clear space clear space clear space white space
A
 r c h i v e s   o f   M a r y l a n d   O n l i n e

PLEASE NOTE: The searchable text below was computer generated and may contain typographical errors. Numerical typos are particularly troubling. Click “View pdf” to see the original document.

  Maryland State Archives | Index | Help | Search
search for:
clear space
white space
Proceedings and Debates of the 1967 Constitutional Convention
Volume 104, Volume 1, Debates 1686   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>
clear space clear space clear space white space

1686 CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION OF MARYLAND [Dec. 4]

terstate commerce and over 150 years there
have been 250 decisions defining that be-
cause, as the country grew, we changed.

I cannot tell you that there will never
he a decision because 50 years from now as
a result of computers and a totally new
kind of civilization, somebody is going to
think of something that I never dreamed
of, even in a nightmare.

THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Kosakowski.

DELEGATE KOSAKOWSKI: Delegate
Sherbow, to pursue Delegate Gleason's re-
marks in reference to the definition of a
lottery, I know you are a learned lawyer,
a very good judge, you have had a lot of
experience in this matter.

When the case goes before the Court of
Appeals, do these judges define words by
looking the words up in the dictionary? Do
they define words from past experiences in
an area? How do they arrive at defining
.something? What process do they take? Be-
ing a layman, I do not understand that.
Maybe you could explain this to me.

DELEGATE SHERBOW: What hap-
pens, Delegate Kosakowski, is this. When
you are dealing with something like lot-
tery, you give it its general meaning. When
somebody comes up with something that is
a little different and you now have to face
another set of facts, then you go back and
you look at the history of the entire sub-
ject. Then you go further and you go to
the debates either in the legislature or in
Congress or before the Constitutional Con-
vention. You want to find out what did
those people think it meant? You look for
the contemporaneous construction. Then
out of all of this distillation of arguments
on all sides, if it becomes necessary to de-
fine the particular matter, the courts will
define them.

If they feel that all they have to do is
to decide whether what is before them
comes within it or not, they may say we
rule that this is or is not within this
statute. We go no further.

They do not have to decide a whole lot
more than just the simple issue of the case
before them.

THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Kosakowski.

DELEGATE KOSAKOWSKI: Delegate
Sherbow, did your Committee get the dic-
tionary and look at the definition of a
lottery?

DELEGATE SHERBOW: We are deal-
ing with a legal definition. You are going

to find out later in reading as we will of
some pages dealing with the matters relat-
ing to taxation, that words have special
meaning. They are words of art. They deal
with a special subject. They have acquired
this particular meaning. The lottery, as we
understand it, has acquired these meanings.

There is another statement in the law
which says if you allow something to go
on for a long time and people have accepted
that particular definition, you have to give
considerable weight to it.

THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Kosakowski.

DELEGATE KOSAKOWSKI: Delegate
Sherbow, going back to a statement you
made relating to horse racing compared to
lotteries, did you make the statement that
horse racing and lottery were controlled
by the State of Maryland?

DELEGATE SHERBOW: No, I said
not that lottery was controlled, I said lot-
tery was banned by the State of Maryland,
but that horse racing insofar as pari-
mutuel betting is concerned is under the
control of the State of Maryland and is
not construed as a lottery. They could not
operate if it was construed as a lottery.

THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Kosakowski.

DELEGATE KOSAKOWSKI: If the ban
on lottery were taken out of the constitu-
tion and the State of Maryland approved
the lottery, do you think with a state-
operated lottery, the racketeers would
muscle in?

DELEGATE SHERBOW: I do not think
there is the slightest doubt of it, I think
they would muscle in, and I would be will-
ing to predict almost the period of time it
would take them to come it. It would be
less than ten years.

THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Weide-
meyer.

DELEGATE W E ID E ME YE R: Mr.
Chairman, I notice that in your report it
dwelt at considerable length on the fact
that lotteries were bad and should be
banned because, as you have indicated by
your talk here today and also by the re-
port, that it meant paying in some money
on the theory of getting a large return or
something for nothing.

I am wondering with that in mind did
your Committee give any special thought
to jai alai? Did it give any special thought
to dog racing? Or bookmaking or pinball
machines that pay off or horse race betting
or off track betting or free play machines



 

clear space
clear space
white space

Please view image to verify text. To report an error, please contact us.
Proceedings and Debates of the 1967 Constitutional Convention
Volume 104, Volume 1, Debates 1686   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>


This web site is presented for reference purposes under the doctrine of fair use. When this material is used, in whole or in part, proper citation and credit must be attributed to the Maryland State Archives. PLEASE NOTE: The site may contain material from other sources which may be under copyright. Rights assessment, and full originating source citation, is the responsibility of the user.


Tell Us What You Think About the Maryland State Archives Website!



An Archives of Maryland electronic publication.
For information contact mdlegal@mdarchives.state.md.us.

©Copyright  November 18, 2025
Maryland State Archives