Clipping:The jurisdiction dispute in the Force case
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
 |
| Add a Clipping |
| Date | Sunday, March 28, 1875 |
|---|---|
| Text | A regular meeting of the Judiciary Committee of the National Professional Association was called to meet March 1, 1875... The first case on the docket was known as the Force case, being a question as to the legality of a properly-prepared and signed contract between the said Force and the Chicago Base-Ball Club. The first move was on the part of the Athletic Base-Ball Club, who, by their representative, raised the point of want of jurisdiction, and called the attention of the Committee to Sec. 4, Rule 4, of the Championship Code, wherein it says unless the charges have been presented in writing to the Judiciary Committee, or any member thereof, on or before Nov. 14, of the championship season, they shall not be adjudicated on by the Committee. The question, being upon the interpretation of the section and rule, was argued by the representatives of the Chicago and Athletic Clubs, and then they withdrew. The committee, after a little discussion, took a direct vote, and it was found to be their unanimous opinion that the point was not well taken. Upon the case being recalled, the Athletic Club filed a protest, and it was so continued. … They [the committee] believe they had jurisdiction for the following reasons: These rules relate solely to the Championship Clode. Its name is Championship Code. Rule 4 is upon the awarding of the championship pennant. Section 4 relates to the presentation of charges. Charges of what? Violation of the rules of the Professional Association, as far as it affects the award of the pennant for the championship. Nothing else. The Committee inquire here what the Force case has to do with the championship of 1874. the answer is at once given. Nothing at all. How then can the clause relating to Nov. 15, applying wholly to the championship, affect this case? Not al all. When did these events happen? In 1874, while the Judiciary Committee of 1874 had full powers. Why then has not this Committee full power and jurisdiction over this case? They have. This Committee is the judicial body of the base-ball community. It is so agreed and understood. Whey then should not questions affecting the interests of the clubs be brought before this judicial body and passed upon? There is no reason at all. Therefore you Committee did act and gave to the consideration of the question the best of their judgment and powers. Upon this ground they decided that they could hear the case. Chicago Tribune March 28, 1875 [See same issue for a detailed presentation of the facts of the substantive argument.] [See also CT. 4/16/75 for the proposed boycott.] |
| Source | Chicago Tribune |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | Edit with form to add a comment |
| Query | Edit with form to add a query |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
| Origin | Initial Hershberger Clippings |
Comments
<comments voting="Plus" />