Clippings:1889
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
 |
| Add a Clipping |
Clippings in 1889 (676 entries)
'We are the People'
| Date | Monday, October 7, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The train from the West over the New York, Lake Erie and Western Railway yesterday afternoon brought to this city [New York] the champion New York base ball team. The club traveled in a special car, on each side of which were long white strips of muslin, bearing the legend in red letters: WE ARE THE PEOPLE. At every station along the road the train was met with crowds, who cheered the champions time and again. In fact, it was almost one continual ring of cheers all day yesterday for the boys, but their reception at the depot in Jersey City and at the ferries in this city capped the climax. |
| Source | Philadelphia Item |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
'blacklist' changed to 'ineligible'
| Date | Wednesday, November 20, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [reporting the Arbitration Committee meeting 11/11/1889] The matter of amending the Agreement was next taken up. No startling changes were made except to chagne in many places the language of the document. The word “blacklist” was changed to “ineligible” wherever it occurred. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a Western Pennsylvania semi-pro league
| Date | Friday, January 25, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from an interview of Al Pratt] The clubs agreed upon to form the League are Johnstown, Blairsville, Lat4obe, Greenburg, Scottdale and Uniontown. … I want to give people to understand that the league means business. Every club has an inclosed ground,and each has a good team made up now. Of course, I think, the batteries of each team will be paid, but the balance will be made up of home players who play for the honor of playing. As far as can be estimated, about two games per week will be played, but this number may be increased. |
| Source | Pittsburgh Dispatch |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a ball players employment agency
| Date | Wednesday, March 27, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The “National Ball Players Employment Agency” is the name of the new players' employment bureau recently opened by George H. Geer, at 16 Clinton Block, Syracuse, N. Y. C. S. Rogers is secretary and treasurer. The terms of the agency are as follows:--To clubs, $3; players' engagement fee, $2, and players registration 25 cents. It will thus be seen that clubs in need of players can get them for less money than it would cost them railroad fare to go after the men, and as Mr. Geer is well acquainted with and a good judge of ball players, he can be depended upon to furnish managers with such players as they want to strengthen the weak spots in their teams. Mr. Geer is in the business to stay, and for that reason will do his level best to please and gain the confidence of all managers and players alike. Players out of engagement will find it to their advantage to communicate with Mr. Geer, as it will cost them less to pay his fees than to waste postage tamps writing to all the mangers and the country and after all not getting fixed for the season. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a batter refuses to take first on a hit by pitch
| Date | Friday, May 31, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [Pittsburg vs. Philadelphia 5/30/1889] In the eighth inning Thompson was hit by a pitched ball. It was scratchy, but he would not take his base, that is he did not appear anxious. The next ball he put over center field for a home run. |
| Source | Pittsburgh Dispatch |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a batting cage at Penn
| Date | Tuesday, January 15, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The Baseball Committee of the University of Pennsylvania has succeeded in securing a loan of %4,000, with which it is proposed to build a cage immediately. The cage will be 220 feet long by 110 feet wide, and between 40 and 50 feet high. That team will be able to begin practice on or about February 15. |
| Source | Pittsburgh Dispatch |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a block ball 4
| Date | Sunday, May 5, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | In the second inning Purcell hit over O’Brien’s head for two bases, and as the ball was blocked by the crowd he took third on the hit. |
| Source | Brooklyn Eagle |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a block ball 5
| Date | Tuesday, August 20, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [Pittsburgh vs. Cleveland 8/19/1889] Tebeau batted a swift grounder to Rose which the short stop juggled and then threw over Beckley's head into the pavilion. Tebeau continued in his chase around the bases, and crossed the plate before the ball was fielded back to Morris. |
| Source | Pittsburgh Dispatch |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a block ball candidate
| Date | Saturday, July 13, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [Chicago vs. Philadelphia 7/12/1889] Wood, the Phillies’ first batsman, in the sixth hit an easy grounder to Dwyer, and the latter threw it over Anson’s head into the right-field seats, Wood coming all the way home on the error. |
| Source | Philadelphia Item |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a botched infield fly play; early use of 'trap'
| Date | Friday, June 28, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [Washington vs. Pittsburgh 6/27/1889] [bases loaded with no outs] Wise then knocked an easy one into short right field. Dunlap ran for it and “trapped” it, expecting to make a double or triple play. Beckley, however, was away from first and failed to catch Dunlap's throw. As a result Hoy scored and three men were still left on bases. The mistake caused animated comment, some people blaming Beckley and others blaming Dunlap. The latter claimed that he shouted to Beckley to get on his base, and if this was so Dunlap's play was a very wise one. Manager Phillips states that Dunlap did just as he ought to have done. It is probable that Beckley did not hear Dunlap, and was not expecting a play of the kind. Dunlap, however, was exceedingly indignant. |
| Source | Pittsburgh Dispatch |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a broken bat
| Date | Monday, October 14, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The old bat which Ward, the Giants’ brainy shortstop, has used for the past three seasons, and which he carried on the world’s tour, was broken a few days ago. |
| Source | Philadelphia Item |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a broken mask 6
| Date | Saturday, October 5, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [Louisville vs. Cincinnati 10/4/1889] Umpire Gaffney was struck on the mask with a foul tip in the second inning and one of the wires cut a deep gash over his left eye. |
| Source | New York World |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a call for a minor league association; Western Association hints at going major
| Date | Wednesday, November 6, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | A dispatch from Minneapolis says:--Secretary Morton has notified the managers of clubs in minor leagues in every part of the country to send representatives to the Western Association's meeting. An alliance offensive and defensive will be formed, and then all will lay back on their oars to await the action of the League and Brotherhood meetings. The Brotherhood meeting will be held Monday, Nov. 4, and the League the week following. If the League passes reasonable rules relating to the minor associations, Morton's plan is to receive propositions from the Brotherhood. Should these propositions not meet with favor a general session of the minor leagues is pretty sure to result. Mr. Morton has a big scheme for th4 government of these associations, which has in view the Western Association becoming to the minor associations what the National League has been in the past. In a nutshell, Morton proposes that the Western Association shall become an open competitor to the National League. The Sporting Life November 6, 1889 [editorial matter] There is a silent but nevertheless strong sentiment in minor league ranks that the time has come for the minor organizations to insist upon a more equitable and less extortionate levy for protection than that now exacted of them by the two major leagues. They heavy tax of $1500 to $2000 per league, levied by the major leagues for a protection which is to a very considerable extent mutual is neither right nor just. Of course, it is quite proper that the minor leagues should share the expenses of maintaining the National Agreement, but anything more than that is simply an enforced tribute on the stand-and-deliver order, especially in view of the fact that the advantages of the protective system are not monopolized by the minor leagues by any means. How much the major leagues profit by such a system apart from the tax question is being made manifest now, and will be made more strikingly so, as the conflict between the League and its players becomes more defined. The Sporting Life November 13, 1889 |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a celebratory riot following a victory
| Date | Wednesday, May 1, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [Boston vs. Philadelphia 4/30/1889] Over 12,000 persons saw the Philadelphia Club defeat the Boston yesterday, and those who witnessed the game are not likely to soon forget the occasion. The overflow from the seats took possession of the field, lining the fence from three to six deep all the way round. On the left field terrace the crowd was about twenty deep. It was an enthusiastic assemblage from the start, but good order was preserved until the game was ended, when a wild scene of excitement ensued. Fogarty's catch of the last hit from big Dan Brouthers' bat, which ended the contest, was the signal for a great shout, and in an instant the field was covered with men and boys. They swarmed up to the pavilion in hot pursuit of the retiring ball players, howling and cheering. They occupants of the pavilion began throwing cushions, and those on the field were not slow in returning the compliment. The friendly fight waxed hotter and hotter, and many a hat came to grief. The battle was waxing furious, when Harry Wright rushed to the rescue. Single-handed he advanced on the tumultuous throng, expostulating by word and hand, and admonishing the men and boys to cease their wanton destruction of property. But it was like talking to a whirlwind. To the on-lookers the strangest part of the conflict was that Manager Wright's tall beaver hat escaped injury. It was in the thickest of the fray, and at times the air seemed black with cushions around it, but the hat came out unscathed. |
| Source | Philadelphia Record |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a charge of game throwing in St. Louis
| Date | Thursday, July 18, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The Post-Dispatch here [St. Louis] to-day published a sensation story that the Browns are putting up a game for the pool rooms and that two members have thrown games. It seems that Latham and King have been putting up such uniformly bad ball that it created suspicion and was some nasty talk. After the second Athletic-Brown game, in which King was knocked out of the box, there was a howl from all over the country. Letters were received by the club management from pool-room keepers and Kansas City and Omaha complaining that certain members of the Browns were throwing games. The Omaha letter stated that a man had entered the pool-room there and offered to bet $100 to $50 against the Browns. This was considered the stronger club, had the advantage of playing on their home grounds, and had in one of their strongest batteries. When King was removed from the box, so the letter stated, the man who was backing the Athletics immediately began to hedge, and the odds veered around from $100 to $60 on the, despite the fact that Stivetts, a green pitcher, was substituted. The Kansas City letter was to the same effect. A man had entered a pool-room there and bet similarly against the Browns, and then commenced to hedge when King was taken out of the box. It was also said that a man had bet $150 against them here and proceeded to hedge at the same point of the game. This information looked so badly for the players that Mr. Von der Ahe immediately placed the matter in the hands of one of the largest detective agencies in the world and had them place officers to watch the pool-rooms, and Kansas City and Omaha especially, and to keep a general lookout at other points. He called King and Latham up before him and charged them with having thrown games. Both men denied it, and he warned them that if he learned that they were guilty of such an offense he would expel them for life... ... It is said that he...expressed himself to them very plainly. Mr. Von der Ahe is busily engaged in investigating the charges. |
