Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, 1881-07-18

revenue, they would not have used the
language they did IN the concluding sen.
tenee. :" Nor shall the sale OF lottery tick
ets be allowed" These words clearly
shov that It was not intended that any
lottory should be authorised by this State
for any purpose.
The words "by this State" - used In
our Constit ution. and the words "in this
state" cor within this State" q used
| In The Constitutions Of New York, have
virtually the same meaning.
"No lottery shall be authorised by this
State, nor shall the sale Of lottery tieksts
b. allowed"
This language applies to all lotteries,
whether public or private. 10 lotteries
conducted by the State By the church |;
by private individuals; by benevolent and
charitable associations, and By corpora.
/ tons.
No lottery Of any kind can bs author.
ised BY the Lsgislature under the present.
Constitution. .
We again repeat what. II seems TO rs.
must be evident 10 every unbiased and i'm.
partial mind, that the language Of the
constitutional provision 10 too plain for
argument. That under Il the Legislature
cannot authorize any lottery 10 this State,
and that the Act approved March ., 1881,
10 null and void.
We are conscious Of the fact that u was
unnecessary 10 add anything 70 the reason.
ing Of this Court In - parts Blanchard.
which 10. OF itself. absolutely conclusive
upon both Of the points we have discussed.
But IL has been attempted. by desire
upon our part. 70 show that no authority
could be found In any Of the sdjudlcatsd
cases In the United States to sustain the
position commended for by respondents
and that no argument has been advanced
by respondents, upon either OF these
points, that has not heretofore been do.
cided adversely to them BY the Courts OF
other States, where tho constitutional
provisions arc substantially the same -
our own.
Il 10 proper 10 add that We have arrived
st the conclusion stated without consider
ing the question OF the morality. or i'm.
morality Of this particular scheme. It
makes no difference whether II was set on
foot purely for the purpose OF raising rev.
enue for the benefit OF the "lnsane and
Charitable Fund" Of this State. or whether
1t belonged 70 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 70 no other sentiment whore
the managers receive Q pecunisry pront
and enlist ga corps OF active seducers to
draw the weak and unwary Into the pur-
chase Of ticksts" by extensive advertise.
msnts containing brilliant pictures OF the
favorable chances to acquire sudden
wealth.
II may be admitted for the purposes Of
this decision, - was argued by respon.
dents counsel, that the people OF this State
arc essentially . gambling people, ready
at all times 70 take the desperate chances
which lotteries afford, and that NO In
furious effects upon the morals OF the peo.
pie would result II this game OF chance
was allowed to proceed.
This question 10 ono that must be con.
sidered a. settled by the adoption OF the
constitutional provision sI psrto Darling,
recently decided.
In the Art Union case. 10 which We have
frequently referred. IL was claimed that
the enterprise was really OF meritorious
character, and that IL differed, In this re-
spect. from the lotteries where the mana.
ayers were TO receive the lions share OF
the profits. The Court, In answer 10 this
argument, said:
"If no lotteries had existed excepting
such a. 10 contained In the Art Union
scheme, It 10 not probable that they would
have been forbidden by the Constitution
or by law. It's misohiefs are certainly not
20 apparent ~ II its prizes were to be paid
In money, or a. IL would be II framed for
tho purpose Of entioing the necessitous and
improvidsnt into its hazards. But this
case cannot be decided according TO
the views We may entertain OF ths probable
good or evil consequent upon the sxecu.
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 to confer that power on the
judicial tribunals. II II we're to be I'd.
mitted that the scheme 10 entirely harm.
less In its consequences, IL would form no
ground for making 10 BY judicial con.
struction an exception 10 the general and
absolute constitutional prohibition"
Courts cannot make any distinction, In
this respect, a. 10 the nature Of the trans.
action or the character Of persons engaged
In 1t. ltis their b,undsn duty TO declare
the law.
"The law knows no person; II 10 not
made for the individual man. but for men.
A. the dew Of heaven falls, % IL bears
alike upon the just and unjust" State
W. Pierce, 8 New, S04.
It smiles and frowns upon all alike. II
makes no distinctions. Submission 70 its
authority 10 incumbent upon oil.
Third-lt 10 unnecessary 10 discuss any
Of the other points suggested BY rsspon.
dents' council.
We will not presume. In advance, that
respondents intend to violate the law.
From the views already expressed II 10
apparent that IL would make no difference
whether respondents base their right TO
act 10 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 IL that the
respondents have no right. liberty, or
franchise, BY virtue Of any law, to advsr.
tiss, print, circulate 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
[Stat., 1881. 1851; and that the costs Of
this proceeding be taxed against them.
HAwLrT, ].
We concur: LEONARD, @. ].
BELKSAP. ].