The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1903-02-24

.OJJEtu IlONLlO
ARE BARRED.
Continued from First Page)
slips from ono State to another does not
constitute an act Of Interstate commerce..
Justice Harlan's opinion in the Cham.
plon case proceeded entirely on the the-
Org that the transmission q lottery tick
ets from one State to another is form
OF Interstate commerce. because they are
subject Of traffic and have money
value. and hence that the law was
regulation OF interstate commerce.
Replying to the contention that the
statute In this case prohibits rather than
regulates comm cree. and that such was
not the Intention OF the Constitutions JUS
tice Harlan said:
HAS PERFECT RIGHT.
"Ars we prepared to say that a pro-
vision which Is In effect prohibition
Of the carriage OF such articles from
state to State Is not ut or appropriate
mode for tho regulation of that partic-
ular Kind OF conlmerce2 II the suppress
tion OF lottery traffic. carried on through
interstate commerce. is matter of which
Congress- may tako cognizanco and over
which It's power may be cxerted. can 1t
be possible that II Is helpless to suppress
such traffic. as carried on through In
terstate commercef Must it tolerate tho
traffic and simply regulate the manner
IN which 1t may be carried on? Or may
not Congress. for the protection OF the
people OF all tho States. and under the
power to regulate interstate commerce.
| devise such means, within tho scope OF
| the CONSTITUTION. and not prohibited by
It. as VIII drive that traffic out OF COM
merce among the States?
III State. when considering legislation
for the suppression Of lotteries within
It's own limits. may properly take into
view tho evils that lnherc in the raising
o. money In that mode. why may not
Congress- Invested with the power to reg
aiate all commerce among the several
not be polluted by tho carrying OF lot
tory tickets from one State to another2''t
Referring to tho fact that the law,
makes the offense criminal, he said:
surely 1t Will not be said to be part
Of any ones liberty. us recognized by
shall be allowed to Introduce into com.
merce among the States an elemen, that
will be onfessedly 'lnjurous to the public
| morals"
DISSENTING OPINION.
Summing up. Justice Harlan said: I'VE
L
than that lottery tickets are subjects of
] traffic among those who choose to sell
or buy them: that the carriage OF such
tickets by independent carriers from ono
| State and another Is therefore interstate
commences; that under It's power to regu-
laia commerce among the several States
| CongrcsS-subject to the lirnita lions Inn
posed by the Constitution upon the cxer-
else OF the powers granted-has plenary
authority over such commerce. and may
prohibit the carriage OF such tickets from
| State to State and that legislation to that
end and OF that character is not lncon-
sistent with any limitation or restriction
/ Imposed upon the exercise Of the powers
granted by Congress"
Those who Joined with Justice Harlan
In sustaining the law were Justices
Brown. White. McKenna and Holmes.
Chief Justice Fuller and Justices Brewer.
/ Shiras and Peckham united In q dissent
Ing opinion, delivered by the Chief Jus.
4 tice.
The Chief Justice said that the naked
question involved in the case Is Whether
the prohibition by Congress OF the car
riage of LOTTERY tickets from one State
to another by means other than the
malls Is within the powers vested In that
body by the Constitution OF the United
States" He contended that 1.-THE lottery
act cannot be brought within the power
to regulate commerce among the several
States unless lottery tickets are articles
! Of commerce or unless the power to reg
Mate interstate commerce Inclcdrs the
absolute and exclusive power to prohibit
the transportation OF anything or any
body from one State to another.
4 Gan Invitation to dine or to take a
j drive. or note Of Introduction, all be-
come articles Of commerce under the rul-
ing OF this case by being deposited wild,
an express company for transportation"
{. Concluding, he says: II regard this
| to- ,yc$o Wilt he ,,lo,
OF the trainers OF the Constitution and
OF Marshall. It's great eSpoun,lcr. Our
form OF government may remain not
withstanding legislation or decision. hut
as long ago observed. 1t is with govern
ments as with relationship form may
survive the substance"
THE OTHER CASE. s
In overrulng the Court OF Appeals a nd
the Circuit Court In the Francis case,
in which the offense charged consisted
in carving the policy slips or certificates
from Kentucky across the Ohio River to
Ohio Justice Holmes said:
''The assumption has been that the
sims carried from Kentucky to Ohio
were papers purporting to be or to rep
resent ticket or interest in lottery.
but in our opinion these papers did not
purport to be or do either. A piper
representing an interest in n lottery Is n
document OF title to the purchaser and
holder-the thing by holding which he
u may make good his right to n chance
in the game. but the slips transported
were not the purchasers documents. 1t
is true that they correspond In contents
and so In one sense represented or de-
picted the purchasers interests: hut rep
4 resent IN the statute means represent
to the purchaser. II nav stand as tho
! indicted thing. and this those slips did
u mot do. The functions Of the sims
r,'ght have heen performed nv lrscrp-
In a or rnnv
whole lottery business had been done
by one man. They as little represented
the purchasers chances ms the stubs IN
check hook represent the sums COM
ing to the fnayees Of the checks
J. Justice Harlan delivered o dissenting
opinto, IN thia ease.