| Source | Philadelphia Item |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a claim of an illicitly substituted ball
| Date | Thursday, August 1, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Captain Farrar did a great deal of unnecessary kicking. His worst ebullition was in the fifth inning, when, with two men on bases, Thompson placed the ball against the slats of the right field fence. Thinking that the ball would easily be a home run, the runners, Haliman and Meyers, began to make the round of the bases at their leisure. Kelly stood watching the ball, evidently of the same idea as the runners, but the ball struck the slats, which in that portion are constructed so that a ball cannot go through them, and they allow a ball to bound well away from them. The ball dropped back in the field and Kelly made a run for it. He fumbled the ball, else he would have been able to capture Haliman at the plate. The runners had been going so very slowly that Myers managed not to get beyond third and Thompson made second. Here Farrar made a great bluff about the ball having gone clear over the seats and then having been thrown back again, but he was unable to persuade Umpire Powers of this fact, though he stood arguing and expostulating for quite a number of minutes. All sorts of rumors went the rounds of the grounds about this ball. Some people, however, said that the ball was thrown back; and others claimed that the ball cleared the fence, and that Kelly had another ball concealed about his person and threw it in. The writing visited the bleaching boards at the end of the game, and found several persons who saw the ball hit the top of the slats and bound back onto the field. A moment’s reflection will convince any one that it was simply impossible for Kelly to have a ball concealed about his person from the way that he ran for the ball after it dropped to the ground. Such a hypothesis is simply ludicrous. Then it is scarcely within the bounds of possibility that any person could have thrown the ball back into the field as quickly as it came back from the slats. With any other man but Kelly in right field it is hardly probable that so many people could have been found who were so positive that they saw the ball go over the fence., quoting the Boston Herald |
| Source | Philadelphia Item |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a claim that Day might get involved with the PL
| Date | Sunday, October 13, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Representatives of the Brotherhood of Base Ball Players in New York inspected the land immediately north of the present Polo Grounds yesterday morning [10/11/]. One of these gentlemen was Mr. James J. Coogan, and the other very much resembled Mayor Hugh J. Grant. That was palpable evidence that the Brotherhood is looking for a ball ground, and as all the members in New York belong to the New York Base Ball Club, it is further evidence that the League organization in this city is in danger of disintegration. President John B. Day, of the Giants, is well aware of that fact, and for that matter so are all the magnates of the National League in the eight cities controlled by the monopoly. They are all frightened, and they have good reason to be. But, as the Item indicated, Mr. Day has been treated with more consideration by the players than some of the other aristocrats of the diamond. It is understood that when John Montgomery Ward, the President of the Brotherhood, was in the city last he called upon Mr. Day in a friendly way and gave him a tip about the negotiations going on. It is said that Mr. Day listened to his short stop, and when Ward suggested that there was no reason why Mr. Day should run an opposition team the League magnate meditatively puffed his cigar a moment and remarked that under the circumstances he could not see that there was. Of course Mr. Day, being a member of the League and the President of its champion team, would not be apt to proclaim the fact that he was contemplating an alliance with its enemies. He says he had no conversation with Ward; that he had no intention of abandoning the League, and that he did not believe that the Brotherhood players were about to desert him and run of club of their own. |
| Source | Philadelphia Item |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a claim that the AA is trying to throw the pennant to St. Louis
| Date | Tuesday, October 15, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from a telegram from Byrne] Under the schedule adopted by the American Association, limiting the championship games to Oct. 14, we have won the American Association Championship. Under the form of law the directors of the Association deprived Brooklyn of a game it was justly entitlted to from St. Louis. The combination to deprive Brooklyn of its victory is still operating. Two games are to be played by St. Louis in Cincinnati to-morrow, to enable St. Louis to get to Philadelphia to play off its postponed games there. This, if done, simply makes our championship race a farce. If we are deprived of the victory we have honestly earned by these methods we must trust our cause to an honest press and public sentiment. |
| Source | New York World |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a claim that the Brush plan is being evaded
| Date | Wednesday, June 12, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from an interview of Frank Bancroft, Pittsburgh manager] ...[the classification scheme is] a fraud as at present obeyed, for New York, Boston and Philadelphia [are] paying the men as they pleased and [will] do it next year. They say Mr. Day told Roger Connor as long as he played ball for him he would give him the same wages. Now I think the plan is a good one if lived up to by all. But now we have some men who are classified, and it riles them to have players in other teams who are lucky to give them the laugh. It makes the classified men careless, and I wouldn't wonder if we lost many a game this way. Something like it must be enforced for Indianapolis, Washington and Cleveland. Even Pittsburg can't pay the salaries the other clubs can. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a claimed flooding of the infield for a rain out
| Date | Saturday, June 29, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The versatile romancer who sends the Clipper base ball “news” from St. Louey, Mizzourey, tells this story: “I recently heard a good one on the Cleveland club. During the last visit of the Browns to Cleveland the weather not particularly bright, and two games were postponed on account of the alleged “bad condition of the grounds.” So the wires informed us here, and the papers also noted it. I learned from several of the players, who happened to be at the Cleveland ball grounds on the days when these games were to have taken place that saw, to their astonishment, the grounds-keeper industriously “hosing” the diamond and forming “pools” around the bases. The stream was a stead one, and it accomplished its purpose admirably. The nefarious work cost St. Louis at least one game and the guarantee. Hereafter Cleveland should be held up to summer guide bookmakers as a delightful and charming watering place, with all the summer comforts, hose and water included. This is one on “Cleveland. |
| Source | Cleveland Plain Dealer |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a club trainer
| Date | Wednesday, April 17, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Bill Hague, the old third baseman of the champion Providence team, has become the trainer of the Athletic club. He has been working on the pitchers' arms, and Seward, Weyhing, Smith and Knouff say their pitching limbs were never before in such excellent condition. St. |
| Source | St. Louis Republic |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a college player expelled for academic failure
| Date | Monday, February 4, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The Faculty of Harvard College had a very horny dilemma to handle this week. It was a question as to whether athletic skill or mental proficiency was the prerequisite to scholarship in the college. The case involved was that of Harry Bates, of Newton, Mass., the popular pitcher of the college baseball team. Harry, while a hero among the athletes, was only a probationary scholar, and in his practice of curves and drops had failed to secure an acquaintance with his studies sufficient to carry him through the final examinations for full admission. The faculty had been considering his case for a long time, withholding his rejection on account of the pressure brought to bear by the athletic enthusiasts who desired to see the crimson pennant carried triumphant through next summer's college contests. It was a close battle between muscle and brains, with the chances in favor of muscle winning, and Bates being retained, when, unfortunately, the condition of affairs got into print. Then the faculty, recognizing the incongruity of their position, acted summarily. Bates' probation was closed, and he returned to his home in Newton this afternoon. His absence will certainly be felt in baseball circles. He improved wonderfully under Clarkson last year, and showed signs o still greater improvement this winter. Clarkson will have a good deal of trouble in bringing out a man who will make even a respectable showing against Yale or Princeton. |
| Source | Pittsburgh Dispatch |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a college player with the Chicagos
| Date | Tuesday, September 10, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | ...the old Yale player, Hutchinson, who pitched the game of his life... |
| Source | Brooklyn Eagle |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a collegiate plays professionally under an assumed name
| Date | Friday, February 1, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Bingham, the Minneapolis pitcher, was a member of the class of '86 at Harvard, and after pitching for his class nine during the spring of '86 he signed with the Oshkosh team under an assumed name, and was known as the “California wonder.” He was recognized by a fellow student while playing at St. Paul, and was exposed. This prevented his playing in any college team in the future. |
| Source | Pittsburgh Dispatch |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a collegiate professional
| Date | Saturday, April 6, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The careers of few professional ball players are more interesting than that of Sanders, the strapping Philadelphia pitcher who is paired with Clements. He comes of a highly respectable family and resides at Sudley, Prince William county, Va., where he was born. He graduated from Roanoke College with high honors, and left there with the intention of studying for the ministry. He taught a country school for one year, and joined the Philadelphias in the spring of 1888. Last winter he attended Vanderbilt University, Nashville, where he is studying to become a civil engineer. Sanders, who is 28 years of age, made a phenomenal record as pitcher for the Cartharpins, a Virginia country nine, which defeated some of the best amateur clubs of the country in 1885 and 1886., quoting the Baltimore Herald |
| Source | New York Sun |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a combine of Association clubs against Byrne
