Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, 1881-12-16
SUPREME COURT DECISION.
UNANIMOUS oprNIoS.l

county. ING ODlect OF ING CCtpOthtioh
being "to establish and carry on tho
business Of providing for and giving pub
lie entertainments, In tho State Of Nevada,
Of Q musical and scientific character, to
sell tickets Of admission to such entertain
ments, and TO purchase, hold and dis
tribute among tho holders Of such tickets
personal property, real estate, chooses In
action and other valuable things, upon
such terms and conditions and In such
and at such times AZ may DO do
termined by o Board Of Managers to DO
selected for that purpose by the Board Of
Trustees Of this company" II 10 pro.
vided that 30 much Of tho proceeds OF said
entertainments "as may be deemed proper
by the Board Of Trustees, but not less than
$4,000, from each entertainment, are 10
be placed In the State Treasury OF the
State Of Nevada 10 DO used only for such
charitable and benevolent purposes as may
State Of Nevada"
The "Aot to Aid the Nevada Benevolent
Association In aiding In providing means
for the care and maintenance Of the In.
zane Of Nevada. and for other charitable
purposes approved March 0, 1881, do
clares that alt shall be lawful for the Nc.
vadA Benevolent Association Of the State
OF Nevada TO give not exceeding five public
entertainments or concerts; TO sell tickets
Of admission 10 the same ; ~ distribute
among the holders Of such tickets personal
property, real estate, things In action, do
mands or other valuables, and TO regulate
the distribution Of all such property or
gifts by rafio or other schemes Of like char
acter." (Stat. 1881, l66, Sec. ~
Tho information filed by tho Attorney
General alleges that respondents, as Trus-
tees OF said association. are, without war
rant Of law, advertising, printing,
circulating and selling tickets for public
entertainments = = -" and that they
"bsse their rights 10 advertise, print, cir.
culate and sell tickets for the said public
exhibitions or entertainments, aud TO pur-
chase, use, hold and distribute amongst
tho holders OF such tickets personal pro.
perty, real estate, chooses In action n
other valuable things" upon the Act Of
tho Legislature above referred to.
The facts set forth In the information
are admitted by respondents TO be true.
Arc the acts Of respondents without war
rant OF law2
Is the Act Of tho Legislature, approved
March 0, 1881, constitutional
First-Is the scheme or enterprise In
which tho Nevada Benevolent Associa.
ton Is engaged . lotteryf
This question 10 answered In the afirma-
tive by the decision Of this Court In &c
parts Blanchard, 0 New, l0i. Is that de-
cision corrcct2 II certainly Is. II is sus.
taired by every decision that has been
rendered by the various courts In the
United States upon this question.
Notwithstanding this fact, VIC are now
earnestly asked to declare that the musical
entertainment which tho Nevada Benevo-
lent Association proposes to give Is not .
lottery. Why not2 What Is 0 lottery?
Every scheme for the distribution Of prizes
by chance Is o lottery. Governors Of the
Almshouse Of New York vs.. American Art
Union. z N. w.. $50; Dunn VI. The Poo
pie, 40 Ills, ACT /; State VS.. Shorts, 81 N.
j.; L., 40l /; handle vs.. State, AZ Tex,
585 ; Chavannsh W. State, 40 Ala. 500 ;
Commonwealth vs.. Manderfcld, 8 Phil,
$50 F; United States VS.. 0lney, l Abb, U.
g., 279.)
A lottery Is Q gamo OF hazard In which
small sums are ventured for the chance Of
obtaining greater. BELL W.. State. 8
Sneed., 509.)
"a contrivanco for tho distribution Of
prizes by chance ; . reliance upon the
results OF hazard |; o decision Of the values
Of tho adventurer's investment Of tho
favors OF fortune" Is Q lottery. Wooden
vs.. Shotwell, 4 Zab., 1851
"where o pecuniary consideration Is
paid, and II is determined by lot or chance.
according to some scheme held out to the
public what tho party who pays the money
Is to have for 1t, or whether no Is to have
anything. 1t il . lottery" Estate vs..
Clarke, SO N. H.. 335; Hull W.. Ruggles,
SO N. Y, 427.) $3.50
1t makes no difference what namo Is
given to tho scheme.
When tho element OF chance enters into
the distribution Of prizes 1t Is o lottery.
without reference TO the nam by which 1t
IL called.
"Ho may choose to call his business o
gift salo." said tho Court In Dunn vs.. PEG.
pie. supra, "but IL Is non the less o lot
terry, and wo cannot permit him to ovado
the penalties Of tho law by so transparent
Q dovice as o micro change Of name. II 1t
differs from ordinary lotteries tho differ.
enco lies chiefly In the fact that II Is moro
artfully contrived to impose upon the ig-
norant and credulous, and IL, therefore,
moro thoroughly dishonest and injurious
10 society,""
"Tho name given TO the process and tho
form Of the machinery used to accomplish
the object arc not material, provided tho
substance OF the transaction ID o distribu-
ton or disposition Of property by lot"
Estate vs.. Clarke. supra.)
"Courts will not inquire into the name,
but will determine the character Of tho
scheme by the nature Of tire transaction
or business In which tho parties are en-.
gagged" (Randlo vs.. State, supra.)
"Tho character Of the scheme is In no
wise changed by tho charitable purpose
expressed in Its title, nor by calling the
drawings entertainments or gift con.
certs.'" (Ex parto blanchard, supra.)
"Tho fact that no plan Of distribution has
been determined upon does not relieve the
scheme Of Its character as Q lottery"
Thomas vs.. People, 80 Ills, 1851
"Nor 10 10 material" said tho Court Of
Appeals In the American Art Union case,
"toc the question in hand that the prizes
were not known and designated when the
tickets or chances wero subscribed and
paid for. The scheme in this respect 10
moro Objectionable than Q scheme In which
the prizes arc previously fixed. because 1t
affords less security to tho subscribers that
the chance purchased is worth the money
paid for IT,"
We arc Of opinion that tho facts stated
In the articles Of incorporation, In the
statutes, and In Che information, show that
the scheme Is one whereby the Legislature
OF this State, In consideration OF the sum
Of $3.50, 900, to DO placed In the State
Treasury, to tho credit Of the "Insano and
Charitable Fund.-" attempted TO authorize
the managers Of tho Nevada Benevolent
Association I" to enrich their own pockets.
ct tho expense Of tho people OF this and
other States. by holding out promises OF
the great and sudden gains that might DO
acquired by tho ticket holders; that
golden prizes would DO "the lure to In
cito tho crcdulous and unsuspectins into
this scheme"
In the light Of all the facts that have
been presented II would be absurd to say