624               JOURNAL OF PROCEEDINGS            [Mar. 3

It yields to the State four thousand dollars more each year than
was required, and it was, no doubt, in view of the fact that every
object contemplated by the people of Maryland in the organic law
was accomplished, and more than accomplished, by the contract,
that it received the unhesitating approval of the two officers desig-
nated by the Constitution, to wit, the Comptroller and Treasurer.
It occurs to the undersigned, in this connection, that it may be a
subject of considerable doubt, whether, after an approval of these
officers, it is competent for any one to litigate the legality of the
contract. Whatever doubts have been expressed as to the power
of the Lottery Commissioner, there can be none as to those of the
Comptroller and Treasurer. If they have approved, what other
jurisdiction has been designated by the Constitution for the super-
vision of the exercise of his powers by the Commissioner of
Lotteries? Where the instrument itself selects the authority
which is to act upon and ratify or reject the proceedings of the
Commissioner, the undersigned think their action must be con-
clusive.

Passing this by, however, as an incidental consideration, the
undersigned repeat, that the contract in question, beyond all
doubt, carries out fully the expressed purpose and aim of the
Constitution. Now, it must be supposed, that with an aim be-
fore them, the people have given the powers necessary to effec-
tuate it, and when we find that it is effectuated, the conclusion is
almost instantly arrived at, that the power, which has accom-
plished the end proposed, must have been conferred.

Upon examination of the 5th Article of the 7th section, the
undersigned find this conclusion corroborated. It authorizes the
several Lottery Commissioners to make a contract or contracts
for accomplishing the desired result. The result their may be
reached by one contract as well as several. The work is not
necessarily to be done by two, three or more contracts. One
may and will be sufficient for the purpose. If then one contract
may extinguish the Lottery system, it can be the work of only
one Commissioner. It is absurd to suppose, that after the end
has been accomplished by one contract made by one Commis-
sioner, any further power can remain in his successors. But it
one Lottery Commissioner does not accomplish the whole work,
all that is unaccomplished remains to be done by his successors.
Hence the meaning of the expression "the several Lottery Com-
missioners." Because one did not, or Could not do the whole
work, it was not to fail for that reason. Those who followed
were to take up the work where he left it, and carry it on to
accomplishment. But it is idle to suppose, that because suc-
ceeding Lottery Commissioners were invested with authority to
perform what was left unfulfilled by those who preceded them,
therefore that power was to be exercised where there was no