| Date | Wednesday, November 13, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The proceedings of a little secret session of what is called the “Association Combine” leaked out yesterday morning, and if the “combine” sticks to its resolutions there is apt to be some fun before the American Association completes its labors of the annual meeting. It was mentioned yesterday that a conference had been held in Philadelphia in which five clubs were represented. Instead of Philadelphia the conference was held in Mr. Von der Ahe’s rooms at the Grand Centra Hotel, this city. Besides the President of the St. Louis Club there were present a representative of the Louisville, Columbus and Athletic clubs. It was intended to map out the procedure for the “combine” at the Association meeting to-day, and to fix matters up generally. The absence of Kansas City from the conclave was rather a surprise, but then no difficulty was expected from that direction, and all arrangements were made to carry out their designs, which are principally to prevent Brooklyn and Cincinnati from receiving any favors in the Association. |
| Source | Philadelphia Item |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a comparison of the Orioles new black and orange uniforms to the Canaries
| Date | Wednesday, April 24, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from the Baltimore correspondent] Kiffe, of Brooklyn, had fitted the boys out in new uniforms of the patter of the old Lord Baltimores. The canaries looked like dandies in them yesterday when the came from the club house... |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a concise statement of the argument that 'reserve' is a technical term
| Date | Monday, November 4, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from an interview of Ward] This move by the magnates [to sue for injunctions] was just what we expected, and it will intimidate no one. The best lawyers, if they start on a misunderstanding of the facts, will reach a wrong conclusion, and this is just what Evarts, Choate & Beaman have done. They seem to think that the clause in the contract was the origin of the ‘reserve’ relation between player and club, and that then afterwards the various clubs agreed to respect this resolution. This puts the cart before the horse, for the reserve relation was created by the agreement among the clubs and had existed for years before it was mentioned in the contract. So that when we used the word it already had a definite technical meaning. |
| Source | Philadelphia Item |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a condemnation of Wikoff's leadership
| Date | Wednesday, September 18, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [editorial matter] The Brooklyn-St. Louis row is but the culmination of a long series of complaints and troubles directly traceable to the umpires themselves and to their handling. In his direction of the corps President Wikoff, who was last spring entrusted with exclusive control of the umpires, has shown himself utterly incompetent. Although regularly scheduled, no attempt has been made by him to keep the men up to their work, they have reported for duty or not, as they pleased, excuses of all sorts for non-performance of duty have been accepted as valid, the substitute system has been abused; in fact, a general demoralization was allowed to creep in unchecked. With five well-paid men on the staff, it was an almost daily occurrence throughout the season to find local substitutes, players and all sorts of irresponsible people umpiring important games with consequent dissatisfaction to the contesting clubs, the public, and the other clubs in the race all more or less affected in position thereby. In fact, a goodly portion of the rows of the season were directly due to this hap-hazard system of umpiring. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a critique of sacrifice hitting
| Date | Wednesday, May 8, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from Ren Mulford's column] The sacrifice hit craze has had its day. In their places sacrifice hits are all right, but to begin in the first inning to try to “go out,” in order to send a runner forward a base, seems absolute folly without an excuse for its practice. The element of uncertainty and possibility in a game of ball is so great that it appears to be bad policy to send a man to absolute destruction. Just in illustration and I'm done. In the last St. Louis game here Nicol led off in the first inning with a hit and stole second. Then McPhee, instead of trying to hit the ball safely was ordered to sacrifice, and he did. Nicol gained third on his out, but Reilly's attempt to sacrifice resulted in a bunted fly to Comiskey, and Carpenter sent Boyle a foul. With the auspicious opening not a semblance of a tally was made. McPhee certainly had a chance to make a hit which would have sent Nicol home, but under this new craze he was allowed to be offered up as a sacrifice—a dead sure out exchanged for a chance for a possible hit, a tally and another runner on base! Was the advancement of Nicol one base worth the loss of all those other chances? I say not. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a critique of the umpire behind the pitcher; umpire looking over the catcher's shoulder
| Date | Wednesday, September 4, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from Joe Pritchard's column] On more occasions than one during the present season have I noticed the fact that umpires who make their decisions from a position behind the pitcher are a source of considerable annoyance to the man who fills the hardest position on a team. In last Tuesday's game, while Stivetts was in the box and Milligan was up behind the bat, the former was given the “cue” two or three times to throw to second to catch a base-runner, but owing the the presence of the umpire between the pitcher and second Stivets was forced to hold the ball, as the base-runner was able to get back to second during the time consumed by Goldsmith in attempting to get out of the pitcher's way. Team work should not receive a black eye from the position occupied by the umpire, and I know it would be more satisfactory to all pitcher for umpires to return to their position behind the plate just as soon as second is reached by the runner. The proper position of the umpire is behind the plate, as he cant hen know just what is is doing on balls and strikes. Gaffney's position is the only correct one. He stands up close enough to the catcher to be able to look over his shoulder, and his position commands full view of the plate. He can tell beyond a doubt whether the pitcher is entitled to a strike or the batsman to a ball. Gaffney's position is certainly more dangerous than the other umpires' but he is well protected by several pasteboard patents, and is seldom injured. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a deal blocked in waivers
| Date | Tuesday, February 5, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | President Davidson says that the deal in which he was trying to disposed of Hecker and Cooker, will fall through, probably, owing to Cincinnati's objection. He was not after a fielder, but a young pitcher whom he things would have proved of great value to the Louisvilles. He declined to say what player he intended securing, but intimated that the sale would have been made had the Association clubs waived their claim to Hecker. He received answers from all the clubs excepting Brooklyn, and out of these Cincinnati was the only one which refused to relinquish their rights to Hecker and Cook. The action of the Cincinnati club in declining that request, he said, deserved criticism, for they not only rejected his request, but even went so fqar as to offer the insignificant sum of a “few hundred dollars” for a battery like Hecker and Cook. |
| Source | Pittsburgh Dispatch |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a defense of the player sales system
| Date | Wednesday, October 16, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from Harry Palmer's column] “The odious sales system” has been the handle to the lash of every conspirator, and to many fault-finders who have been at a loss for any other cause for complaint. While not a defender of the system and while I should gladly welcome the substitution of any other system for the promotion of demonstrated talent, I am still compelled to admit that even the “sales system” of to-day is of great benefit both to the player and to the minor organizations throughout the country. Indeed, were it not for the sales system, many promising young clubs which have gone through several seasons would never have been able to organize for another race in the face of the financial loss attendant upon their first season. For instance, take the case of the Des Moines Club of last year. It was away behind financially before the season had been complete, but it developed some excellent playing talent during the race and impressed this fact upon the clubs of the greater leagues by winning the championship of the Western Association. Although from $8000 to $10,000 behind when the season closed, the sales system enabled Des Moines to recover its losses and wind up with a few thousand dollars to the good. The sale of Hutchson and Sage alone yielded the club no less than $6000, Chicago paying $3500 for Hutchison. Further than this, the club was not only helped out of the hole, but the players “sold” were advanced to better positions with clubs of national reputation, and at a material increase of salary and unquestionably increased opportunities to add to their professional reputations and consequently to the value of their services. While citing the case of Des Moines I am reminded that the sales system alone saved Omaha—Western Association pennant winners for this season—from financial loss. The howl about “slaves and slave-masters” of the National League is a “bugaboo,” a pumpkin-face with a candle behind it. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a description of Coogan's Bluff
| Date | Wednesday, July 10, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from J. F. Donnolly's column] Another circumstance in connection with the [new Polo] ground is that it is below the level of the street, while overhanging it on the west is a big bluff from which a good-sized audience can view the game most comfortably. In addition, the bluf throws a deep shadow over the diamond, and as the sun gets behind it about 5 o'clock every evening it may possibly be necessary to commence the game some thirty minutes earlier than the two hours before sun-set prescribed by the rules. … I must confess that I cannot see anything peculiarly bright in the prospects of the club at the new location. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a dispute over an exhibition game guarantee
| Date | Thursday, April 18, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | An umpire named Bowman gave the Columbus Club such a roast at Wheeling, W. Va., last Sunday that Captain Dave Orr took his men off the field and refused to continue the game. Manager Buckenberger refused to refund the guarantee and as a result the entire Columbus team was arrested and their baggage, including the trunk of Mrs. Orr, were attached. Arrangements were made to hold the train for ten minutes, a lawyer was engaged, and by paying $30 for settlement and $10 for the lawyer, the baggage was at once released, the team just making the train in time. The Columbus manager got the best of it by $85, as the guarantee was $125. |
| Source | Philadelphia Item |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a dispute over the dropped third strike rule
| Date | Saturday, May 25, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [Pittsburgh vs. Washington 5/24/1889] There was a long and tedious delay in the sixth. Morrill and Haddock were on second and first and Hoy struck out, Lauer dropping the ball. Hoy was out at first under the rules, but Morrill and Haddock went ahead a base each. Fessenden was included to acceded to Dunlap's claim and sent them back, but Honest John talked loud and long, and finally sent to the clubhouse for the rules. After much reading Fessenden allowed the runners to remain in their places. |
