Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, 1882-01-07

" saA8 st8tY IA oAA0Su NAoA8-
ton Of the plain letter and spirit Of this
provision OF the Constitution. It would
DO . perversion Of tho language Of the Con.
s%titution to say that tho Act Il valid.
Respondents, however. contend that tho
Constitution "does not prohibit private
lotteries, and was by its trainers intended
only to prevent the Legislature from In
volving the State in 0 system Of public
lotteries Is Q means Of raising money for
the service OF the State" or, In other
words, that this constitutional provision
wa only intended a. . limitation Of power
70 prevent the State, % 0 State, from en-.
gazing In public lotteries for tho purpose
Of raising means for the general revenue
Of the State. Hence they 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 Couven-
ton In California upon the adoption Of Q
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 II Is proper TO
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 at Issue. They are a much In
favor Of the position taken BY the Attorney
General a. they are In favor Of the rospon.
dents. The debates show that the Consti.
tuition Of New York was referred to In
discussing the provision that was adopted
In California. Mr.. Halleck, who was in
favor Of the adoption Of tho lottery pro.
vision, In the course Of his argument,
said /: "In nearly all the new Constitu-
tons you will ind this clause. II wal not
contained In the old Constitution, but In
most cases, where they have been
amended, 10 has been introduced. In tho
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 90.
rious embarrassment to the State Govern
ment itself. Tho result 80 clearly estab-
lished the evils Of the lottery system that
the Convention Of New York. In 1876, In.
serted o clause In tho very FIRST article Of
the new Constitution [seo Section 10l
prohibiting lotteries and the sale Of lot.
terry tickets. 1t appeared 10 him
that this prohibition was one OF tho best
that could DO inserted In tho article limit.
Ing the powers Of the legislature"
The language Of the 10th Section Of Ar
ticlo I Of the Constitution Of 1916, refer
r.I a. hv Ne IIaltank Ia 80 foltnwa. ssNar
shall any lottery hereafter be authorized
or any sale Of lottery tickets allowed with.
In this State"
In the Governors Of tho Almshouso vs..
American Art Union, supra. II was con-
tended by Charles 0'Connof counsel for
the Art Union, as II Is here, that tho Con.
stitution was only intended to prevent the
mlschievous 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.
tions OF tho Constitution were only directed
against this particular evil. He referred
to tho fact, as do counsel here, that ''from
1909 10 1924 public lotteries were author.
lied at every session Of Parliament" He
also referred to tho debates Of the Consti-
tutional Convention OF 1921, for the pur.
pose OF showing that " public lotteries for
pecuniary prizes as . 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 DO
authorized In this State. and tho Lcgis.
laturo shall pass laws TO prevent the sale OF
all lottery tickets within this State except
In lotteries already provided for by law"
Tho Court Of Appeals In referring TO this
Constitution, which 1t declared to DO sub
stantislly the Same as the Constitution Of
1916, said: "This prohibition 10 general.
II must DO held to embrace all lotteries,
unless there be some very clever and salts.
factory reason for understanding IL In Q
moro limited sense. It was urged upon
the argument that public lotteries for Pc
cuniary prizes 40 . means OF raising rev.
enue were slono 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 tho prohibition was In
tended 70 DO limited to lotteries for that
object. This would havo been restraining
o mischief which did not exist, and toler.
sting that which did. Lotteries had been
authorized by the Legislature for tho bene-
at Of colleges, for tho making Of roads. for
the building Of bridges. for tho improve
mont OF ferries, for the erection Of hos.
pitfalls, and for various other purposes
equally commendable and beneficial. All
these were clearly within tho prohibition.
The prohibition was not aimed ct the OBJ.
jects for which lotteries had been author.
lied, but ~ that particular mode Of accom-
plishing such objects. II was founded on
the moral principle that evil should not BIO
dono that good might follow, and upon tho
moro cogent practical reason that tho evil
consequent on this pernicious kind OF
gambling greatly overbalanccd In tho
aggregate any good likely to result from
1t. The promotion Of tho lne arts Is I'M
doubtedly o co~mmendable 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 ct any time previously been author.
lied by law. and by requiring the Legis.
lature to pass laws TO prevent the sale OF
al iOttcIy hChctot w Pus ~ VAN
such distributions Of money or goods by
lot or chance a. had heretofore been for
hidden by statute under tho namo Of
private lotteries"
Tho argument that tho words "by this
State" were inserted for the purpose Of
preventing tho Legislature from authorize.
ing public lotteries as o means Of raising
revenue. and that the provision was not
intended to prevent tho Legislature from
authorizing private lotteries, 10 wholly I'M.
tenable. No authority has been produced
In Its support and we arc satished that
none can DO found.
In constituting this provision Of tho Con-
stitution the last sentence Is IS important
az tho first.
II the trainers Of the Constitution had
by tho use OF tho words: "No
shall DO authorized by Mis- State"
to only limit tho legislative power to pub
lie lotteries. conducted and managed solely !
by tho State for the purpose Of raising
revenue, they would not have used the
language they did In the concluding sen.
tence. Nor shall the sale OF lottery tick
cts DO allowed" These words clearly
show that II was not intended that any
lottery should be authorized by this State