Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, 1882-03-22

tiUu VI bno pam iotof ana bplIlt OF tulb
provision Of the Constitution. Il would
be . perversion Of the language Of the Con.
stitution 70 say that the Act d valid.
Respondents, however, contend that the
Constitution does not prohibit private
lotteries, and was by its trainers intended
only 10 prevent the Legislature from In
volving the State In , system Of public
lotteries Is . means Of raising money for
the service Of the State" or, In other
words. that this constitutional provision
was only intended - . Limitation Of power
10 prevent the State, - . State, from en-
gazing In public lotteries for the purpose
Of raising means for the general revenue
Of the State. Hence they claim that the
State has the right 10 authorize private
parties TO conduct and carry on . lottery
Of the character specified In the informa-
ton.
In support Of this position they refer To
the debates Of the 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 the weight Of .
judicial decision, but that Il ID proper 10
examine them In case OF doubt a. to the
intention Of the trainers Of the Constitu-
ton. The remarks Of the different mem.
bers shed but little light upon the real
question ct issue. They are u much In
favor Of the position taken BY the Attorney
General - they are In favor Of the respon.
dents. The debates show that the Consti.
tuition OF New York Was referred 10 In
discussing the provision that wal adopted
In California. Mr.. Halleok, who was in
favor Of the adoption Of the lottery pro.
vision, In the course OF his argument,
said /: "In nearly all the new Constitu.
lions you will find this clause. II was not
contained In the old Constitution, but In
most cases, where they have been
amended, II has been introduced. In the
old Constitution Of New York. TO 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 Mcintyre,
which involved not only individuals Of the
State In ruin. but was tho occasion OF So
rious embarrassment to the State Govern.
ment itself. The result 90 clearly estab.
lished the evils Of the lottery system that
the Convention OF New York. In 1876, In.
serted Q clause In the very first article OF
tho new Constitution (see Section l0l
prohibiting lotteries and the sale OF lot
terry tickets. 1t appeared TO him
that this prohibition was one Of tho best
that could be inserted In tho article limit.
ing tho powers Of the Legislature"
The language Of the 10th Section OF Ar
ticle I Of the Constitution Of 1886, refer
-aJ A. hv NJ u.iIanL 10 an follnua gNor
shall any lottery hereafter DO authorized
or any sale Of lottery tickets allowed with.
In this State"
In the Governors Of the Almshouse VI.
American Art Union, supra, IL was con.
tended by Charles O'Connor, counsel for
the Art Union, % Il is here, that the Con.
stitution was only intended 10 prevent the
mischievous practice OF raising 0 revenue
by public lotteries, which had been for
many years In full vigor both In England
and In this country, and that the prohibl.
tions Of the Constitution were only directed
against this particular evil. He referred
to the fact. as do counsel hero. that ''from
1909 to 1924 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 for
pecuniary prizes a. . means Of raising
revenue were alone within tho contempla-
ton Of that body"
Tho Constitution OF 1871 Is In these
words: "No lottery shall hereafter bo
authorized In this State, and the Legis.
lature 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 IL declared 10 be sub
stsntially the same as the Constitution OF
1876, said: "This prohibition Is general.
It must be held 10 embrace all lotteries,
unless there be some very clever and salts.
factory reason for understanding II In .
moro limited sense. II was urged upon
the argument that public lotteries for Pc
cuniary prizes Is . means OF raising rev.
enue were alone within the 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 10 therefore no ground for
believing that the prohibition was In.
tended 10 DO limited 10 lotteries for that
object. This would have been restraining
. mischief which did not exist, and toler.
ating that which did. Lotteries had been
authorized by the Legislature for the bene-
at Of colleges, for the making Of roads, for
the building Of bridges, for the improve
mont Of ferries, for tho erection Of hos.
pitfalls, and for various other purposes
equally commendable and beneficial. All
these were clearly within the prohibition.
The prohibition was not aimed ct tho OBJ.
jects for which lotteries had been author.
lied, but at that particular mode Of accom-.
plishing such objects. II was founded on
the moral principle that evil should not DO
done that good might follow, and upon the
more cogent practical reason that the evil
consequent on this pernicious kind OF
gambling greatly overbalanced In tho
aggregate any good likely to result from
1t. The promotion Of inc fine arts is I'M
doubtedly . commendablo object, but the
prohibition contains no exception In Its
favor on that ground.
The intention Of the trainers OF the Con.
stitution undoubtedly was to forbid the
future granting Of any such lotteries a.
had ct 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 o. had heretofore been for
hidden by statute under tho name Of
private lotteries"
The argument that the words by this
State" were inserted for tho purpose Of
preventing tho Legislature from authorize.
Ing public lotteries o. . means Of raising
revenue. and that the provision was not
intended TO prevent the Legislature from
authorizing private lotteries, 10 wholly I'M.
tenable. No authority has been produced
In Its support and wo are satisaed that
none can be found.
In constituting this provision Of the Con.
.stitution the last sentence h ss important
az the first.
II the trainers Of tho Constitution had
intended by the use Of tho words: "No
lottery shall DO authorized by this State"
to only limit the legislative power TO pub
lilo lotteries, conducted and managed solely
by tho State for the purpose OF raising
revenue, they would not have used tho
language they did In tho concluding sen.
tence, "Nor shall thR sale OF lottery tick
cts DO allowed" These words clearly
show that 10 was not intended that any
should be authorized by this State
for any purpose.
Tho vords - nv tbis Gkste % m used In