| Source | Pittsburgh Dispatch |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a doubleheader due to a rain delay
| Date | Wednesday, May 1, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [Baltimore vs. Brooklyn 4/30/1889] There was something like 3,795 spectators at the morning game between the Brooklyn and Baltimore clubs at Washington Park yesterday, the game was the one prevented by the bad condition of the grounds at Ridgewood on Sunday. |
| Source | New York Sun |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a eulogy for the American Association
| Date | Wednesday, November 20, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [editorial matter] Base ball history was made rapidly during the past week, and the 14th day of November marked the beginning of a new epoch in professional base ball, for on that day the national League succeeded informing its lines in final array for the battle with that rising power, the National Players' League, and at the same tie dealt its old and hated rival, the American Association, a mortal blow, for that is what the defection of Brooklyn, Cincinnati and the consequent withdrawal of Kansas City virtually amounts to. The American Association may succeed in filling the vacancies and weathering another season, but its position in the front rank of base ball is gone, its prestige destroyed, and it stands shorn of all power for good or evil. With a widely scattered circuit, expensive teams, several semi-bankrupt clubs, but a couple of cities of the first class, and with no financial resources, its chances for more than a precarious existence are decidedly slim, and to all intents and purposes it may now be considered out of the arena as a great factor in the national game. This is a sad fate for this once powerful organization, and for many reasons its downfall is to be regretted. In its time it has done much for the game, alike for some of the reforms it has aided in accomplishing, and for the larger interest in the sport its existence helped to create and maintain; but it contained almost from its inception the seeds of early dissolution, disorganizing forces were uninterruptedly at work, and it was only a question of time when it would go to the wall. Brilliant opportunities to assume the premier position, to consolidate and strengthen itself presented themselves time and again, but all were frittered away through gross incompetence, despicable selfishness and fatuous perversity, and the melancholy result is visible to-day. … ...blunder followed blunder, and the campaign of 1889 marked the beginning of the end. This campaign was one continual series of petty bickerings, scandalous crimination and recrimination and bitter quarrels over a miserable championship which culminated in a factional division and the discreditable combination and outrageous action of the Board of Directors at the Cincinnati special meeting. From that day every thinking friend of the Association must have realized that the end could not be much longer delayed, as the breach was then widened to almost unclosable proportions and unhealable wounds were made. … Vale, American Association! |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a failed game due to a large crowd; clearing the field
| Date | Monday, May 6, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [Athletic vs. Brooklyn May 5, 1889] The fine weather of yesterday was almost perfect for ball playing, and the fact that the Brooklyn and Athletic Clubs were to play at Ridgewood brought out 18,000 base ball enthusiasts to see the game. Hours before the game they began to come. The early comers had no more than selected their choice seats before a crowd of fully five thousand persons was outside the gates clamoring for admission. From 2:30 o'clock to 3:30 o'clock there was a solid mass of people reaching from the gates of the ball grounds along the Manhattan Beach Railroad to Myrtle avenue, a distance of probably half a mile. Near the gates this treat line was broken up into a number of small lines. For the greater portion of the time it was a go-as-you-please, and every man for himself. The one or two constables who tried to make order out of the confusion might just as well have tried to stop the tides. A thousand or more persons were jammed into the little space leading to the admission gates, and the outside thousands pushing on them prevented their being able to move at times. When the game began, the seats had all been taken, and with one exception there was no place to stand. The picket fences on each side of the ground had a mass of spectators both outside and in, and the only place left unfilled was the space directly back of the field. This space, however, was filling up fast, and as hundreds packed themselves on that part of the field every minute, it became too small to hold them. The crowd then began to push forward. The great high fences surrounding the grounds bore a solid row of men, and the only thing that those on the field could do was to push forward. Every few minutes there would be a break in the lines and a general move forward. This continued until the Athletics had finished their fifth inning and the Brooklyns were at the bat for their half of the fifth. The crowd by this time had encroached upon the territory of the outfielders. Left-fielder Stovey of the Athletics called Umpire Holland's attention to the fact, and asked to have the ground cleared. Holland requested the manager of the Brooklyn Club to see that the spectators were moved back. President Byrne, Umpire Holland, and several of the Brooklyn and Athletic players tried to assist the four lone constables in clearing the field. They failed in doing so. Those on the front of the crowd could not get back, and those on the back would not. Then began one of the finest scenes ever presented on a ball field. The attempt to get the right field side of the crowd back resulted in a break in the centre, and a thousand men moved forward a few steps and then wheeled to the right in a solid body and completely surrounded the men and players who were trying to put the crowd back. For a moment the left field crowd remained on a grassy incline. Then one man in the front jumped up and started across for the right field. This was a signal for another break, and two thousand men reinforced the the right field crowd. The attempt to clear the ground was then given up, and with one grand rush five thousand spectators rushed down upon the diamond, and in a minute the whole ball field was a mass of human beings. Ball playing was now out of the question, and Umpire Holland called the game back to the even fifth inning, and the players all went home. It is quite likely that this contest will be heard from again, and it may prove no end of trouble for both sides. President Byrne says that Stovey and Larkin incited the crowd to move forward on the field. This may be so, but the players deny it. Mr. Byrne also said that the actions of these two men caused the breaking up of the game, and that he would refuse to pay the managers the usual 20 per cent. due them as the visiting club. On the other hand, the Athletic managers insist that as the Brooklyn managers had failed to provide a sufficient number of police with which to keep the field clear, they should be awarded the game. They say that the umpire should have demanded that the field be cleared in a specified time, as called for in the rules, and if this was not done they should have been awarded the game by 9 to 0... When asked whether it was true that Stovey and Larkin had made any move toward inciting the crowd to break in on the field, they said that it was nonsense and that the circumstances of the case showed that they had nothing to gain by such a move. They had just a lead in the game but the inning had not been finished by the Brooklyn Club, so that any attempt to to break up the game would have done them no good as far as winning was concerned. It is certain that they w ill make a fight to have the game awarded them and the money also. If they don't get the money it is not quite plain who will get it unless it goes to the Brooklyn Club it certainly would not be fair for the home club to have it, either, because it was by their failure to have sufficient police to keep back the crowds that the game was not finished. A walk among the crowd while the diamond was still overrun showed quite plainly the cause of the game being broken up. The great crowd seemed to have made up its mind to get even with Stovey for his kicking in days gone by, and determined that he and his team should not win this game. New York Sun May 6, 1889 The Brooklyn team now went to the bat and Burns opened with a hit to Fennelly, who threw him out. At this juncture a movement of the crowd in on the right center field, back of where Welch was standing, was noticed, and while Foutz was at the bat the umpire called time and notified the Brooklyn officials that the field must be cleared. The ground officers went down to induce the crowd to stand bac, while Stovey and Welch–as dozens of men were ready to testify–told the crowd they could move in if they liked, and they did so, and soon the Athletic players, who had gathered back of second base in a bunch, were surrounded, and it became impossible to place the crowd back in their former position. Umpire Holland , seeing that the ground officials and Mr. Byrne had done their best to clear the field, and also that there was no possibility of having the contest resumed, called the game back to the last even five innings played, which left the game a draw, 1 to 1. ... Under the circumstances no claim of forfeit will hold good, especially in view of the fact that Stovey and Welch encouraged the crowd to break in. They were in a hurry to close the game, so as to catch the train, and they knew that if the crowd broke in it would likely end in a forfeit. That it was their game because of the lead they had secured was a nonsensical claim. Brooklyn Eagle May 6, 1889 [The game was in fact forfeited to the Athletics.] |
| Source | New York Sun |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
| Date | Sunday, September 1, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Patsy Tebeau has captured the heart of the town [Cleveland] by his tricks and antics. He plays to win games, and that's the kind of playing that pays. In last Monday's game he taught that big Chicagoan, van Haltren, a lesson which he'll not soon forget. Van was on third and pat had the ball. He made a motion to throw it to the pitcher, but deftly hid it in his hip pocket instead. Van, who wasn't watching the ball, led off the base and Tebeau stepped between him and the bag. Then he began to tug at the ball in the hip pocket, but it wouldn't budge. The harder he pulled the closer the ball stuck, until at length the runner noticed what he was doing and ran to his base. Then the unaccommodating sphere slipped out ot he pocket, but too late. Loftus says he'll have the pockets made larger after this. |
| Source | Chicago Tribune |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a feint to pick off a runner at second
| Date | Friday, April 26, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The Harvard base ball men have hatched up a trick which they claim will catch nearly every opponent who is lucky enough to steal second base. It is played between the pitcher, third baseman, and short stop, and its object is to confuse the player who may stealing from second to third base. It is, as nearly as can be descried, as follows: The player who has succeeded in reaching second base, on seeing that baseman step back to his usual position, about ten feet back of the base line, steals several feet down the path toward third. When he is about in front of short stop that player makes a dash toward second base, which causes the runner to dart in that direction also; but the short stop's run is only a feint, and the runner, on seeing the short stop stop, also stops before reaching second, and the pitcher throws the ball to the second baseman, who is on base, and whom the runner has entirely forgotten, and the runner is out. |
| Source | New York Sun |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a foreshadowing of Merkle's Boner
