302 POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



It should also be remembered that lotteries, if they exist at all 

 in the United States, must do so under the authority of State 

 laws ; that Congress can not take from a lottery company the 

 charter which a State Legislature has granted ; or make the issue 

 of its tickets illegal, or punish as a crime the action of the man- 

 agers by whom the business of a lottery is carried on ; and further, 

 that any legislation to make lotteries illegal should inferentially 

 pertain to the State ; first, because no jurisdiction has been given 

 under the Constitution to Congress, except by remote inference to 

 interfere with this matter ; and, second, because there is no doubt 

 that there was a complete unanimity of opinion among its f ramers 

 that lotteries were legitimate and unobjectionable instrumentali- 

 ties of society, inasmuch as at the time the Constitution was 

 framed they were authorized by the States and extensively em- 

 ployed throughout the country for the founding of schools and 

 colleges, the erection of hospitals, and the construction of roads, 

 bridges, and ferries. On the other hand, it does not admit of con- 

 tention that under the exclusive power vested by the Constitu- 

 tion in the Federal Government to "establish post offices and 

 jjost roads," the use of the mails for the transmission of lottery 

 tickets and correspondence may be legitimately inhibited, or that 

 the general business of lotteries may not be rightfully made sub- 

 ject to Federal taxation for the sole purpose of revenue. When 

 the Provincial Legislature of Canada recently decided to suppress 

 lotteries in the Dominion, the measures which it instituted for so 

 doing were not made contingent in any way upon the power of 

 taxation, but by the imposition of heavy fines and penalties, not 

 only on those engaged in the business, but also upon those having 

 lottery tickets in their possession. 



During the early years of the late war, taxes were imposed on 

 the circulation of the State banks, "manifestly with a view to 

 raise revenue and inform the authorities of the amount of paper 

 money in circulation, and for no other purpose." But in 1865 

 these taxes were greatly increased, not for revenue, but with the 

 admitted intent of destroying all banking institutions chartered 

 by the States, leaving only similar institutions chartered by the 

 Federal Government in existence. The result sought was fully 

 attained, and the constitutionality of the legislation by which it 

 was achieved was subsequently affirmed by the United States Su- 

 preme Court, which in the case of Veazie vs. Fenno (8 Wall., p. 552) 

 nevertheless held that " the States possessed the power to grant 

 charters to State banks," that " the power was incident to sover- 

 eignty, and that there was no limitation in the Federal Constitu- 

 tion" of such power. But in delivering the opinion of the court, 

 the Chief Justice (Chase) declined to enter upon an inquiry 

 whether the tax imposed on the State banks was so excessive as 



