Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, 1882-03-07
SUPREME COURT DECISION.
UNANIMOUS oprSros.]

county. Inc OBJECT OF tho corporhuon
being "to establish and carry on the
business Of providing for and giving pub
lie entertainments, In the State OF Nevada,
OF . musical and scientific character, TO
sell tickets OF admission 10 such entertain.
mens, and TO purchase, hold and dis
tribute among tho holders OF such tickets
personal property, real estate, chooses IN
action and other valuable things, upon
such terms and conditions and In such
manner and ct such times as may be de-
termined by . Board Of Managers to DO
selected for that purpose by the Board Of
Trustees Of this company" II 10 pro.
vided that 80 much Of the proceeds Of said
entertainments ''as may DO deemed proper
BY the Board Of Trustees, but not less than
$4,000, from each entertainment, are 70
be placed In the State Treasury Of the
6tate Of Nevada 70 be used only for such
charitable and Acknowledgements - may
be determined By the Legislature OF the
State Of Nevada"
The "Act to Aid the Nevada Benevolent
Association In aiding In providing means
for the care and maintenance Of tho In.
zane Of Nevada. and for other charitable
purpose approved March 8, 1881, de-
clares that '.it shall be lawful for the Ne.
vada Benevolent Association Of the State
Of Nevada 70 give not exceeding Ave public
entertainments or concerts; TO sell tickets
Of admission 10 the same |; ~ distribute
among the holders Of such tickets personal
| property, real estate, things In action, de-
msnds or other yaluables, and TO regulate
the distribution Of all such property or
gifts BY rafie or other schemes Of like char.
acter." tStat. 1881, l66, Sec. ~
The information fled by the Attorney.
General alleges that respondents, - Trus-
tees Of said association. are, without war
rant Of law, advertising, printing.
circulating and selling tickets for public
entertainments = -" and that thoy
base their rights 10 advertise, print, cir.
culate and sell tickets for the said public
exhibitions or entertainments, and TO pur-
chase, use, hold and distribute amongst
the holders Of such tickets personal pro.
| perty, real estate, chooses In action and
other valuable things" upon the Act Of
the Legislature above referred to.
The faots set forth In the Information
are admitted by respondents to DO true.
Are the acts Of respondents without war
rant OF lawf
Is the Act Of the Legislature, approved
March o, 1881, constitutional2
Pirst-Is the scheme or enterprise In
which the "Nevada Benevolent Associa.
ton " Is engaged . lotteryf
This question 10 answered In tho aflrma-
tive BY the decision Of this Court In er
paris Blanchard, 0 New, l04. Is that de-
cision corroctf 1t certainly Is. 1t Is sus.
taired BY every decision that has been
rendered by the various courts In the
United States upon this question.
Notwithstanding this fact, We are now
earnestly asked 10 declare that the musical
entertainment which the Nevada Bensvo-
lent Association proposes 10 give 10 not .
lottery. Why not2 What Is . lottery ?
Every scheme for the distribution Of prizes
by chance Is Q lottery. Governors Of the
Almshouse OF New York W. American Art
Union. z N. ", $50; Dunn vs. The PEG.
pie, 40 Ills, ACT State vs.. Shorts, 80 N.
j.; L., 40l /; Randle VI. State, a. Tex,
685 Chavannah W. State, 40 Ala. 800 /;
Commonwealth vs.. Msnderaeld, 8 Phil,
$50 United States VI. Olney, 1 Abb, U.
b., 279.)
A lottery Is . game Of hazard In which
small sums are ventured for the chance Of
obtaining greater. tBell vs.. State, 8
Sneed., 509.j
"a continuance for tho distribution Of
prizes BY chance . reliance upon tho
results Of hazard |; . decision Of the values
favors OF fortune" IL . lottery. wooden
vs.. shotwell, 4 Zab., 1852
"Where . pecuniary consideration 10
paid, and II 10 determined by lot or chance.
according to some scheme held out 10 the
public what tho party who pays the money
10 to have for II, or whether he 10 10 have
anything, IL 10 . lottery" Estate vs..
Clarke, 50 N. H., 3S5 Hull vs.. Ruggles.
SO N. Y, 427.) =
It makes no difference what name 10
given to the scheme.
When the element OF chance enters into
the distribution Of prizes II IL . lottery,
without reference to the name by which II
10 called.
"He may choose to call his business q
gift sale." said the Court In Dunn vs.. PEG.
pie, supra, "but IL is none the less 0 lot.
terry. and We cannot permit him to evade
the penalties Of the law by so transparent
. device a. . nero change Of name. II II
differs from ordinary lotteries the differ.
ence lies chiefly In the fact that II 10 more
artfully contrived to impose upon the ig.
norant and credulous, and 10. therefore,
moro thoroughly dishonest and injurious
to society"
"Tho name given 10 the process and the
form Of tho machinery used to accomplish
the object are not material, provided tho
substance Of the Transaction IL . distribu.
tion or disposition OF property BY lot"
Estate W. Clarke, supra.)
"Courts will not inquire into the name,
but will determine the character Of the
scheme by tho nature Of the transaction
or business In which the parties arc en-
gagged" (Randle vs. State, supra.)
"The character Of the scheme 10 In no
wise changed by the charitable purpose
expressed In It's title, nor by calling the
drawings entertainments or gift con-
certs.'" (Ex parte blanchard. supra.)
"Tho fact that no plan OF distribution has
been determined upon docs not relieve the
scheme Of Its character a. . lottery"
Thomas vs.. People, 80 Ills, 1851
"Nor 10 u Material" said the Court Of
Appeals In the American Art Union case.
"to the question In hand that the prizes
were not known and designated when tho
tickets or chances were subscribed and
paid for. The scheme In this respect 10
more Objectionable than Q scheme In which
the prizes are previously fixed, because It
affords less security To the subscribers that
the chance purchased Is worth the money
psid for IT,"
We are Of opinion that the facts stated
In the articles Of incorporation. In the
statutes, and In the information. show that
the scheme Is one whereby the Legislature
Of this State, In consideration Of the sum
Of $3.50. 900. TO be placed In the State
Treasury, to tho credit Of the "Insane and
Charitable Fund.-" attempted 10 authorize
the managers Of tho "Nevada Benevolent
Association " to enrich their own pockets.
at the expense Of the people Of this and
other States. by holding out promises OF
the great and sudden gains that might DO
acquired by the ticket holders that
golden prizes would be the lure TO In.
cite the crcdulous and unsuspecting into
this scheme"
In the light Of all tho facts that have
been presented 10 wouldbe absurd TO say
that the managers Of this scheme are sim.