The people's voice., 1942-12-25
Supreme Court


(COnt1nued from Page One)
viz, to enhance the receipts from the
sale of theatre tickets by appealing
to the gambling instincts of the gen.
eral public. The increased attend
ance at the theatre is all that is nee
essary to supply the element of con-
sideration. (Society Theatre v. City
of Seattle, 11S Wash. 25S, 500 Pac. 21.)
This the legislature fully realized and
ATTEMPTED in 1885 to make the law
linapplicable to fairs and rodeos giving
away cash and merchandise by public
drawings. (Sec. 11149.1, Rev. Codes.)
Whether that attempt was efficacious
need not here be determined. The
majority opinion makes the sweeping
statement that the case of Society
Theatre v. City of Seattle, just cited,
turned upon a local ordinance com
pletely eliminating the element of con-
sideration. 1t is true that city ordi-
nance was involved prohibiting the
sale or disposal of lottery tickets
point out in its opinion that consid-
GRAFTON was one of the elements nee
essary to prove lottery, and in plain
language held that there was a con-
sideration because of the increase in
attendance at the theatre because of
the awarding of prizes. The fact that
some have received the prize who
were not in the theatre is of no inn
portance. The lottery being estab-
lished, the giving of some tickets
without consideration is also prohib-
tied. (Sec. 11151, Rev. Codes.) We
are not advised by the agreed state
ment of facts whether some outside
the theatre were denied the prize be-
cause of inability to arrive at the
proper place within the proper time.
such situation We can readily see
that, the fact that when one draws
the lucky number and is unable to re-
port within the time because of re-
naming outside the theatre, will stim-
ulate the sale of tickets on succeed
ing Bank Nights so as to avoid repe-
tition of that situation.
This case is a typical illustration
of the activities of those who would
attempt to do that which is prohibited
first proceeding in one way and
then in another in achieving the same
ultimate purpose and aim with the
hope of ultimately seizing upon some
method that would meet the approval
OF the courts. When once approval
of the practice is obtained, all those
who had speculated in some other
plan to- evade the intent and purpose
of the law would readily conform to
the approved method. 1t was devices
such as this which caused the court, |
in Harvie V. Heise, $50 S. C. PIT, 14S |
S. E. 66, to make the following COM
ment, which we quoted with approval |
in State ex rel. Dussault v. Kilburn, |
Ill Mont. 400, 109 Pac. (2d) lib: !
In no field of reprehensible endeavor |
has the ingenuity of man been more |
sxerted than in the invention of de- |
vices to comply with the letter but to
10 violence to the spirit and thwart |
he beneficient objects and purposes
If the laws designed to suppress the
yice of gambling" | think rather than
.hus specializing on different modes
% achieve the same end-an evasion
If the laws-it would come with bet
.er grace for the theatres to seek
legislative approval of some method
o conduct lottery after amendment
If the Constitution was first had.
The most optimistic proponents of
he scheme here involved will be
lmazed at the result of this case be-
,ause now they may adopt either of
wo methods, if in fact there is any
Inference between them: either that
lere involved, or that used in the Dus-
iault case, and in addition to that