York W. American Art
Union. z N. Y... $50; Dunn vs.. The Peo-
pie, 40 Ills, ACT State W. Shorts, " N.
j.; L., 40i Randle vs.. State. AZ Tex,
o85 I; ChavannAh W. State, 40 Ala. 396 !
Commonwealth vs.. Manderield, 8 Phil,
469 ; United States vs.. Olney, l Abb, U.
g., 279.)
A lottery IL . game Of hazard In which
small sums are ventured for tho chance OF
obtaining greater. BELL vs.. State, D
Sneed., 509.)
"a contrivance for tho distribution Of
prizes by chance . reliance upon tho
results Of hazard ; . decision Of the values
Of the adventurer's investment Of the
favors OF fortune" IL Q lottery. wooden
W. Shotwell. 4 Zab.. 1851
"Whero o pecuniary consideration 10
paid, and IL Is determined by lot or chance.
according to some scheme held out to the
public what the party who pays the money
10 to have for II, or whether no is 10 have
anything. II Is . lottery" (State vs.
Clarke, So N. H., 1856 Hull vs.. Ruggles.
Sc N. Y, ALL
It makes no difference what nam 10
given to the scheme.
When the element OF chance enters into
tho distribution OF prizes 1t 10 lottery.
without reference to the namo by which II
10 called.
"Ho may choose TO call his business Q
gift SALE" said the Court In Dunn W. Peo-
Pile, supra, "but IL Is zone the less . lot.
terry, and wo cannot permit him to ovade
tho penalties Of tho law by 80 transparent
0 dovioo a. Q nero change Of name. II II
differs from ordinary lotteries tho differ
ence lies chiefly In the fact that II is more
artfully contriyed to impose upon the ig-
norant and credulous, and 10, therefore,
more thoroughly dishonest and injurious
10 society"
"The name given 10 the process and the
form Of tho machinery used 10 accomplish
the object are not material, provided tho
substance OF the transaction IL Q distribu.
ton or disposition Of property by lot"
Estate ". Clarke. supra.)
Courts will not inquire into the name,
but will determine the character Of the
scheme by the nature OF the transaction
or business In which the parties are en-.
gagged" (Randle VI. State, supra.)
"The character Of tho scheme 10 In no
wise changed by the charitable purpose
expressed In is title, nor by calling tho
drawings entertainments or gift con.
certs.'" (Ex parte Blanchard, supra.)
"Tho fact that n % plan Of distribution has
been determined upon does not relieve the
scheme Of It's character - . lottery"
Thomas vs.. People, 80 Ills, 1851
"Nor 10 IL material,' SAID the court OF
Appeals in the American Art Union case.
"to the question In hand that the prizes
were not known and designated when the
tickets or chances were subscribed and
paid for. The scheme In this respect 10
more Objectionable than . scheme In which
the prizes are previously fxed. because It
affords less security to the subscribers that
the chance purchased 10 worth tho money
paid for IT,"
We are Of opinion that the facts stated
In the articles Of incorporation, In the
statutes, and In the information, show that
the scheme 10 one whereby the Legislature
Of this State, In consideration Of tho sum
Of $780, 600, to be placed In tho State
Treasury, to the credit Of the "Insane and
Charitable Fund.-" attempted to authorize
the managers Of the Nevada Benevolent
Association " TO enrich their own pockets,
Of the expense Of tho people Of this and
other States. by holding out promises OF
tho great and sudden gains that might DO
acquired by the ticket holders ; that