Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, 1882-03-30

ton Of the plain letter and spirit Of this
provision Of the Constitution. Il would
DO Q perversion Of the Language Of the Con-
stitution TO say that tho Act l. valid.
Respondents, however, contend that the
Constitution docs not prohibit private
lotteries, and was BY is trainers intended
only TO prevent the Legislature from In
yolving the State In . system Of public
lotteries ~ Q means Of raising money for
the service Of the State" or, In other
words, that this constitutional provision
was only intended - . Limitation Of power
70 prevent the State, a. . 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 to 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 II not claimed
that these debates have the weight Of .
judicial dseisien, but that u Il proper 70
examine them In case Of doubt % 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 - they are In favor Of the respon-
dents. The debates show that the Constl.
tuition Of New York was referred 70 In
discussing the provision that was adopted
In California. Mr.. Halleck, 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.
tions you will and this clause. It was not
contained In the old Constitution. but In
most cases, whore they have been
amended, u 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 the occasion Of So
rious embarrassment to the State Govern
ment itself. The result DO clearly estab-
lished the evils Of the lottery system that
the Convention OF New York, In l8i6, In.
serted . clause In the very first article Of
the new Constitution (see Section l0l
prohibiting lotteries and the sale Of lot.
terry tickets. It appeared to him =
that this prohibition was n OF the best
that could be inserted In the article limit.
ing the powers Of tho Legislature"
The language Of tho 10th Section Of Ar
ticle I OF the Consultation OF 1886, refer
raI - hV Ne IIsIIanG Il 80 faItn-a StHnS
shall any lottery hereafter be authorized
or any sale Of lottery tickets allowed with.
In this State"
In tho Governors Of the Almshouse W.
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 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 the fact, Is do counsel hero, that ''from
1909 to 1924 public lotteries were author.
lied at every session Of Parliament" He
also referred TO the debates OF the Consti.
tutional Convention Of 1921, for the pur.
pose Of showing that I" public lotteries for
pecuniary prizes as . means Of raising
revenue were alone within the contempla-
ton Of that body"
Tho Constitution OF 1891 10 In these
words: "No lottery shall hereafter DO
authorized In this State, and tho Legis.
laturo shall pass laws TO prevent tho 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 10 declared TO DO sub
stantially the same ~ tho Constitution Of
1916, said: "This prohibition IL general.
II must DO held TO embrace all lotteries,
unless there DO some very clever and salts.
factory reason for understanding IL In .
moro limited sense. II was urged upon
the argument that public lotteries for pe-
cuniary prizes a. . means Of raising rev.
enue were alone within the contemplation
Of the trainers Of the Constitution. But
lotteries have mover been created within
this State for the purpose Of general rev.
onue, and there IL therefore no ground for
believing that tho prohibition was In.
tended 10 be limited to 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
ment Of ferries, for the erection OF hos.
pitals,' and for various other purposes
equally commendsble and beneficial. All
these were clearly within the prohibition.
The prohibition was not aimed ut the OBJ
jects for which lotteries had been author.
lied, but 1t that particular mode Of accom-.
plishing such objects. Il was founded on
tho moral principle that evil should not DO
done that good might follow, and upon the
moro cogent practical reason that thu evil
consequent on this pernicious kind Of
gambling greatly overbalAnccd In tho
aggregate any good likely TO result from
IL. The promotion OF tho fine arts IL un-
doubleday . commendable object, but the
favor on that ground.
The intention Of the trainers OF tho Con-
stitution undoubtedly was 10 forbid tho
future granting Of any such lotteries a.
had ct any time previously boon author
lied by law. and by requiring the Legis.
lature TO pass laws TO prevent the sale OF
all lottery tickets, 70 put an emo 70 al
such distributions Of money or goods by
lot or chance a. had heretofore been for.
hidden by statute under tho name OF
private lotteries"
The argument that tho words "by this
State" were inserted for the purpose Of
preventing the Legislature from authoris'
Ing public lotteries % . means Of raising
revenue. and that tho provision was not
intended 10 prevent tho Legislature from
authorizing private lotteries. Is wholly IN.
tenable. No authority has been produced
In Its support aud We are satisfed that
none can DO found.
In constituting this provision Of the Con-
stitution the last sentence h - important
a. the first.
II the trainers Of the Constitution had
intended by tho uso Of the words: "No
lottery shall be authorized by this State"
to only limit the legislative power 10 pub
lie lotteries. conducted and managed solely
by the State for the purpose Of raising
revenue, they would not have used the
language they did In the concluding zen.
tence, "Nor shall tho sale Of lottery tick
cts DO allowed" These words clearly
show that II was not intended that any
should DO authorized by this State