| Date | Tuesday, August 27, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [Boston vs. Philadelphia 8/26/1889] [bottom of the 12th inning, tie score, Boston at bat, two outs, Kelly at second and Brouthers on first] Johnston followed with a solid crack to centre and ran leisurely to first, bat in hand. When within ten feet of the base, seeing that Kelly had scored, he turned towards the right and ran over towards the stand. Fogarty made a wild throw in, the ball getting away from Farrar. It was finally secured by one of the Boston players, who passed it to Kelly. Farrar, Delahanty and Sanders ran after Kelly and tried to wrest the ball from him, but he would not give it up. The crowd then surged into the field and several passes were made at the “only,” but none of them landed. Finally, with the aid of the officers, he was hustled into the dressing-room. Johnston did not touch first base. In fact, he stopped within ten feet of it; but even if Farrar had secured the ball and made the claim it would not have been allowed, as neither [umpires] Curry nor McQuade saw the play. Kelly when seen said that he supposed Farrar wanted to substitute an old ball for a new one, as he did not tell him that he wanted the ball to make a play. Farrar admitted that in the excitement he did not tell Kelly what he wanted the ball for, but supposed that Kelly knew. The excitement was intense for a half hour, a great crowd being assembled on the outside of the grounds. The Philadelphia Item August 27, 1889 President Young yesterday [9/16] telegraphed Director Soden that the Boston-Philadelphia game had been declared by the League directors a victory for the Bostons. Three out of four members of the Board of Directors of the League voted for Boston, and it was not necessary for President Young, as chairman ex-officio, to cast his vote. President John B. Day stated in his communication to President Young “To all practical intents and purposes the game in dispute was won for Boston on Johnston’s hit, which, having passed the centrefielder, permitted Kelly to score the winning run.” Mr. Hewett when the case was presented to him concurred in the opinion of Mr. Day and cast his vote accordingly. His opinion was not given, however, until yesterday and was a verbal reply to President Young’s message. For the Indianapolis Club President Brush decided: “The umpire is sole judge of the game, and if he did not declare Johnston out for not running to first it must be presumed that he did reach there safely, in which case the run counted.” Messrs. Day, Brush and Hewett, it will be seen favored the award of the game to the Bostons, while President Nimick, of Pittsburg, was the only director opposed to the leaders. This effectually disposed of the story that Mr. Day is inimical to the Bostons, and speaks well for the fair minded New Yorker. The Philadelphia Item September 27, 1889 |
| Source | Philadelphia Item |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a foul flag
| Date | Wednesday, May 29, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [Athletic vs. Baltimore 5/28/1889] ...Stovey was on the coaching line at third base when Larkin cracked out what appeared to be a hit directly over third base, but the ball bounded foul just beyond the flag. Gaffney did not give any sign of life until Larkin was near second. Stovey was so intensely disgusted that he that he turned toward the umpire and with face turned away expressed his feelings by turning the palms of his hands towards Gaffney and waving him off. This was too much for the umpire. “Ten dollars for that,” he called out. |
| Source | Philadelphia Item |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a game halted to catch a train; beer selling at the Polo Grounds
| Date | Sunday, July 28, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | President Soden says that the game of six innings played between Boston and Indianapolis would go on record and be counted. “Why,” said he, “it is a common occurrence for teams to stop games to catch trains.” “I don't think a team that is breaking the rules every day, as they do in New York by selling beer on the grounds, will make much of a kick in a case of this kind,” said Director Billings. |
| Source | Indianapolis Journal |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a game prearranged to play five innings
| Date | Sunday, June 9, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [Pittsburgh vs. Cleveland 6/8/1889] The Pittsburghs did not want to play the second game. They had had enough. The local management couldn't see it in that light. Many people had come late, only to see the one game. Finally it was decided to play five innings and the game began. |
| Source | Pittsburgh Dispatch |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a ground rule for a puddle
| Date | Sunday, July 21, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [Indianapolis vs. New York 7/20/1889] The final ball game of the New York-Indianapolis series was played under very discouraging circumstances at the Polo grounds this afternoon. There was a heavy rain-fall last night, and the ball field was in a very bad condition in consequence. There was a small lake in left field, and on that account a ground rule was made, under which a hit to that territory, no matter how long, could only yield two bases. Boys, with trousers rolled up, were engaged to fish the ball out when it went into the miniature lake. In trying to get a fly ball, Sullivan went into the water once nearly up to his knees. |
| Source | Indianapolis Journal |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a half balk move; modern club name pattern
| Date | Sunday, April 14, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from the Harry Weldon's column] ...Elmer smith has this Winter acquired a new motion, which he uses effectually in watching bases. Elmer has a side step when a runner is on first almost equal to Jimmie Galvin's half-balk motion, which is known and spoken about the base ball world over. No one has ever yet succeeded in getting gentle James' exact motion, but Smith has a clever counterfeit. He used it effectively against the Pittsburgs the past week. If Elmer does not lose the art before the season opens the St. Louis Browns, Baltimores, Kansas Citys and other clubs who have daring a quick starters will come to grief by reason of this motion. |
| Source | Philadelphia Item |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a history of the A. G. Spalding & Bro. Company
| Date | Wednesday, April 17, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [See TSL April 17, 1889 p. 10 for a good history of the Spalding Company.] |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a history of the original Polo Grounds
| Date | Wednesday, May 1, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from Chadwick's column] So it is good-bye to the Polo Grounds after all. And thereby hangs a tale. The plot of ground bounded by One Hundred and Tenth and One Hundred and Twelfth streets and Fifth and Sixth avenue in this city was enclosed by the Westchester Polo Club in 1879. This club was composed of a choice lot of wealthy representatives of the upper ten—the exclusive “four hundred” were not in existence then—who made a specialty of that very costly sport, polo. They had flourished at Jerome Park, and had created such a stir among New York's fashionable circles that they became ambitious of having a club ground of their own; and so they leased the ground above referred to and it became known as the Westchester Polo Club's grounds and eventually the Polo Grounds. The club opened the grounds in style with a band of music and a crowd of fashionables, with lots of tally-ho coaches and carriages with liveried servants, etc. all in English style, “don't yer know.” As long as the entertainment was free it was crowded by the invited guests, but when half a dollar entrance fee was charged the attendance fell off. In fact, the enterprise as an investment became a pecuniary failure and the club found the grounds an elephant on their hands. Just at this time the Metropolitan Club—a gate-money professional organization which Mr. Day established with his money in September, 1880, and made James Mutrie its manager—finding that it was not profitable to play any more on the old Union grounds, induced the Westchester Polo Club to allow them to use their field on off days, when Polo was not played, and this being agreed to—the Polo people being glad to have a part of their rent paid in this way—the Metropolitan Club began its New York season there on September 15, 1880, and they played their first regular match at the Polo Grounds, on Sept. 29, they having the Nationals as opponents, and they defeated them 4 to 2. the Mets had previously played on the old Union grounds, beginning there on Sept. 15, when they played the Union nine—a picked gate-money team. During their first fall campaign at the Polo Grounds, they played twelve games, of which they won five, including victories over the Chicago, Worcester, Troy, and Cleveland nines, two of their defeats there being at the hands of the Chicago team. [continuing on through 1882] |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a home run trophy ball
| Date | Wednesday, July 17, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The first ball to be knocked over the New Polo Grounds fence was returned to the batter, Connor, by a policeman. Connor presented it to De Wolf Hopper, who will have it gilded, appropriately inscribed and hung up in the club house of the Actors' Amateur Athletic Association. To what lengths will not cranks of the Hopper stripe go? |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a journalist-player-manager; reporter for the Courier-Journal
| Date | Wednesday, October 2, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from the Louisville correspondent] The team on its present trip is under the charge of probably the youngest manager who was ever placed in such a responsible position. Rosy-faced, red-headed harry Means, who is not yet quite old enough to vote, is piloting the the Kentuckians in their rambles through Kansas City, Cincinnati and St. Louis. Harry is the base ball editor of the Courier-Journal. The present owners of the Louisville Club seem to have a partiality for newspaper men, since Brown and Means, its last two managers, are both members of the Courier-Journal staff. Young Means is himself something of a pitcher, and three seasons ago, when the Athletics came here and got very hard up for pitchers, he twirled in one game for them against the Louisville team. He was not a winner, but he did very well. He has been practicing with the Louisvilles nearly all season, and may yet joint them as a regular pitcher. The Sporting Life October 2, 1889 [N.B. The A's game was probably an exhibition] |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a late fair-foul
| Date | Wednesday, June 19, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [St. Louis vs. Brooklyn 6/18/1889] Now came a play which puzzled the crowd–grandstand occupants as well as the bleachers. Collins bunted a ball high enough in the air to prevent it being a hit direct to the ground, and, as it fell on fair ground and then rolled on foul ground–Collins ran to first on the hit... and everyone expected to hear the umpire call foul. But he apparently was the only one to see the point of the play, and when he decided it a fair ball there was a dispute. ... Of course when the point taken was explained there was prompt acquiescence, but the crowd could not understand it a bit. |
| Source | Brooklyn Eagle |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a late game on ice skates
| Date | Friday, February 22, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The South Park Commissioners have everything ready for the base of ball to-day on ice, at Washington Park, between the Jenney & Graham boys and the professionals (Artics). This is the deciding game and will be hotly contested. Both nines will be in uniforms–the toboggan suits–and a good game is expected. ... The diamond is all laid out, and the regular ice rules will govern the game. |
| Source | Chicago Inter Ocean |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a late use of 'How's that?'
