Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, 1882-04-06

&AI ~
ton Of the plain letter and spirit Of this
provision OF the Constitution. Il would
Be . perversion Of the language Of the Con-
stitution to say that the Act 10 valid.
Respondents, however, contend that the
Constitution "does not prohibit private
lotteries. and was by its trainers intended
only TO prevent the Legislature from in
volving the State in . system OF public
lotteries as 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
TO prevent the State. a o State, from en-
gazing In public lotteries for the purpose
Of raising means for the general revenue
Of the State. Hence they claim that tho
State has the right to authorize private
parties 10 conduct and carry on Q lottery
Of the character specified In the informa-
ton.
In support Of this position they refer 10
the debates Of the Constitutional Conven-
ton In California upon the adoption Of .
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 IL IL 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 arc In favor Of the respon-
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 the lottery pro.
vision, In the course Of his argument,
said /: "In nearly all the new Constitu-
lions you will find this clause. II was not
contained In the old Constitution, but In
most cases, where they have been
amended, II has been introduced. In tho
old Constitution Of New York. to which
reference has been mado In the course Of
debate. NO prohibitions 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 Sc
rious embarrassment 10 the State Govern
ment itself. The result 80 clearly estab-
lished the evils Of the lottery system that
the Convention OF New York, In 1916, In.
serted Q clause In the very first article Of
the new Constitution fsee Section l0l
prohibiting lotteries and the sale Of lot.
terry tickets. 1t appeared to him
that this prohibition was ono OF the best
that could DO inserted In the article limit.
ing the powers Of the Legislature"
Tho language OF the 10th Section OF Ar.
ticle I Of tho Constitution Of 1916, refer
red 10 by Mr.. Hslleck Is a. follows : "Nor
shall any lottery hereafter DO authorized
or any sale Of lottery tickets allowed with.
In this State"
In tho Governors OF tho Almshouse vs.
American Art Union, supra. II was con.
tended by Charles 0'Connor, counsel for
the Art Union, as IL Is here, that the Con.
stitution wa only intended TO prevent the
mischievous practice Of raising o 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 the Constitution were only directed
against this particular evil. He referred
to the fact, as do counsel here, that ''from
100 to 1894 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 ~ Q 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
In this State, and the Lcgis-
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 10 this
Constitution, which It declared to be sub
stantially the Same a. tho Constitution Of
1876, said: "This prohibition 10 general.
II must be held to embrace oil lotteries,
unless there BIO some very clever and salts.
reason for understanding IL In .
moro limited sense. II was urged upon
the argument that public lotteries for pc
cunisry prizes % Q means Of raising rev.
enue were alone within tho 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 the prohibition was In
tended to DO limited 10 lotteries for that
object. This would have been restraining
Q mischief which did not exist, and tolor.
ating that which did. Lotteries had been
authorized by the Legislature for the bene-
ct Of colleges, for the making Of roads, for
the building OF bridges, for the improve
ment Of ferries, for the erection Of hos.
pitfalls, and for various other purposes
equally commendable and beneficial. AL
these were clearly within the prohibition.
The prohibition was not aimed ut tho OBJ.
jects for which lotteries had been author.
lied, but at that particular mode Of accom-.
plishing such objects. II was founded on
the moral principle that evil should not be
done that good might follow, and upon tho
more cogent practical reason that the evil
consequent on this pernicious kind OF
gambling greatly overbalsnced In tho
aggregate any good likely to result from
1t. Tho promotion Of the fine arts Is un-
doubtedly q commendsble object, but tho
contains no exception In Its
favor on that ground. =
The intention Of tho 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.
to pass laws TO prevent the sale OF
all lottery tickets, to put 81 end to all
such distributions Of money or goods by
lot or chance as had heretofore been for.
hidden by statute under the namo OF
lotteries"
The argument that tho words "by this
were inserted for the purpose Of
preventing tho Legislature from authorize
Ing public lotteries a. Q means OF raising
revenue. and that tho provision was not
intended TO prevent the Legislature from
authorizing private lotteries, 10 wholly un.
No authority has been produced
In Its support and we are satisfied that
can be found.
In constituting this provision Of the Con-
stitution the last sentence Is % important
as tho first.
II tho trainers Of tho Constitution had
intended by the use Of the words: "No
shall be authorized by this State"
to only limit the Legislative power TO 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.
DTS DO allowed" These words clearly
show that Il was not intended that any
should DO authorized by this State