Dorrell v. Clark

MR. JUSTICE ANGSTMAN:

I dissent. I agree with all that is said in the opinion of my associates portraying the pernicious character of the slot-machine as a contrivance by means of which money is taken from the gullible, and that the judgment of the trial court is in conformity with good morals and what public policy ought to be. But the question of the public policy of the state is a legislative one where the legislature has legislated on the subject (Spaulding v. Maillet, 57 Mont. 318, 188 Pac. 377; State ex rel. Rankin v. Harrington, 68 Mont. 1, 217 Pac. 681), and not one for the courts, and…