The holding by the court that lottery tickets are articles of commerce and may become articles of interstate commerce, has of the agents who are to transport them. The mere fact that goods are manufactured to be transported and sold in another or other States, or that they have been segregated in the place where produced, for that purpose, is not sufficient to make them articles of interstate commerce. In some way they must have advanced some distance upon their way outside of the State of production. It is clear, therefore, that the whole process of manufacture or production is definitely excluded from the operation of the commerce clause. "Commerce succeeds to manufacture, and is not a part of it."22

21 In the minority opinion it is urged that the same reasoning which had been applied to hold hills of exchange and policies of insurance not to be articles of commerce was applicable to lottery tickets. "The lottery tickets." Bays Chief .Justice Fuller, speaking for the minority. "purports to create undoubtedly increased the possibility that, should a federal law be enacted in regulation of insurance companies doing business in more than one State, it will be sustained by the Supreme Court. Certainly there are very great points of similarity between a policy of insurance and a lottery ticket. Like the insurance policy, the lottery ticket is a promise to pay upon the happening of a certain contingency. Lottery tickets, to be sure, do indeed freely pass from hand to hand by sale or exchange, but, though not so readily, insurance policies are also at times sold and exchanged. Furthermore, as has been already observed, should the constitutionality of a federal law in regulation of insurance be involved, it would receive the benefit of every rational doubt.