| Date | Sunday, May 26, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [Chicago vs. New York 5/25/1889] Anson was jeered whenever he raised his hand and asked “How's that?”... |
| Source | Chicago Tribune |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a late use of 'chicago'
| Date | Monday, October 7, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [Athletics vs. Brooklyn 10/6/1889] ...nearly three thousand of these enthusiasts were there and saw the home team “chicago” their opponents... |
| Source | Brooklyn Eagle |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a leaguewide telegraph concession
| Date | Wednesday, February 20, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [reporting on the Atlantic Association meeting of 2/11/1889] The Postal Telegraph Company was granted the exclusive right to place its instruments in all the grounds of the Association. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a minor league no-reserve agreement upheld
| Date | Wednesday, March 20, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [a ruling of the Arbitration Committee] In the matter of the controversy between the Milwaukee Western Association club and the Rochester International Association club for the services of Ezra B. Sutton, the undersigned find from the evidence that when the Rochester Club arranged for Sutton's services for the balance of the season of 1888, the president of said club agreed that Sutton should not be reserved by said Rochester Club. This agreement is not only proved by what we believe to be credible testimony, but is admitted in the broadest terms in a letter from said president to the secretary of that club directing him to release Sutton accordingly. There are other circumstances strongly corroborating this conclusion. The point now relied on, that the president had no authority to make such an agreement, cannot be upheld. In the absence of some express notice to parties dealing with the chief executive officer of an association that his power are limited, good faith requires that such parties be not prejudiced in assuming that he has the power to claims and which is one usually pertaining to such office. While great care should doubtless be exercised in acting on such verbal agreements, yet where it is one as clearly proven as in this instance, and where the same is embodied in the written admission of the party alleged to have made it, a great wrong would be done should we disregard it. We therefore find that the Rochester Base Ball Association had no right to reserve Sutton in the face of their agreement and he was therefore free to sign with the Milwaukee Base Ball Club. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a minor league salary limit
| Date | Wednesday, October 30, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The Texas league has fixed the salary limit for 1890 at $950. St. |
| Source | St. Louis Republic |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a minor league telegraph deal
| Date | Wednesday, January 30, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [reporting on the International Association special meeting of 1/20/1889] Secretary White submitted a proposition by the Postal Telegraph Company to allow the various clubs unrestricted use of the wires in return for a frank at the grounds. The Western Union offered to allow each club $100 worth of telegraphing and a half rate for all messages in excess. Detroit and Toledo had already made arrangements with the Western Union, but for the other cities the Postal bid was accepted. The Sporting Life January 30, 1889 minor league salary capitalist [reporting the International Association special meeting of 1.20.1889] In the evening, after many arguments, the salary limit rule was amended. All sorts of propositions were made for limits, from $14,000 to $18,000, as well as graded limits for certain clubs, but to no purpose, as Rochester, Syracuse and London defeated all amendments. Finally, after a recess of half an hour, a compromise was arrived at and Rochester moved that the limit of salaries be fixed at $13,500 for each club. Syracuse seconded the motion and it was carried unanimously. The Sporting Life January 30, 1889 |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a minor league's measures to enforce a salary limit
| Date | Wednesday, January 9, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [reporting the Middle States League meeting 1/5/1888] Mr. Farrington's motion to amend the salary limit rule so as to read that an affidavit from manager and players in which both are to swear that the limit of $75 per month has in no way been evaded, was unanimously adopted. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a minor league's salary limit
| Date | Wednesday, February 6, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [reporting on the meeting of the Tri-State League 1/29/1889] The new salary limit of $750 will cause a lot of trouble. The way the magnates count on it is by having only eleven men for each club. That would mean only one extra battery. The pitchers and catchers would receive $90 each, the infielders $60 each, and the outfielders $50 each. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
| Date | Wednesday, November 20, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from the Boston correspondent] John C. Haynes is to-day the head and front of the biggest music publishing house in the country, the Oliver Ditson Company, of Boston. Mr. Haynes is in this thing for something besides the money he may possibly get out of it. He was one of the so-called “frozen out” stockholders of the Boston Base Ball Club Association. He finally sold his stock and got a good price for it, because it was utterly impossible for him and the other majority [sic] stockholders who held the minority stock to figure at all in Boston's base ball interests. And although he and the others who disposed of their stock to the triumvirs made tremendous money by the investment, they were sore on account of the “freeze-out.' it is for that reason Mr. Haynes is more particularly anxious to see the present move succeed. The same is true of two or three of his associates. The Sporting Life November 20, 1889 23 |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a newspaper bulletin board
| Date | Wednesday, August 7, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The largest crowd of spectators attracted by base ball yesterday in the Metropolis was that gathered in front of the World office to see the machine exhibition of the contest which was then taking place 900 miles distant, at Chicago, between the nines under those boss kickers, Anson and Ewing. Every point of the game was shown by the patent bulletin machine, and Park row, from Beekman street to the Mail office was crowded by over a thousand spectators. Up to the ninth inning all the bulletins which came in were in favor of New York, and the gamins were in ecstacies, the score standing at 7 to 1 at the end of the eighth inning in favor of New York. When the eighth inning began and the New York got in a single the boys yelled. Run after run, however, was then recorded in favor of Chicago, and the gamins almost broke their hears. At last came the record of seven runs for Chicago in their eighth [sic: should be ninth] inning, with the result of a tie game, and then the crowd was hushed to silence in suspense awaiting the record of the tenth inning. It came, and two runs were set down for New York, making the total 10 to 8. Would Chicago score? was the next question, and the bulletin was watched with intense interest. One man out and no runs, and the crowd yelled. Two men out and Anson at the bat. But “the might Casey” struck out, and then there was a rush of the crowd to get the extras giving the particulars. |
| Source | Brooklyn Eagle |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a partial implementation of the two umpire system
| Date | Sunday, May 12, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from Charles Foley's column] By ordering McQuade and Curry to umpire the Boston-New York series in Jersey City, Nick Young has declared himself in favor of the double umpire system in all important games. This is as it should be, for it is only a matter of time when the League and Association will adopt the system. There is only one reason why the League people are opposed to double umpiring, and that is the expense incurred. We need the double umpire system more than ever before, because there is more batting under the new rules; because there are more men than ever taking their bases on balls; and the more the bases are occupied, the more arduous becomes the umpire's task. |
| Source | Philadelphia Item |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a player discontented with his rating
| Date | Wednesday, February 6, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from R. M. Larner's column] I am very sorry Jim Whitney was allowed to leave the Capital without coming to some definite understanding with Mr. Hewitt for the approaching season. There are several player son the team whom we might dispense with and be benefited thereby, but Jim Whitney is not one of them. I do not know the details of his disagreement with the Washington management, beyond what Jim says himself, but I imagine that he was rated at about class C, at a salary of $2,000. … I don't desire to encourage Jim to hold out, or make a bad break which may prevent him from playing here next season, but in my humble opinion he should be classed higher than either Jerry Denny or Jack Glasscock, and it appears that the former is in class B--$2,250. In classifying the players of the League Mr. Young announced that good deportment would cut a conspicuous figure in rating players. Now I have known Whitney as a player ever since he became identified with the League, and no one can point to an instance where he has been arrested for misconduct in public places, nor has he ever been generally recognized as a dirty ball player. Why he should be rated below Denny reasonable and fair-minded people cannot understand. Denny has played in the League just as long as Whitney has, yet the latter stands even with him in batting. So far as general deportment is concerned, taking together with general usefulness on the field, Jim Whitney should outrank Mike Kelly, Glasscock, Denny, Dunlap, and several others whose moral character might be marked doubtful, yet it is said that all of these men are put in class A. The Sporting Life February 6, 1889 Pitcher Jim Whitney on Friday signed with Indianapolis at classification figures. The Sporting Life April 10, 1889 |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a player ejected
| Date | Wednesday, June 5, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [Brooklyn vs. Columbus 5/25/1889] At the last meeting of the joint committee on rules it was unanimously resolved to give the umpire the protective power of removing any player from the field and the game who, after being fined for violating the rule against disputing an umpire's decision, should continue to repeat the offense. In the case in question, Orr offensively disputed Umpire Goldsmith's decision, and he was justly punished for it by a fine. He again offended, and when threatened with the more costly penalty he impudently defied the umpire to do his duty and enforce the law to the full extent, threatening personal injury if he did so. Goldsmith then did his duty manfully and kept to his decision, Orr being put out of the game. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a player grievance for being fined for illness
