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 1694   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>
clear space clear space clear space white space

1694 CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION OF MARYLAND [Dec. 4]

THE CHAIRMAN: Any further ques-
tions? Delegate Lloyd Taylor.

DELEGATE L. TAYLOR: One final
question. Do you say that if the State en-
tered into this type activity it would really
give the State a bad reputation and also
add more special problems to the State.
This is what you are really saying.

DELEGATE SHERBOW: Without ques-
tion, I think that is so.

THE CHAIRMAN: Any further ques-
tions of the Committee Chairman for pur-
pose of clarification? Delegate Harry
Taylor.

DELEGATE H. TAYLOR: Judge Sher-
bow, I have a question. In Southern Mary-
land where I live, bingo is very popular
among some of our churches there. In fact,
so much so, the congregation on bingo
night is usually a lot larger than it is at
Sunday morning services. We also have
fire departments that depend to a great ex-
tent on bingo to supplement the income
they get from the county and the State. I
am worried and I think many here are
now although you made the intent of your
Committee very clear that somehow the
Court of Appeals or someone else is going
to say that bingo is a lottery and we are
going to be in trouble on this provision.

I do not know whether Style and Draft-
ing can do anything about this, but I think
what we want is for this provision to say
we do not want lotteries but this does not
include bingo.

It may be that the simple answer to it,
I ask you this question, you say the present
provision says that the General Assembly
may not grant. If we make an amendment
to that and say or any local subdivision
shall not grant, we might be able to solve
the problem and make this absolutely clear
and get to a vote.

DELEGATE SHERBOW: Are you sug-
gesting, Delegate Taylor, that instead of
the present proposal that we adopt now
literally the present Constitution "no lot-
tery grant shall ever hereafter by author-
ized by the General Assembly" and add to
it "or any political subdivision of the
state"? I myself would be willing to accept
that. I do not know whether the members
of the committee who voted in the affirma-
tive would.

THE CHAIRMAN: I take it Delegate
Taylor's suggestion would also be satisfied
simply by changing the word "sanctioned"
in line 9 to the word "granted," is that
correct, Delegate Taylor?

DELEGATE H. TAYLOR: Yes, Mr.
Chairman.

DELEGATE SHERBOW: I would ac-
cept that definition instead of "lottery shall
not be sanctioned", change the words to
"lotteries shall not be granted".

THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Harry
Taylor.

DELEGATE H. TAYLOR: I am willing
to do whatever I must to see that this is
done.

DELEGATE SHERBOW: I would ask
it —

THE CHAIRMAN: This is not the time
to offer amendments. You have that oppor-
tunity later. You have asked the question
and Delegate Sherbow has indicated that
at the proper time he would not oppose
such amendment. You will have to wait
until then.

DELEGATE SHERBOW: Mr. Chair-
man, I have been handed here in answer
to some of the questions page H-8029 of
the Congressional Record of the House of
June 26, 1967, dealing with the question
which has been asked by some people as to
whether or not the numbers racket is
stamped out by lottery.

A statement from Mr. Patman. Headline
reads: Numbers Racket Flourishes Amid
The New York Lottery. I will just read
briefly one statement from the New York
Times of June 22, 1967. "Betting on num-
bers is holding its own despite the lottery.
We welcome the lottery, a policy gambling
operator said yesterday. Numbers players
have not quit us because they now realize
our odds are better, we pay off immediately
and there is no waiting and furthermore
no winner has to worry about paying in-
come taxes." That's from the Congressional
Record.

THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Gallagher.

DELEGATE GALLAGHER: Judge Sher-
bow, I believe that "sanctioned" is a word
which is capable of duplicitous definition
and I wonder whether or not you would
seek some other word besides sanctioned
or grant because it would seem to me you
want to try to do two things in this par-
ticular language. One is you want to dis-
allow the State and its political subdivi-
sions from operating a lottery itself and
you want to prohibit them from allowing
others to do so, others in the nongovern-
mental sphere.

DELEGATE SHERBOW: Delegate Gal-
lagher, I believe the word "authorized"



 

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 1694   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