Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, 1881-05-17

Il has the essential elements aud attri.
butes Of . lottery; the distribution Of prizes
By chance. II 10 lottery within the dshn.
ition given 10 the dictionaries; 10 10 . let.
terry according 10 the ordinary aooeptation
Of that word II 10 . lottery within the
terms specified BY the Legislature OF this
State In tho "Act 70 prohibit lettsriec =
IBtat.. 1878. 1851; 10 10 . lottsry within the
meaning Of that word - used In the Con-
stitutiou.
second-Is ths Act approved March Q.
1881. constitutionalf
This question b q clear and plain 70
our minds q the one already decided. It
will not admit Of any reasonable doubt.
The language Of the Constitution 10 sus.
esptibls Of but one meaning. There 10 no
room for construction. Nothing upon
which any real OF substantial argument
can be based.
"No lottery shall bs authorised By this
Stats, nor shall the sale OF lottsry tickets
bs allowed" [Const., Art, ~. Sso. ~. ]
The Act In question attempts 70 snthor'
ise . lottery. and 10 allow the sale OF lot.
terry tickets In this State In direct yiola-
tion Of she plain letter and spirit OF this
proyisIou OF the Constitution. Il would
be perversion OF tns language o. ,ne oon'
sutuuon 70 ssy tnst tne Ao. .n vsla. A.
hesPonden's, however. ooniena .nG .ns
oonsusnuon ooss nos po sIrs.S .sS
iottsries' ana was oy iu nsmsH isuIsu ~
only 70 prevent sne Legu.e io@ n.,I. i
voiving inc oae IN ym y W psvns ~
iotteries ~ moans y. tsuS ~oney W..
tne serves OF she oD, W; ~ 49,.
words, tnAt Snls oonsutuuonai Pr"sisiou
was only intended - Limitation OF power
10 prevent the State, - . state' from en-
gazing In public lotteries Tor inc purpose
OF raising means for the general revenue
OF the State. Hence they claim tnnt tne
State has tho right TO authorize pri.a1
parties TO conduct and carry on !o1sery
OF the character specified In tho iniorma'
tion.
In support OF this position they refer 70
the debates OF tho constitutional Conven-
ton In California upon the adoption OF
provision in the Constitution OF that state
identical with ours. II 10 not claimed
that these debates have tue weight Of .
judicial decision, but that 10 10 proper 10
intention Of the trainers Of the Constitu.
ton. The remarks Of the different mem
bers shed but little light upon the real
question at issue. They are a. much In
favor Of the position taken BY the Attorney
General % they arc In favor OF the respon.
dents. The debates show that the Consti.
tuition Of New York was referred TO In
discussing the provision that was adopted
in California. Mr.. Halleck, who was in
favor Of the adoption Of the lottery pro.
vision, In the course Of his argument.
said "In nearly ali the new Ceustitu.
tions you will fnd this clause. II Was not
contained In the old Constitution. but In
most cases, whore they have been
amended. IL has been introduced. In the
old Constitution OF New York, 10 which
reference has been made In the course OF
debate. NO prohibition was inserted.
Many gentlemen present would remember
the famous case OF Yates and NcIntyre.
which involved not only individuals Of the
State In ruin, but was the o,cssion Of se.
rious embsrrassme Mt 10 the State Govern
ment itself. Tho result 20 clearly estab-
lisbed tho evils Of the lottery system that
the Convention Of New York. 10 1876. 10.
serted clause IN the very frst article Of
the new Constitution see Section l0l
lOttCIlca euu th0 seAo VI tSt-
terry tickets. II appeared TO him
th.. this prohibition was ono Of tho best
that could be inserted In tho article limit.
ing the powers Of the Legislature"
The language Of the 10th Section Of Ar.
ticle I Of the Constitution OF l8i6, refer
red 10 by Mr.. Hslleck IL - follows: "Nor
shall any lottery hereafter be authorized
or any sale Of lottery tickets allowed with.
In this State"
In the Governors Of the Almshouse 70.
American Art Union, supra. IL was con.
tended BY Charles O'Conuor, counsel for
the Arr Union. ss n In here, that the Con.
.,itntion vss oniv intended 10 prevent the
mi.chisvous practioe Of rsi.ing = revenue
by pubiio lotteries, which had been for
MANY years in full vigor both In England
and In this country, aud that the prohibi.
tiops Of the Constit tut tiou were only directed
sgsins. this particular evil. He referred
70 the fact, a. do counsel here. that "from
1909 to 1874 public lotteries were author.
lied at every session OF Parliament" He
slso referred to the debates Of the Consti.
tutiopsl Convention Of 1921, for the pur.
poss Of showing that " public lotteries for
pecuniary prizes a. q means Of raising
revenue we're alone within the contsmpla-
ton Of that body"
The Constitution OF 1871 10 In these
words: "No lottery shall hereafter DO
authorized In this State, and the Legis.
lsturs shall pass laws 70 prevent the sale OF
all lottery tickets within this stats except
In lotteries already provided Tor BY law"
The Court Of Appeals In referring to this
Constitution, which II declared to be sub.
stautially the same - the Constitution OF
1886, said: "This prohibition 10 general.
Il must 30 held 70 embrace all lotteries.
unlsss there be some very clever and salts
factory reason for understanding u In
moro limited sense. II was urged upon