Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, 1882-03-27

cases In the United States 70 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 de-
cided adversely 10 them BY the Courts Of
other States, where the constitutional
provisions are substantially the Same -
our own.
Il 10 proper to add that We have arrived
At the conclusion stated without consider-
ing Che question Of the morality, or i'm
morality Of this particular scheme. II
makes no difference whether IL was set on
foot purely for the purpose OF raising rev.
cnue for the benefit OF the "lnsane and
Charitable Fund" OF this State. or whether
II belonged to that class Of lotteries that
arc made up Of pecuniary prizes and min
lister to the love Of gain I; whose schemes
address themselves In the grossest and
most revolving form directly 10 that sordid
passion, and TO no other sentiment; where
tho managers receive . pecunisry pront
and enlist Z" . corps Of active seduccrs 70
draw the weak and unwary into the pur.
chase Of tickets" by extensive advertise
ment containing brilliant pictures OF tho
favorable chances 10 acquire sudden
wealth.
It may DO 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 to taks the desperate chances
which lotteries afford, and that no In.
furious effects upon the morals OF the PEG.
pie would result II this game Of chance
was allowed 10 proceed.
This question 10 one that must be con-.
sidered - settled by the adoption Of the
constitutionatprovision OK parte Darling.
recently decided
In the Art Union case, TO which we have
frequently referred, IL was claimed that
the enterprise was really Of . meritorious
character, and that II differed. In this re-
spect, from the lotteries where the mana.
ayers were 10 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 tho Art Union
scheme, IL 10 not probable that hey would
have been forbidden by the Constitution
or by law. Is mischiefs arc certainly not
20 apparent a. II Its prizes were to DO paid
In money, or a. II would be II framed for
the purpose OF enticing the neoessitous and
improvident into Its hazards, But this
case cannot be decided according to
the views we may entertain OF the probable
good or evil consequent upon the execu-
ton Of the scheme. Tho 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 It were to DO sd-
mitted that the scheme 10 entirely harm.
less In its consequences, IL would form NO
ground for making IL by judicial o n
struction an exception 10 the general and
absolute constitutional prohibition"
"The law knows NO person ; IL 10 no
made for tho individual man, but for men.
As the dew Of heaven falls, 70 Il bears
alike upon the Just and unjust" Estate
VI. Pierce, 8 New, 30i.l
Il smiles and frowns upon all alike. It
makes no distinctions. Submission to Its
authority 10 incumbent upon all.
Third-It is unnecessary TO discuss any
Of the other points suggested by respon-
dents council.
We will not presume, In advance, that
respondents intend TO violate the law.
From tho views already expressed IL 10
apparent that II would mako NO difference
whether respondents base their right to
act In 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.
Tho judgment OF this Court Ia that the
respondents have NO right. liberty, or
franchise, by virtue Of any law. to sdver.
tise, print, circulate or sell any tickets In
the scheme or enterprise Of tho Nevada
Benevolent Association" within this State,
or to do any Of tho acts specified In the
statute. $50 aid the Nevada Benevolent
Association" approved March 9. 1881
Stat, 1881, 1851; and that the costs Of
this proceeding DO taxed against them.
HAwLEY, J.
We concur LEONARD, O. ].
BELKNAP, j.