New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1895-10-11
RACING FOR SWEEPSTAKES LEGAL.

OPINION or CORPORATION COUNSEL SCOIT-IHE
VALIDITY OF AN ACT OF THE LEGISLATURE
MUST BE ASSUMED BY PUBLIC OFF,
CERs-No CAUSE FOR POLICE IN
TERFERENCE AT MORRIS PARK
Corporation Counsel Scott yesterday sent TO Iheo-
dore Roosevelt president OF the Police Department.
his opinion on the question whether the Police
Board should interfere with the races TO begin al
Morris Park on October Is.
The CORPORATION Counsel, after exhaustive ex-
animation OF the fundamental law and the statutes
enacted TO prevent the sale OF lottery tickets pool
selling boOkmaklng and oil forms o. gambling mas
decided that the Police Commissioners are not called
upon to take any acton regarding these races so
long as the law str1cty complied with ard no at
tenpt is made 10 violate public order or decency.
The opinion OF the Corporation Counsel was given
in response TO a resolution OF the Police Board on
Tuesday last. in which besides the request for IN
formation as to the Boards duty in connection with
the Morris Park races. the question Is put W nat
constitutes a race for sweepstakes and whether
under the recent decision Of Judge Bischon' IN the
Flushing Jockey Club case, it devoives upon the
Police Depar tment to prevent racing for prizes IN
any form whatever
Mr.. Scott cites Chapter so OF the Laws of 1895
passed subsequent to the adoption Of the anti-gam-
bling clause IN the new Constitution, and says;
The act in question bears upon its face evidence
that it carefully prepared. ana II Is ma,iei
OF common knowledge tnat II was careI9liy ana
Governor before II was permitted 10 become law,
and expressly permits racing for prizes in the form
commonly known as sweepstakes
Your question implies an inquiry Whetner II. If
your duty TO tina, this act ls No-d, so i'tI
as THIS particular form OF racing Is concerned and
whether. acting upon such assumption you shou.d
prevent such racing by the exercise or the extreme
police powers Of making arrests without warrant
1t is well established principle OF Ia" tldl az
pre sumptlOns in favor OF the cOnsutuuOndlty
OF an act Of the Legislature. and unless il IS en-
tirely clear that act IS uucOns ltuuOHai IL j. the
duty OF all public officers to assume its validity ana
act upon that assumption until II shaH nave Deen
declared by authority TO be unconstitutional ana
void. -
The question as 10 whether or not racing for
what Is known sweepstakes l. form OF gam
bling and therefore Vi0lltVe Of the CONSTITUTIONAL.
provision ] have cited. is one upon when the
though there Is much authority for the proposition
that such contest Is not to be cOns!cered as IAN
ing within the statutes prohibiting lotteries ana
gambling. o.,
In the case submitted 10 me for opinion 1t APP
pears that number Of persons, dctiS lh strict &c
cOriance with the statute OF this state, proposed 70
conduct q racing meeting which is expressly au-
thOrized by statute in question, ana. III my
opinion. You are not called upon by any duty I'M
posed upon you by law 10 prevent the carrying OUT
of this project by the process OF arresting persons
without warrant, 50 long the terms ana ccLll-
tions imposed by the act Of 1925 are strictly COM
p.ied with ana attempt Is made 10 commit a
breach OF pubic order n decency. .
II II desired to test. in direct proceeding the
validity OF the 1885 and the rights OF parties
acting by rs authority. the proper course, III my
opinion would be for some person VINO IS Interested
I'm the result obtain from magistrate warrant
Of the law 30 that the matter can be judciaIy de-
termined in a direct proceeding, llVoNMs me
punishment Of the person alleged TO b. about 10
commit the offence.