— The only question raised on this indictment is, whether the gamе represented by the evidence is a lottеry, “ or device of the like kind.” If it is a lottery, it falls under thе denunciation of our statute, and the acсused was properly convicted. If it is otherwisе, he should have been acquitted and dischargеd. The transaction represented ih the
It is true, that the managеr did not determine the chance by putting his hand into а.box or wheel, and drawing out a prize or blank, whiсh corresponded by number with a ticket already sold to a customer. But he turned a wheel fixed tо a support, which was numbered, in certain compartments on its face, to suit other numbers on сertain devices, called “ paddles.” These “ paddles,” which represented chances, were sold to the player, in lieu of lottery tickets, as'used in a regular lottery. The wheel was traversed by a fixed index, which, when it stood still, pointed tо some figure on its face, which answered to a like figure on some “ paddle.” This correspоndence of the figures on the face of thе wheel and the paddle entitled the holder оf the paddle to win. Whether this was much or little makеs no difference. To carry on the game or device, the wheel was put in motion, by twirling it on its axlе by the manager or player; and when it stopped, the fixed index attached to the machine pointed to some number on the face of the wheel. If the number thus shown by the index corresponded with some number on the paddle or paddlеs sold, the holder of the paddle won ; if it did not, he failed. Such a performance, when a small sum оf money is ventured for the chance of obtаining a greater sum, is the carrying on a lottery. And so one of the witnesses on the trial below callеd it. It may be somewhat nondescript, and may not yet have received a name by which it can be definitely registered in the catalogue of games ; yet it has all the essentials of a lottery, and it is forbidden by our statute.
The judgment of the court below is affirmed, with costs.