State v. Lipkin
Decision Date | 24 February 1915 |
Docket Number | 57. |
Citation | 84 S.E. 340,169 N.C. 265 |
Parties | STATE v. LIPKIN. |
Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
Appeal from Superior Court, Edgecombe County; Ferguson, Judge.
Chas G. Lipkin was convicted of conducting a lottery, and he appeals. Affirmed.
Laws for the protection of the health, morals, and safety of society within the police power should be given such a construction as will suppress the mischief aimed at.
The prisoner was indicted in the court below for conducting a lottery in violation of Revisal, § 3726, which provides that it shall be unlawful to open, set up, promote, or carry on a lottery, publicly or privately, by any name or style, or by such ways and means expose to sale any real or personal property therein described, or goods or chattels, or anything of value whatsoever, and imposing a fine or imprisonment as the punishment for the offense as a misdemeanor. It also provides that any person who engages in disposing of any species of property whatsoever, money, or evidences of debt or in any manner distributes gifts or prizes upon tickets or certificates sold for that purpose, shall be subject to prosecution under that section. The following is a copy of the contract referred to in the testimony of Mrs. Emma Jacobs, who first got a wardrobe under a similar contract, and afterwards contracted for a sewing machine by this instrument:
"Mutual Supply Company, Incorporated.
Authorized capital, $25,000.
Furniture rugs, jewelry, etc. Complete house furnishers. Direct from factory to home. The $17.50 Furniture Society. Corner Ninth and Broad streets, Richmond, Va. Entrance 214 North Ninth street. When calling on us, bring this contract with you.
Mutual Supply Co., Inc. Contract No. 4473.
We hereby agree to sell to the holder of this contract, Mrs. Emma Jacobs, and said party agrees to purchase a sewing machine or any one of the articles enumerated on the next page for the sum of $17.50 on the following terms and conditions: Each customer agrees to pay 25 cents per week until the sum of $17.50 has been paid, or until their name is selected by the company as an advertising medium. In order to advertise our business on a broader principle, we will distribute among our patrons each week several pieces of furniture. Patrons who are selected to receive the furniture will not be required to make any further payments, and will then be entitled to receive their furniture at once, providing their payments have been made regularly.
No method of any kind dependent upon or connected with chance in any form whatsoever, enters into this contract. We do not authorize agents to make statements or arrangements, verbal or otherwise, to add, change or erase the terms of this contract.
No money can be lost by lapsing, as the amount paid in can be applied at any time to the purchase of any $17.50 article. The furniture which is distributed each week is given solely for advertising purposes and the Mutual Supply Co., Inc., reserves the right to make the selection in such a manner as it considers best for the benefit of the business. The consideration of twenty-five cents paid on receipt of this contract shall constitute a full acceptance of the terms and conditions mentioned herein.
Each contract will entitle the holder to a separate article unless by special agreement in office. No money refunded if discontinued.
Partly filled contract bought or loaned from others cannot be used for redemption of articles enumerated herein.
I have read this contract before signing same and am acquainted with its contents and as evidence that I understand and fully agree to the printed terms of this contract, I make my first payment.
Signature: Emma Jacobs.
Address: Tarboro, N. C."
Attached to the contract was a card, so arranged with blank spaces as to enter therein the payments made in each week to the number of 70, which would be $17.50 by addition of the weekly payments. There is also shown on the back of this paper a list of the articles of furniture (value $17.50 each) to be selected from by the ticket holders, and a copy of the contract or substantial portions thereof, for the company, with a similar card for entering payments on the back. On each contract are these entries at the bottom: --and the title of the concern, as follows:
Mrs. Emma Jacobs, a witness for the state, testified:
Oscar Lloyd, witness for the state, testified:
R. B. Hyatt, witness for the state, testified:
The state rested its case.
Defendant moved to dismiss the action or for judgment of nonsuit, under chapter 73, Acts 1913. Motion denied. Defendant excepted.
Mr. Abrams, only witness of defendant, testified:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Costing a Pretty Penny: Online Penny Auctions Revive the Pestilence of Unregulated Lotteries
...Seattle Times, 495 P.2d at 1369. 98. Sherwood & Roberts-Yakima, Inc. v. Leach, 409 P.2d 160, 163-64 (Wash. 1965) (quoting State v. Lipkin, 84 S.E. 340, 343 (N.C. 1915)). 99. Charles Pickett, Contests and the Lottery Laws, 45 Harv. L. Rev. 1196, 1210 (1932) ("The requirement of chance presen......