The Columbia herald. [volume] (Columbia, Tenn.) 18??-1935, 1891-05-22
The Lottery Law.

Commenting on the postponement of
the lottery case the Ne1o York World
says:
the hearing until autumn in order that
the case may be determined by a full
Bench, but the briefs are in, ana a care
tul reading of them is not very reas
surfing to those who desire to see some
effective restraint placed upon this
legalized gambling. The argument of
the Lottery lawyers upon the consti-
tutional questions involved is very
strong; that of Assistant Attorney
General Maury for the Government
seems much weaker than really capa-
BILE Attorney-General would have made
it. If the law lies with the right in the
case we must depend upon the Court to
discover the fact without much help
from the Attorney-GeneIals office as at
preSJ MT manned"
This is scarcely just to the Attorney
Generals Offie. Mr.. Maury has made
the best case that was possible for the
Government in this controversy, and
has, presumably, acted i'll full harmony
| with Attorney-General Miller, who has
| been prevented by illness from pre-
| y tring the brief in person. The trouble
| Is that the Government has not much Of
a case on the face OF the papers. The
| measure which the Louisiana Lottery
Company challenges before the Su-
preme Court can b. defended only on
! the ground of moral eXpediemcy, I'm
| dOubtedly 1t IS, as an abstract prop
osition, an invasion of the liberty OF the
press and an infringement of personal
rights. Theoretically, if Congress may
deny the use of the mails to newspapers
containing lottery advertisements, it
may with equal prOpriety take similar
acJlon in the case of liquor advertise
ments, playing-card advertisements
bucket-shop advertisements or any 9th
er which the party in the majority at
the moment may choose to regard as
IMMORAL and pern!eiuqs. There is, in
deed, no end TO the mischief and OPP
pression to which such principle, once
Established may not lead, II is hut
natural, therefore, that the Constitution
should Frpudiate IL i'll go @ 'al way
and that it should be destitute of sup
port in precedent. We can readily sec
that the Attorney-General's office may
have found it impossible to defend the
, law on any but moral, and, to certain
| extent, sentimental grounds. As we
: see it, the question is not whether the
! Government can find any defense il
l laws already existent, but whether the
3 Supreme Court will, in view of thu
, gravity of the case, originate a law t.
! lat THIS PARTICULAR emergency. TGt
Q structures on Mr.. Maury strike us a
unjust. He has no case and he virtual !!
: cOnfesses as much. What his brie
/ means is that the Supreme Court shoulC
5 make a case for him. Washington q
u o. Critic Record.
- Ehe NGiG YORK JI-Otq conmeEts VI
g the above as follows;
) Why did not the Attorney G onera
II then discover the limitations of powe
l. aud see that the bill was so framed a
g to be constitutional? The World ur
IL gently pointed out the necessity 70
3 such caution at the time, and the rep!.
: uniformly was that the Attorney-Gen
e erals office had thoroughly cOnsidere
d that matter. How comes 1t, then, tina
,, the III 5meIt the law is questioned III
u best the Attorney General can do is t
e confess that he has no case and pra
y the Court 'to make a case for for HIM
1t "FingeIs were made before forks,
Or remarked Miss Elder, at the table.
g Mine weren't" replied Miss Flipi
70 spitefully Hampers Bazaar.