Commonwealth v. O'ConnellCommonwealth v. O'Connell
This is a complaint under
The sole question for decision on the defendant’s motion and requests for rulings is whether an enterprise carriеd on in the manner described in the agreed statement of facts as matter of law could be found to be a “lottery” within the meaning of
A hospital which was a Massachusetts corporation vоted “to conduct a charitable Mardi Gras or carnival at which a game or games of Beano would be conducted.” The defendant, the vice-president of the hospital, “was in active charge of the Carnival or Festival hereinafter referred to.” Ten thousand books “containing twelve 'charitable donation subscriptions’ at fifty cents apiece were printed.” Thеse books “were placed in the hands of persons who were paid for disposing of the twelve subscriptions contained in each one.” The hospital obtained a license “to сonduct a Beano party,” at a hall having a capacity of seven hundred persons, “the proceeds of the same to be used for charity.” “Each charitable donation subscription under its terms entitled the holder to admission to . . . [the hall] on the occasion of the carnival up to the extent of the capacity of the hall.”
“Under the plan of the carnival and Bеano game as projected, twenty-five names of those who held charitable donation subscriptions were to be drawn at the time of the carnival and allotted to twenty-five young ladies who would participate in the game of Beano, as usually played, repre
One third of the receipts — the “gross amount subscribed less solicitation expense” — was to be distributed in two hundred fifty cash awards, including ten awards running from twenty per cent to two per cent of one third of such receipts. The “winner of the 1st Game of Beano” was to “receive free the 1st award and the other 24 . . . the consolation awards,” and the same routine was to be “followеd through for ten consecutive games which will complete the distribution of ten major awards and 240 consolation awards.”
It is apparent that the enterprise, after subscribers are obtained, consists of two elements: (a) the drawing of the names of twenty-five subscribers for whom twenty-five young women as their representatives are to play the game of Beano and (b) the playing of thе game by these representatives of subscribers winning in such drawing. Each subscriber who is such a winner is entitled to ten cash prizes — ten consolation prizes at least and a larger prize in lieu of a сonsolation prize for each time his representative is the winner of a game of beano. The drawing of subscribers entitled to play the game of beano through their representatives and entitled also to the accompanying cash prizes, considered by itself, is clearly “a lottery for money,” within the meaning of
The defendant is not, by reason of
The facts agreed, however, show that the selection by chanсe of subscribers entitled to be represented in the game and also to share in the cash prizes is not a part of the game of beano. Only representatives of the subscribers winning in the drawing аre to “participate in the game.” The game is to be played by these representatives to determine, subject to limitations, the distribution among such subscribers of the cash prizes. The subscribеrs losing in the drawing not only are not to participate in the game but even are not required to be present personally or by representatives in the hall when the game is played. And they hаve no interest in the outcome of the game. The selection by chance of subscribers to participate in the game by their representatives and the consequent exclusion of all other subscribers from participation therein, personally or by representatives, is merely preliminary to the game itself.
The defendant contends, however, that the enterprise аs a whole is within the protection of
It follows that there was no error in the denial of the defendant’s motion for a finding of not guilty or of his requests for rulings and that the judgment must be affirmed. Commonwealth v. Boston & Maine Transportation Co.
So ordered.