| Date | Wednesday, May 29, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [reporting the Brotherhood meeting of 5/19/1889] Henry Boyle, of the Indianapolis Club, was the only player to present a grievance. The League rules say that a player can be laid off without pay by reason of sickness from natural causes. Boyle was sick and was laid off under these rules, to which he does not object. But the Indianapolis Club not only deducted his salary, but it fined him $100 for being sick, which he claims they had no right to do. He was suffering from fever and ague, and presented a physician's certificate and testimony of players that he was unable to report. The Brotherhood will present this case to the Indianapolis Club and insist that the $100 be refunded. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a player jumps reservation to play in California
| Date | Wednesday, January 2, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Normal L. Baker, one of the crack twirlers of the Newark Base Ball Club during the past season, has jumped the reservation claim held upon him by the Newark Base Ball And Exhibition Company and has signed a contract to play net season with the Stockton Club of the California League... The Sporting Life January 2, 1889 [editorial matter] There is a break in the stone wall the National Agreement has built around the National game, which should be repaired at once. The California League last season employed three ineligible players—J. J. Smith, Ebright and Whitehead—and is likely to become a refuge for more of that ilk next season. Close upon the announcement that the Newark Club's reserved pitcher, Norman Baker, has signed with the Sacramento Club, comes the news that third baseman Alvord, reserved by Des Moines, has also signed with that club, and that other Des Moines reserved players contemplate doing the same thing. The California League surely needs looking after. It is a prosperous institution, pays good salaries, and is apparently permanently established. Under the circumstances no strong efforts should be spared to make the League an ally, instead of a menace to National Agreement interests. The Sporting Life January 2, 1889 |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a player loan
| Date | Friday, July 12, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The Cleveland Club to-day released catcher Joseph Lohback to the Milwaukee team of the Western Association. He agreed on terms, and started for Milwaukee. A side agreement binds the Milwaukee Club to return him to Cleveland at the end of the season. The man will be a great catcher with a little more experience, and is a throwing wonder. |
| Source | Philadelphia Item |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a player objects to being sold
| Date | Monday, May 20, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Ed Andrews is indignant at being sold “like a slave.” He says: “If the Philadelphia management does not want my services let them give me my release. I have been to considerable expense fitting up a comfortable home and I don’t like the idea of leaving it. I like Boston and the Boston players, and if I was unencumbered I think I would rather play with the Boston Club than anywhere else, but I hate these sudden changes. Brooklyn Eagle May 20, 1889 Boston purchased Andrews' release Saturday, and Manager Hart wired Andrews to report in Boston at once. But Andrews didn't go, and it is hardly probable that he will unless the Philadelphia management agree to give him a big slice of the money they obtained for his release. Andrews is indignant at being sold. “I don't like being sold like a nigger,” said he. “If the Philadelphia management does not want my services let them give me my release outright. What have I done that I should be sold?” Chicago Tribune May 22, 1889 |
| Source | Brooklyn Eagle |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a player sale
| Date | Saturday, March 9, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [quoting Brush] We have purchased the release of Getzein from Detroit, and if he plays next season he will play with the Hoosiers. I have had no communication with him since the deal was made, but feel safe in saying he will be one of the local twirlers. St. |
| Source | St. Louis Republic |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
| Date | Friday, August 2, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Harry Lyons, the ballplayer, to-day [8/1] won his suit against President Von der Ahe of the St. Louis base ball club and received judgment for $71.40. The suit was the outgrowth of the race for the championship of the American Association last year. A prize of $1,000 in addition to the pennant was offered to the team that should win the championship. Von der Ahe paid 12 of his 13 players but refused to pay Lyons and Short-stop White. In response to a summons President Von der Ahe appeared before Magistrate Durham to-day. He said that the prize was offered to the managers of the various clubs and not to the individual players. He thought it was entirely optional with him whether he should divide the money with the players or should keep it himself. He thought Lyons and White did not play good ball during the season. Ex Manager Sullivan and Player McCarthy were called to substantiate Mr. Von der Ahe. They said they thought the prize was given to the management of the championship club. They both thought, however, that Lyons did play good ball. The magistrate gave judgment for Lyons. St. |
| Source | St. Louis Republic |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a preliminary contract
| Date | Monday, April 1, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Ward wanted to go to Boston and signed a contract with that club, by which he agreed for certain considerations to sign a league base ball contract when Boston should obtain his release from New York. Mr. Day had given his consent to the Boston club to negotiate with Ward. |
| Source | Philadelphia Item |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a professional groundskeeper
| Date | Wednesday, April 10, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | William Houston, who formerly lived here, but has been a resident of Detroit for several years, has returned to Indianapolis, and made application for the place of ground-keeper at the ball park. He will probably be engaged. He is said to be an excellent man for the position, as he kept the Detroit grounds, and they were the finest in the League. Indianapolis Journal April 10, 1889 William Houston has been engaged by the local management as ground keeper. He is regarded as a first-class man and an improvement in the field is looked for. He will take charge at once. Indianapolis Journal April 11, 1889 |
| Source | Indianapolis Journal |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a proposal for a single entity league
| Date | Wednesday, February 27, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from the Kansas City correspondent] President Speas proposes that the eight clubs of the American Association form a stock company to be called the American Base ball Association. Let this Association be capitalized for a sum of money sufficient to cover the investments in players and in franchises that the eight members have made. The nine incorporators of the American Base Ball Association would be the presiden6t of the American Association and the presidents of the eight individual clubs. Let the incorporators be the directors for the first year. The officers would be the usual corporation officers:-a president, vice president, secretary and treasurer, and their duties, of course, would be similar to the duties of other corporation officers. The business of the Association would be conducted by the nine directors. There is a plain, simple method of organization, easy of perfection and short of every particle of red tape. The plan in short is to pool the investment in players and franchises of each club and to issue stock in lieu thereof. The valuation of club properties could be arrived at in this way:--Each club should furnish the directors with a statement showing the actual money it has invested in players and releases, that is to say the amount of money actually paid out. For instance, a player, though a valuable one, whose release had cost nothing, would not figure in this list. Then the directors would take up every player owned by a club and put an estimate on him. In this way the club would receive compensation for players whose releases had not cost anything. While, on the other hand, they might suffer some by having the estimated price fall below what another player's release had cost. Each club would receive stock covering, as near as possible, the actual value of its money invested. Then come the matter of franchise. Of course, a franchise in Brooklyn is worth more than a franchise in Kansas City. Brooklyn should therefore receive as much more stock than Kansas City in the American Base Ball Association as its franchise is more valuable than the Kansas City franchise. In other words, a club should be paid in stock for its franchise according to the capacity of that franchise for earning money. If Brooklyn pays interest—earns a dividend on $100,000 of stock—it should have stock in the Association accordingly. If Kansas City's club does not earn money, its franchise has no value outside of its players, and as it has already received stock in payment for its players it would receive nothing else. … If this plan were adopted, the Millennium Plan of equalizing strength would then have to be adopted, in order to make each club pay. Brooklyn would then be as much interested in Louisville's earning money as Louisville itself would be. |
| Source | The Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a proposal for league classes, player draft; Brush plan
| Date | Wednesday, July 17, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from a letter from Spalding to Young] The National League and American Association to continue as they are now, the governing power in professional base ball. They jointly to make the playing rules and to furnish the system, means and power for carrying out the laws as provided for in the National Agreement and Articles of Qualified Admission. All other professional leagues and associations to be divided into say four classes to be known as Class A, B, C and D. Class A would probably include such associations as the International and the Western associations, California League and others of about the same grade. Class B to include associations whose draing power would be about 25 per cent. less than Class A. Class C to include associations whose drawing powers would be about 50 per cent. less than Class A. Class D to be the lowest, including clubs that cannot afford to pay over $50 or $60 per month salaries. Continue the present plan of protection to minor leagues with a right to reserve with the following modifications: Class D to be obligated not to pay salaries aggregating over $600 per month, and no individual player over $60 per month. All players in this class subject to requisition from any club of a higher class on, say, one week's notice, upon payment of a fixed bonus of, say $250, to be paid to the club releasing the player. Class C to pay salaries aggregating not over $100 per month, and no individual player to receive over $100 per month. All players in this class subject to requisition from any club in a higher class upon a payment of a bonus of $500. Class B to pay salaries aggregating not over $1500 per month, and no individual player to receive over $150 per month. All players in this class subject to requisition from clubs in Class A and the League and American Association clubs upon payment of a bonus of $100. Class A to pay salaries aggregating not over $100 per month, and no individual player to receive over $200 per month. All players in this class subject to requisition from League and American Association clubs upon the payment of a bonus of $1500, reserve system. Modify the classification salary limit by making it non-operative on players whose habits are exemplary and who shall have completed a service of three years in the League or American Association. To discourage the present sales system in the League and American Association, I would suggest that only one-half of the bonus paid for the release of a player