Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, 1881-06-01

revenue, they would not have used the
language they did IN the concluding sen.
tenoe, Nor shsll the sale Of lottery tick.
ets be allowed" These words clearly
shov that u wss not intended thst any
lottery should b authorised By this State
The words "by this State" q used In
our Constitu ution. and the words "in this
eats," cor within this State" q used
In the Constitutions Of New York, havs
virtually the same meaning.
"No lottery shall b authorised BY thii
Stats. nor shall the sale Of lottsry ticksts
b allowed"
This language applies 70 al lotteries,
whether public or private. To lotteries
conducted BY the State BY the church
by privsts individuals; By hsnsvolsnt and
ohsrisabls associations. and By eorpors.
lions.
No lottery Of any kind can b author.
ised by the Legislsture under the present
Constitution. -
We again repeat what, II seems 70 us,
must b evident 10 every unbiased and In
partial mind, that the language Of the
constitutional provision u too plain for
argument. That under II the Legislature
cannot authoriss any lottsry IN this State.
and that the Act approved March ., 1881.
Il null and void.
We are conscious Of the fact that u was
Unnecessary 70 add anything 10 the reason.
Ing Of this Court In - parts Blanchard.
which 10, Of itself, absolutely conoludve
upon both Of the points We have discussed.
But Il has been attempted, BY . desire
upon our part, TO show that no authority
could 10 found In any Of the adjudicated
cases In the United States 70 sustain the
position contended for BY respondents ;
and that no argument has been advanced
BY respondents. upon either OF these
points. that has not heretofore been Dc.
cidsd adversely 70 them By the Courts OF
other ststss, whore the constitutional
provisions are substantially the same -
our own. ~
I. 10 proper 10 add that We have arrived
st the oonsiusion ststed without consider.
Ing the question Of the morality. or I'm.
morality Of this particular scheme. II
makes no differences whether 10 was set on
foot purely for tho purpose Of raising rev.
enus for the benent Of the "lnsans and
Charitable Fund" Of this State, or whether
IL belonged to that GLASS Of lotteries that
are made up Of peounisry prizes and min
later to the love Of gain whose schemes
address themselves In the grossest and
most revolving form directly 70 that sordid
passion, and to no other sentiment; where
the managers receive . pecunlsry pront
and enlist "a corps Of active seducers TO
draw the weak and uuwary intb the pur.
chase Of tickets" BY extensive advertise.
msnts containing brilliant pictures Of the
favorable chances to acquire sudden
wealth.
II may bs admitted for the purposes Of
this decision, - was krgued BY respon.
dents' counsel. that the people Of this State
are essentially . gambling people, ready
at all times TO take the desperate chances
which lottsriss afford, and that NO In.
furious effects upon the morals Of the peo.
ple would result II this game Of chance
was allowed 70 proceed.
This question 10 one that must be con.
sidersd a. settled BY the adoption OF the
constitutional provision sx psrte Darling,
recently decided.
In the Art Union case, 70 which We have
frequently referred, 10 was claimed that
the enterprise was really Of msritortous
character, and that 10 differed, Ia this 70.
speot, from the lottsriss where the mana.
ayers were 10 receive the lions share OF
the profits. The Court, In answer 70 this
argument, said:
III no lotteries had existed excepting
suoh % 10 contained In the Art Union
scheme. IL 10 not probable that they would
hate besn forbidden BY the Constitution
or BY law. Is misohisfs are certainly not
90 apparent - II its prizes were to bs paid
In money, or - Il would b II framed for
the purpose Of enticing the ns0sssitous and
improvldsnt into its hazards. But this
case cannot b decided according 10
the views We may entertain Of the probable
good or evil consequent upon the exeou'
ton OF the scheme. The Constitution
took away the power Of determining
whsther 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 Il were 70 DO ad.
mItted that the scheme II entirely harm.
less In it, consequences, IL would form no
ground for making IL BY judicial con.
struction IN exception 10 the general and
absolute constitutional prohibition"
Courts cannot make any distinction, 10
this respect, a 10 the nature Of the trans.
action or the character Of persons engaged
in II. Its thsir boundsn duty 70 declare
the Law.
"Ths law knows no person; IL 10 not
made for tho individual man. but for men.
Al the dew Of heaven falls, % 10 bears
alike upon the lust and unjust" lShts
W. Pierce, 9 New, 00k.
Il smiles and frowns upon oil alike. II
makes no distinctions. Submission 70 IL
authority 10 incumbent upon oil.
Third-It 10 unnecessary 70 discuss any
Of the other points suggssssd By rs'Pon'
dsnts' council.
We will not presume. In advance, that
respondents intend 70 violate tie law. :
From the views already expressed 10 u
apparent that IL would make no difference
whether respondents base their right 70
act In the premises under the articles Of
incorporation or under the provisions Of
the Act OF the Legislature. In either even!
their Aoh would b without warrant oi
Law.
The Judgment Of this Court q that the
rsspondents have no right, libsrty, Of
franchise, By virtue Of any law, 70 sdver'
tiss, print, eiroulats or sell any tickets 70
the scheme or enterprise Of the "Nsvsdi
Benevolent Association" within this stats,
or To do any Of the acts specified IN the
statuts, "to aid the Nsvads Bensvoisn,
Association" spprovsd March ., 1851
[Stst., 1881. 1881; and that the costs Of
this proceeding b taxed sgsinss them.
HAwLIT, J.
We concur, LsosAlp, o.J.
BxLxNA1, j.
NOTHING sHoRT OF