Alexandria Gazette

Important Decision.

It will be seen by the report of the Court of Appeals, on Tuesday, that they have decided the case of Alfred R. Day, vs. the State, which was instituted on the suggestion of the lottery commissioners, on the equity side of Baltimore County Court, by the State, for a discovery from the appellant, (the defendant below.) The bill states, that six separate actions had been instituted before a justice of the peace of Baltimore against the appellant, to recover the fines imposed for violation of the third section of the act of 1846, ch. 109, which were then pending. That said appellant had been engaged in selling to persons of color, memoranda or tickets insuring certain numbers of lottery tickets, contrary to the provisions of said act, and that it was material to the proper decisions of said actions. that the appellant should discover, on oath, when, and for what consideration, and to whom, the said memoranda were given, and what is their meaning.

The case involved the question of the constitutionality of the 2d section of the act of 1847, ch. 284, which provides, "That upon any proceeding for the recovery of any fine imposed by the act to which this is a supplement, the party from whom it is sought to be recovered shall be bound to answer upon oath any bill of discovery which may be filed against him in the premises by the commissioners of lotteries in the name of the State, either in the High Court of Chancery or any county court of equity."

The Baltimore County Court, considering the provisions of this act binding, passed an order commanding the said appellant to answer the same on oath. The appellant filed a general demurrer, which was overruled by the court, from which the appellant appealed.

The Court of Appeals, it will be seen, has affirmed the decision of Baltimore County Court, in equity, which required that Day is bound to answer the "bill of discovery," filed in chancery against him, even though his answer should prejudice his defence.—Balt. Sun.