So where one furnished a cigar to every person who placed a five-cent piece in a slot machine, and the one after whose play the machin,e indicated the highest card hand was to receive all the cigars ; Loiseau v. State, 114 Ala. 34, 22 South. 138, 62 Am. St. Rep. 84; and where every purchaser of dry goods received a key and was told that one key would be given out which would unlock a certain box containing twenty-five dollars, which would go to the person who received this key ; Davenport v. City of Ottawa, 54 Ran. 711, 39 Pac. 708, 45 Am. St. Rep. 303. So where every subscriber to a newspaper received a ticket which entitled him to par ticipate in a distribution of prizes by lot ; State v. Mumford, 73 Mo. 647, 39 Am. Rep. 532 ; and of a bond investment scheme, where bonds were issued at a specified price and the value of each bond was determined by its number, the bonds being numbered in the order of application for them ; MacDon ald v. U. S., 63 Fed. 426, 12 C. C. A. 339.
A "missing word" competition, in which the winners are to be those who, upon send ing a shilling to the promoter of the com petition, select, fill up a named sentence, a particular word_ also selected by the pro moter, is a lottery within the English act ; [1896] 2 Ch. 154; [1909] 2 K. B. 93.
Raffles at fairs, etc., are as clearly viola tions of the criminal law as the most elabo rate and carefully organized lotteries ; Com. v. Manderfield, 8 Phila. (Pa.) 457. Thus the American Art Union is a lottery ; Governors of Alms House of New York v. Art Union, 7 N. Y. 228; People v. Art Union, 7 N. Y. 240; so a "gift-sale" of books ; State v. Clarke, 33 N. II. 329, 66 Am. Dec. 723 ; so "prize-con certs" ; Com. v. Thacher, 97 Mass. 583, 93 Am. Dec. 125 ; and "gift-exhibitions"; State v. Shorts, 32 N. J. L. 398, 90 Am. Dec. 668; Thomas v. People, 59 Ill. 160 ; Buckalew v. State, 62 Ala. 334, 34 Am. Rep. 22 ; Wilkin son v. Gill, 74 N. Y. 63, 30 Am. Rep. 264. The payment of prizes need not be in money ; Governors of Alms House of New York v. Art Union, 7 N. Y. 228 ; as where a suit of cloth ing was given at a weekly drawing in a mer chant tailor's club ; State v. Moren, 48 Minn. 555, 51 N. W. 618 ; Grant v. State, 54 Tex. Cr. R. 403, 112 S. W. 1068, 21 L. R. A. (N. S.) 876, 130 Am. St. Rep. 897, 16 Ann. Cas. 844.
On the other hand, where the scheme af fords room for the exercise of skill and judg ment, it is not a lottery ; 60 L. J. M. C. 116. So of a coupon competition in a newspaper, where purchasers of copies of the newspa pers fill in on coupons the horses selected by them as likely to come in first, second, third, and fourth in a given race, the purchaser to receive a penny for every coupon filled up after the first, and a money prize to be given to the holder of the coupon who should name the first four horses [1895] 2 Q.
B. 474.
Guessing contests are lotteries ; People ex rel. Ellison v. Lavin, 179 N. Y. 164, 71 N. E. 753, 66 L. R. A. 601, 1 Ann. Cas. 165 ; Public Clearing House v. Coyne, 194 U. S. 497, 24 Sup. Ct. 789, 48 L. Ed. 1092 ; Stevens v. Times-Star Co., 72 Ohio St. 112, 73 N. E. 1058, 106 Am. St. Rep. 586; contra, [1899] 1 Q. B. 198; 23 Op. Atty. Gen. 492.
The mere determination by lot where there is no giving of prizes, is not a lottery ; Com. v. Manderfield, 8 Phila. (Pa.) 457. Joint owners of property may ordinarily divide it by lot; Elder v. Chapman, 176 Ill. 142, 52 N. E. 10. Merely determining by lot the time at which certain bonds are to be paid, is not ' a lottery ; U. S. v. Zeisler, 30 Fed. 499; but it, is otherwiSe if a prize is offered on the bonds so drawn ; id. To constitute a lottery something of value must be parted with, di rectly or indirectly, by him who has the chance ; Yellow-Stone Kit v. State, 88 Ala. 196, 7 South. 338, 7 L. R. A. 599, 16 Am. St. Rep. 38 and note. Therefore, where every customer of a shoe store and every applicant received a ticket gratuitously, and a piano was allotted by chance among the holders, it was held not to be a lottery ;' Cross v. Peo ple, 18 Colo. 321, 32 Pac. 821, 36 Am. St. Rep. 292. Where the element of certainty goes hand in hand with the element of Chance in an enterprise offering prizes, the former ele ment does not destroy the existence or effect of the latter ; Horner v. U. S., 147 U. S. 449, 13 Sup. Ct. 409, 37 L. Ed. 237.
The act which forbids conveying in the mails newspapers containing anything relat ing to a lottery is within the power of con gress to establish postofflces, and does not abridge the freedom of the press ; In re Ra pier, 143 U. S. 110, 12 Sup. Ct. 374, 36 L. Ed. 93. The right to operate a lottery is not a fundamental right ; id. Under this act it is an offence to deliver in Illinois a prohibited circular mailed in the city of New York, and such an offence is triable in Illinois ; Horner v. U. S., 143 U. S. 207, 12 Sup. Ct. 407, 36 L. Ed. 126. The carriage of lottery tickets from one state to another by an express company is interstate commerce, which congress may make an offence against the United States; Lottery Case, 188 U. S. 321, 23 Sup. Ct. 321, 47 L. Ed. 492. See CONSTITUTIONALITY.