Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, 1881-07-19

Ing Of this Court In sr parts Blanchard.
which 10. OF itself, absolutely conclusive
upon both Of tho points VIC have discussed.
But IL has been attempted, by . desire
upon our part. 70 show that NJ authority
could 30 found In any Of the adjudicated
cases In tho United States to sustain the
position commended for BY respondents;
and that no argument has boon advanced
BY respondents, upon either Of these
points, that has not heretofore been do.
cidsd adversely 70 them by tho Courts OF
other States, where the constitutional
provisions are substantially tho same a.
our own.
"A the conclusion stated without consider
ing the question Of tho morality. or I'm.
morality Of this particular scheme. 1t
makes nc difference whether II was set on
foot purely for tho purpose Of raising res,
epue for the benefit OF the "lnsane and
Charitable Fund" Of this State, or whether
IL 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 70 that sordid
passion, and 70 no other sentiment ; where
the managers receive . pecuniary profit
and enlist " . corps Of active seducers 10
draw the weak and unwary into tho pur.
chase OF tickets" BY extensive advertise
meuts containing brilliant pictures Of tho
favorable chances TO acquire sudden
wealth.
IL may DO admitted for tho purposes Of
this decision. - was argued BY respon.
dents' counsel, that the people OF this State
are essentially . gambling people, ready
at al tlmos 10 take the desperate chances
which lotteries afford. and that no In.
furious effects upon the morals OF the pco-
Die would result II this game OF chance
was allowed 10 proceed.
This question IL o that must be con.
sidered ss settled by the adoption OF the
constitutional provision ex psrts Darling.
recently decided.
In the Art Union case, TO which We have
frequently referred. 10 was claimed that
the enterprise was really Of Q meritorious
character, and that IL differed, Ia this 70.
speot, from the lotteries whore the mans.
ayers we're TO receive the lions share Of
the proHts. The Court, In answer 10 this
argument, said:
III uO lUttcIlt1 uhu CAibtcu cACtptiuH
such ~ 10 contained In the Art Union
scheme, II 10 not probable that they would
have been forbidden by the Constitution
or by law. Its mischiefs are certainly not
so apparent - II Its prizes were to be paid
In money, or - II would be II framed for
the purpose OF enticing the necessitous and
improviJent into It's hazards. But this
case cannot DO decided according TO
the views We may entertain OF the probable
good or evil consequent upon the execu-
ton Of the scheme. The Constitution
took away tho power Of determining
whether this or any other lottery was Of
good or evil tendency. and certainly did
not intend 10 confer that power on the
judicial tribunals. II 1t we're to DO I'D.
mittsd that the scheme 10 entirely harm.
less In It's consequences. IL would form NO
ground for making II by Judicial con.
struction an exception to tho general and
absolute constitutional prohibition"
Courts cannot mako any distinction. In
this respect, ~ to the nature Of the trans.
action or the character OF persons engaged
In IL. 1t 10 their bounden duty to declare
the law.
"Tho law knows no person IL 10 not
made for tho individual man, but for men.
As the dew Of heaven falls, 30 II bears
alike upon the Just and unjust" lState
w. Pierce, 8 New, 304.l
Il smiles and frowns upon all alike. 1t
makes no distinctions. Submission to Its
authority Is incumbent upon all.
Third-It Ii unnecessary TO discuss any
Of the other points suggested by respon.
dents' council.
We will not presume. In advance, that
respondents intond to violate tho law.
From the views already expressed IL 10
apparent that Il would make no difference
whether respondents base their right to
act In the premises under tho articles Of
incorporation or under tho provisions OF
tue 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 adver.
tise, print, circulate or sell any tickets In
the scheme or enterprise Of the Nevada
Benevolent Association" within this State,
or to do any Of the acts specified in the
statute. "to aid the Nevada Benevolent
Association" approved March D.. 1881
Stat, 1881. 1861; and that the costs OF
this proceeding be taxed against them.
HAwLEY, j.
We concur LEONARD, @. ].
BELKNAP. j.