Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, 1882-03-21
SUPREME COURT DECISION.
UNANIMOUS oprSroS.l

Counsy' Ano opyeos VI tuo cCIpOthtion
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 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 be do.
termined by . Board Of Managers to be
selected for that purpose by the Board Of
Trustees OF this company" Il 10 pro.
| vided that 30 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 70
be placed In the State Treasury Of the
STATE Of Nevada to DO used only for such
charitable and benevolent purposes a may
State Of Nevada"
The "Act to Aid the Nevada Benevolent
Association In aiding In providing means
for the care and maintenance OF the In.
sane Of Nevada, and for other charitable
purpose approved March 8, 1881, do.
clares that ait shall be lawful for tho Nc.
vada Benevolent Association Of the State
OF Nevada 10 give not exceeding Ave public
entertainments or concerts; TO sell tickets
| Of admission TO tho same ; ~ distribute
among tho holders Of such tickets personal
property, real estate, things In action, de-
mands or other valuables, and TO regulate
the distribution Of all such property OF
gifts by rattle or other schemes Of like char.
acter." lStat. 1881, l66, Bee. ~
Tho information filed 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 they
base their rights 10 advertise, print, cir
culste and sell tickets for the said public
exhibitions or entertainments, and 10 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 tho Act oil
the 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
Is the Act Of the Legislature, approved
March 0, 1881, constitutional2
First-L the scheme or enterprise In
which the "Nevsda Benevolent Associa'
ton i" is engaged . lottery2
This question Is answered In the afirma'
tive by tho decision Of this Court In ca
parte blanchard, 0 New, l0i. Is that de-
cision corroct2 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 TO declare that the musical
entertainment which the Nevada Benevo'
lent Association proposes to give is not q
lottery. Why not2 What is . lottery
Every scheme for the distribution Of prizes
by chance Is . lottery. Governors VI the
Almshouse Of New York W. American Art
Union. z N. ", 239; Dunn vs.. Tho Poo
pie, Az Ills, ACT State vs.. Shorts, 81 N.
j.; L., 40l ; Randlo VI. State, AZ Tex,
685 ; Chavannah Va. State, 40 Ala. 800
Commonwealth w. Manderfield, 8 Phil.
459 ; United States vs.. 0lney, l Abb, U.
b., 279.)
A lottery Is Q gamo Of hazard In which
small sums are ventured for the chance Of
obtaining greater. BELL vs.. State, 8
Sneed., 509.J
"a contrivsnco for tho distribution OF
prizes by chance o reliance upon the
results Of hazard |; o decision Of the values
Of the adyenturer's investment OF the
favors OF fortune" Is . lottery. wooden
vs.. shotwell, 4 Zab., 1857
"Where . pecuniary consideration Ia
paid, and 1t Is determined by lot or chance,
according 10 some scheme held out to the
public what tho party who pays the money
IL to have for 1t, or whether he Is to have
anything, IL Is . lottery" State vs..
Clarke, SO N. H., 9s5 Hull vs.. Ruggles.
Sc N. Y, 427.) q
1t makes NO difference what namc 10
given to the scheme.
When the element OF chance enters into
the distribution Of prizes IL Is Q lottery.
without reference to tho namo by which II
H. called.
-"Ho may choose to call his business q
gift SALE" said the Court In Dunn vs.. PEG.
pie, supra, "but II 10 none the less Q lot.
terry, aud We cannot permit him to ovado
tho penalties Of the law by so transparent
Q dovico rs Q mere change Of name. II II
differs from ordinary lotteries the differ.
ence lies chiefly In the fact that II Is more
artfully contrived TO impose upon tho ig-
norant and credulous. and Is. therefore,
moro thoroughly dishonest and injurious
to society"
"Tho name given to the process and the
form Of the machinery used to accomplish
the object are not material, provided the
substance Of the transaction Is . distribu.
ton or disposition Of property by lot"
Estate W. Clarke. suprs.)
Courts will not inquire into tho name,
but will determine tho character Of the
scheme by the nature OF tho transaction
or business In which the parties are en-.
gagged" (Randlo vs.. State, supra.)
"The character Of the scheme IL 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 the
scheme OF Its character as Q lottery"
Thomas vs.. People. 50 Ills, 1881
"Nor 10 Il material" said the Court Of
Appeals In the American Art Union case,
"to the question In hand that the prizes
wero not known and designated when the
tickets or chances were subscribed and
paid for. The scheme In this respect is
more Objectionable than Q scheme In which
the prizes are previously fixed, because It
affords less security to the subscribers that
tho chance purchased 10 worth tho money
psid for H."
We are Of opinion that tho facts stated
In the articles Of incorporation, In tho
statutes, and In the information. show that
the scheme Is ono whereby the Legislature
Of this State, In consideration Of the sum
Of s250.000 to be placed In tho State
Treasury, 10 the credit Of the " Insane and
Charitable Fund" attempted to authorize
the managers Of the 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 DO the lure to in
cite tho credulous and unsuspecting into
this scheme"
In the light Of all the facts that have
been presented IL would be absurd to say
that the managers Of this scheme are sim