Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, 1882-01-02
SUPREME COURT DECISION.
UNANIMOUS opryroS.l

1881, articles OF incorporation Of the ''Ne-
vada Benevolent Association" were filed
In the Office Of the County Clerk OF Storey
county. The object Of the corporation
being "to establish and carry on tho
business OF providing for and giving pub
lie entertainments, In the State Of Nevada,
Of o musical and scientific character, to
sell tickets Of admission to such entertain.
ments, and TO purchase. hold and dis
tribute among the 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 at such times as may DO de-
termined by . Board Of Managers to DO
selected for that purpose by tho Board OF
Trustees Of this company" 1t is pro.
vided that so much Of the proceeds OF said
entertainments ''as may be deemed proper
by the Board Of Trustees. but not less than
$50. 900, from each entertainment, are to
be placed In the State Treasury Of the
STATE Of Nevada to be used only for such
charitable and benevolent purposes a. may
DO determined BY the Legislature Of the
State Of Nevada"
Tho "Act to Aid the Nevada Benevolent
Association In aiding In providing means
for the caro- and maintenance Of the In.
sane Of Nevada. aud for other charitable
purposes" (approved March o, 1881, de-
clares that ''it shall be lawful for tho Ne.
vada Benevolent Association OF the State
Of Nevada TO give not exceeding five public
entertainments or concerts; to sell tickets
OF admission to the same ; to distribute
among the holders Of such tickets personal
pi operty, real estate, things In action, de-
mands or other valuables, and to regulate
the distribution Of all such property or
gifts by rattle or other schemes Of like char
acter." (Stat. 1881, l66, Sec. ~
The information filed by tho Attorney
General alleges that respondents, as Trus-
rant Of law, advertising, printing,
circulating and selling tickets for public
entertainments q ~" and that they
base their rights 10 advertise. print, cir.
culate and sell tickets for the said public
exhibitions or entertainments. aud 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
tho Legislature above referred to.
The facts set forth in the information
are admitted by respondents to DO true.
Arc the acts Of respondents without war.
rant Of law2
L. the Act Of the Legislature, approved
March o, 1881, CONSTITUTIONAL
First-ls tho scheme or enterprise In
which the Nevada Benevolent Associa.
ton Is engaged q lottery2
This question 10 answered In tho afirma-
tive by tho decision Of this Court In er
parts Blanchard, . New, l0i. Is that do.
cision correct? 1t certainly Is. 1t Is sus.
rendered by the various courts in the
United States upon this question.
Notwithstanding this fact, We arc now
earnestly asked to declare that tho musical
entertainment which tho Nevada Benevo-
lent Association proposes 10 give Is not q
lottery. Why notp What IL q lottery Z
Every scheme for the distribution Of prizes
by chance Is Z lottery. Governors Of the
Almshouse Of New York vs.. American Art
Union, z N. ". 239; Dunn vs.. The Peo-
pie, ~ Ills, i67 ; State vs.. Shorts. 81 N.
j.; L., 4Ol ; Randle vs.. State, AZ Tex,
585 ; Chavannsh VI. State, 40 Ala. 800 /;
Commonwealth vs.. Manderield, . Phil,
459 ; United States VI. Olney, l Abb, U.
g., 279.)
A lottery is o game OF hazard In which
small sums are ventured for tho chance Of
obtaining greater. BELL vs.. State, 8
Sneed., 509.l
"a contrivanco for the distribution OF
prizes by chance |; q reliance upon the
results OF hazard o decision Of the values
OF tho adventurer's investment Of the
favors OF fortune" Is q lottery. wooden
vs.. Shotwell. 4 Zab., 1851
"Where . ~pecuniary consideration IL
paid. and II Is determined by lot or chance.
according to some scheme held out to the
public what the party who pays the money
IL to have for 1t, or whether he 10 to have
anything, IL 10 o lottery" (Stato vs..
Clarke. a3 N. H.. 3S5 ; Hull vs.. Ruggles,
SO n. Y, 427.) = y
1t makes no difference what name IL
given TO the scheme.
When tho element Of chance enters into
the distribution Of prizes IL is q lottery.
without reference to the name by which II
IL called.
"He may choose to call his business o
gift SALE" said the Court In Dunn vs.. PEG.
pie, supra, "but 1t IL none tho less Q lot.
terry, aud We cannot permit him to evado
the penalties OF the law by SO transparent
. device as o moro change Of name. II IL
differs from ordinary lotteries the differ.
enco lies chiefly In the fact that IL 10 more
artfully contriyed to impose upon the ig-
norant and c%redulous, and 10, therefore,
more thoroughly dishonest and injurious
TO society,""
"The name given to the process and the
form Of the machinery used to accomplish
tho object arc not material, provided tho
substance Of the transaction Is o distribu.
tion or disposition Of property by lot"
Estate vs.. Clarke. supra.)
Courts will not inquire into the namo,
but will determine the character Of the
scheme by the nature Of the transaction
or business In which the parties aro on.
gagged" (Randlo vs.. State, supra.)
"Tho character Of the scheme is In no
wise changed by the charitable purpose
expressed in its 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 does not relieve tho
scheme Of Its character as Q lottery"
Thomas vs.. People. 80 Ills, 1881
"Nor is II material" said the Court Of
Appeals In the American Art Union case,
"to tho question In hand that the prizes
were not known and designated when the
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 II
affords less security to the subscribers that
the chance purchased 10 worth the money
paid for It,"
We are Of opinion that tho 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 tho sum
Of S250,00o, to DO placed In the State
Treasury, to the credit Of the "Insane and
Charitable Fund" attempted to authorize
tho managers Of the "Neyads Benevolent
Association " to enrich their wi pockets.
at tho 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 luro to In
cite the oredulous and unsuspecting into