Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, 1882-03-11

terry tcke0 IN tnlb btAte IN direct VIOLA
ton Of the plain letter and spirit Of this
provision OF the Constitution. II would
be q perversion Of the language Of the Con.
stitution to say that the Act 10 valid.
Respondents, however, contend that the
Constitution "does not prohibit private
lotteries, and was by its trainers intended
only to prevent the Legislature from In
yolying the State In Q system OF public
lotteries a. Q means Of raising money for
the service Of the State" or, In other
words, that this constitutional provision
was only intended a. . Limitation OF power
10 prevent tho State. as o State, from en-
gazing In public lotteries for the purpose
Of raising means for tho general revenue
OF tho State. Hence thoy claim that the
State has the right to authorize private
parties to conduct and carry on . lottery
Of the character specified In tho informa'
ton.
In support OF this position they refer to
the debates OF the Constitutional Conven'
ton In California upon the adoption OF q
provision In the Constitution Of that State
Identical with ours. It 10 not claimed
that these debates have the weight OF
judicial decision, but that IL Ii proper to
examine them In case Of doubt as 10 the
intention Of the trainers Of the Constitu'
ton. The remarks Of the different mem.
bers shed but little light upon tho real
question at issue. They are a. much In
favor Of the position taken by the Attorney
General as they are In favor Of the respon'
dents. Tho debates show that the Consti'
tuition Of New York was referred to 10
discussing the provision that was adopted
In California. Mr.. Halleck, who was In
favor Of tho adoption Of the lottery pro-
vision, In tho course Of his argument,
said "In nearly all the new Constitu'
tions you will find this clause. II was mol
contained In the old Constitution, but In
most cases, where they have been
amended, u has been introduced. In the
old Constitution Of New York, to which
reference has been mado In the course Of
debate, NO prohibition was inserted.
Many gentlemen present would remember
the famous case OF Yates and Mcintyre
which involved not only individualo of the
State In ruin, but was tho occasion Of So
rious embarrassment to tho State Govern
ment itself. The result so clearly estab'
lished the evils OF the lottery system tina,
the Convention OF New York. In 1876, In.
serted Q clause In the very first article Of
tho new Constitution see Section 10
prohibiting lotteries and tho sale OF lot
terry tickets. 1t appeared TO him .
that this prohibition was one OF the best
that could be inserted In the article limit
ing tho powers Of the Legislature"
The language Of the 10th Section OF Ar
ticle I OF tho Constitution Of 1916, refer
red to by Mr.. Hslleck Is a. follows /: ''Nor
shall any lottery hereafter DO authorized
or any sale OF lottery tickets allowed with
In this State"
In tho Governors Of tho Almshouse vs..
American Art Union. supra, 1t was con-
tended by Charles 0'Connor, counsel for
the Art Union, as IL Is here, that the Con.
stitution was only intended to prevent the
mischievous practice Of raising Q revenue
by public lotteries, which had been for
many years In full vigor both In England
and In this country, and that the prohibi.
tons Of the Constitution were only directed
against this particular evil. Ho referred
to the fact, ~ do counsel here, that 'from
1909 to 1894 public lotteries were author
lied at every session OF Parliament" He
also referred to tho debates Of tho Consti'
tutional Convention Of 1921. for the pur'
pose Of showing that public lotteries fol
pecuniary prizes as Q means Of raising
revenue were alone within the contempla.
ton Of that body"
Tho Constitution Of 1921 Is In these
words: "No lottery shall hereafter be
authorized in this State. and the Lcgis
laturo shall pass laws to prevent the sale Of
all lottery tickets within this State except
In lotteries already provided for by law
The Court Of Appeals In referring to this
Constitution, which II declared to be sub.
stantially the same a. tho Constitution oil
1876, said: "This prohibition Is general.
II must be held to embrace all lotteries,
unless there be some very clever and salts.
factory reason for understanding IL In q
more limited sense. 1t was urged upon
the argument that public lotteries for Pc
cuniary prizes as Q means OF raising rev.
niue were alone within tho contemplation
OF the trainers Of the Constitution. But
lotteries have never been created within
this State for the purpose Of general rev.
enue. and there Is therefore no ground for
believing that tho prohibition was in.
tended TO DO limited TO lotteries for thai
object. This would have been restraining
o mischief which did not exist, and toler'
ating that which did. Lotteries had been
authorized by the Legislature for the beno'
at OF colleges, for the making Of roads, for
tho building OF bridges, for the improve
ment Of ferries. for tho erection OF hos
pitfalls, and for various other purposes
equally commcndable aud beneficial. All
these were clearly within the prohibition.
The prohibition was not aimed at the oh.
jects for which lotteries had been author.
lied, but at that particular mode Of accom-.
plishing such objects. It was founded on
the moral principle that evil should not be
done that good might follow. and upon the
moro cogcnt practical reason that the evil
consequent on this pernicious kind OF
gambling greatly oyerbalanced In the
aggregate any good likely to result from
II. The promotion Of tho fine arts Ia un.
doubtcdly o commendable object, but the
prohibition contains no exception In Its
favor on that ground.
The intention Of the trainers Of tho Con.
stitution undoubtedly was to forbid the
future granting Of any such lotteries as
had Ut any time previously been author
lied by law. and by requiring the Legis.
lature TO pass laws 10 prevent the sale OF
all lottery tickets, to put an end to all
such distributions Of money or goods by
lot or chance a. had heretofore been for.
hidden by statute under tho namo Of
private lotteries"
The argument that tho words "by this
State" were inserted for tho purpose OF
preventing tho Legislature from authoriz'