shall go to the club releasing him, one-fourth to the player and one-fourth to the League or Association of which the releasing club is a member. The Sporting Life July 17, 1889 [See also TSL 7/24/1889 editorial for a long critique.] President Reach in speaking of it yesterday said: “Some such plan is necessary to stop this high salary evil which is slowly but surely killing the game. Such a scheme as Mr. Spalding suggests would work to the advantage of all parties concerned, for it would cut down expenses all round and without injuring ball players either. The pay in the smaller leagues would be less, but there would be fewer collapses of clubs. “Every young ball player would be continually striving by his play to attract the attention of managers in higher-grade leagues where the pay was better. The pay of men in National League and American Association Clubs would not be affected, but with good minor league clubs to draw upon the managers would not think of carrying more than thirteen players on the pay roll instead of fifteen to twenty as they do now. “If that system had been in operation it would not have taken us a month to have found a second baseman when Delahanty was hurt. We would simply have taken our pick of all the second basemen in the minor leagues, planked down the special amount of money and taken the man. The club thus weakened would have looked over the lists in clubs of the leagues below it and done likewise, and so on. Minor league clubs would not be likely to carry more than eleven or twelve players.” The Philadelphia Item July 16, 1889 ...Manager James. A. Hart, of the Boston Club, has formulated a plan which is given in full below. Mr. hart forwarded his scheme to Mr. Spalding, and shortly after he did so, Mr. Spalding's plan appeared in print with his name attached. An analysis of the two schemes will reveal a very close similarity in many respects, except that Mr. Hart's production is accompanied by elaborate tables that must have required a thorough knowledge of the subject, years of practical experience in base ball, and many hours of hard and studious labor to prepare. Mr. Hart's plan is submitted to public consideration for the first tame... A board of control should be created. This board should have full and supreme power, and its ruling in all cases should be final. The board should be clothed with power to discipline any league, club, player or umpire. It should consist of three members (a chairman and two associates); they should be amply paid, and should be supplied with a good office centrally located, also with a stenographer and clerk if necessary. … The board should name the limits of salary for each league, and have power to rigidly enforce the compliance of all clubs. It should have reports sent it of each game, stating the exact number of persons present at said game, together with the gross receipts thereof. All contracts between clubs and players and between leagues and umpires should be approved by the board. The board should be the tribunal to try and decide all disputes between leagues or clubs, or clubs and players, or leagues and umpires, and in all instances the decision rendered by the board should be final. The expense of the board would be met by dues from all leagues... … All clubs under the control of the board should be allowed to reserve players under contract on a certain date, say Oct. 2, at a price not less than that received by the player under the existing contract. All players who do not receive the full amount of salary called for in their contracts should be granted a release if their claim to that effect is sustained by the board. Any club under control should be compelled to release to any other club under control, when paid a certain price (as shown later) as a bonus, provided said player desires to change his place of service. The bonus should be uniform in each league, but may be changed from year to year by the board. The matter of releasing and signing of players should be done wholly by the board. A very desirable grouping and grading of cities would be as follows: [Tables of cities follow, with an eight club National League and cities divided into groups rated A through G.] The league first named [i.e. the National League] should be granted the right of reservation, but a player, upon being in one club's employ three years, should, if he desires, be granted his unconditional release. This league should have no salary limit law. The other leagues should be graded according to the drawing power of the league, but in no instance should a league be regraded during a playing season. A reasonable grading would be as follows: [A table of salary limits follows, by league level, giving both team and individual player limits, price paid for release, and length of contract.] [Tables of estimated expenses for clubs and leagues, and required attendance to meet expenses, and additional details follow.] The Sporting Life July 31, 1889 |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a proposal for post-season interleague play
| Date | Sunday, August 25, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | A few days ago Al Pratt, the well-known dealer in sporting goods in this city, and also a veteran in baseball affairs, suggested to me a plan by which League and Association clubs could contest against each other at the end of the season. Mr. Pratt's plan is to the effect that the first, second, third and so on in the League race play a series of games with the first, second, third and so on of the Association. Mr. Pratt was enthusiastic about the idea, and was thoroughly convinced that it would be a great success. Doubtless at first sight there are attractive features about the plan, but I fear that those features belong almost entirely to the clubs that stand well in the respective associations. For instance, what great interest would there be in a series of games between Louisville and Washington? I refer to the interest at the respective cities of these two clubs. I venture to say that there would be a certain amount of general interest merely prompted by the desire to see which organization had the worst club. But citizens nowadays are not inclined to knowingly put up their money for a bad article. However, as we ascent eh list, that is, the list of clubs in the League and Association, the chances of financial success become better. I have no doubt whatever but what the eight series would generally be a great success, providing the weather was all right. This thought prompts the idea that if all the clubs cannot profitably make the venture, let as many as can do so. |
| Source | Pittsburgh Dispatch |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a proposal for the League to appoint official scorers
| Date | Wednesday, March 6, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [quoting Young] I wish the League had given me the power to appoint the official scorers. Under the new classification rules, they will be as important to the success of the game as the umpires. If I had the appointment of them, I would select men and not allow the clubs to know who they were . That is, I would have the League buy the tickets from each club, so the scorer would be independent, and not under obligations to the club he represented. Of course the clubs would eventually find out who was their official scorer, but I think it ought to remain a secret as far as possible. I do not approve of a corps of traveling scorer, although I am aware that each man favors the home time some. That is only natural, and is evened up throughout the season, when the club is away from home. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a proposal to abolish the foul fly out
| Date | Saturday, August 31, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | President Spalding goes on record in the east as favoring the abolition of the foul catch. Such a change will come this season. The way for it was paved when the foul tip out behind the bat was abolished. With no foul catches allows one more of the elements of “luck” will be removed from the game. |
| Source | Chicago Tribune |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a proposal to move the pitcher back, five balls for a walk; overrunning bases
| Date | Wednesday, October 9, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | John F. Morrill, talking about the rules for next season, says:-- “I am strongly of the opinion that the game would be helped materially by putting the pitcher back five feet and giving him five balls. I do not think that it would be too great a strain. It would help batting a great deal, and, at the same time, I do not think the games would be lengthened materially thereby. There would be very few games that could last over two hours. The objection has been made that such a rule would hurt the base-running, but I fail to see how. While the pitcher would be able to hold the base-runner more closely to his base, the latter would be able to watch the pitcher better and would also have the five feet advantage, so that I think that these two facts would counter-balance one another. I think that the foul tip rule is good as it stands. Then I fail to see what good it would be to make a rule allowing the over-running of bases. That is all right for the bases where the player does not have to be touched. Players always slide to the home plate, and there are no more close plays there than on second. If you should allow the players to over-run the bases you would find that they would slide just as they are doing now. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a proposal to shrink the diamond
| Date | Wednesday, October 30, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from a letter from Joe Battin] My plan (and I claim it as original, never having heard of it before) would be to make the distance from base to base 88 feet instead of 90. It would compel infielders to be more lively in handling balls hit to them, especially those that come to them slow, and sharp hits towards third and first bases would be more apt to go fair. Two feet between each base or eight feet around the bases does not seem to be a great distance, but it will make a big different to the base-runner and at the same time give him no big advantage over the fielder. The Sporting Life October 30, 1889 players holding out; the League exercises its option; the reserve clause; Blackhurst switches sides Monday, Oct. 21, was the day upon which contracts for next season could be legally signed. As was expted, no Brotherhood players appended their signatures to contracts. They were met, however, by a new move by some of the League clubs, adopted by the latter at the suggestion of the Brotherhood's ex-counsel, Mr. F. C. Blackhurst, who is now Mr. Day's private counsel. On Monday morning, each League player was served by his club officials with a short but pertinent printed notice worded as follows... October 30, 1889 [from a letter by John Ward] The following document was handed me during the past week, and I understand a similar paper has been delivered to every League player: “New York, Oct. 21.-- To Mr. John M. Ward—Sir: You will please take notice that the New York Ball Club hereby exercises its option for the employment of your services under and pursuant to the provisions of paragraph 18 of a certain contract heretorfore made with you and bearing date on or about April 23, 1889, and does hereby now employ you under the provisions of said contract, and retain your serves for the season of 1890, and is now ready and offers to execute the agreement therefore. New York Ball Club.” Under the guidance of some brilliant legal adviser the “magnates” have taken this method to intimidate the players and confuse public opinion as to the actual relation existing between the latter and themselves. In order that the preposterous nature of this claim may be clearly understood a word of review is necessary. [a history of the reserve follows, concluding that it only applies to National Agreement leagues.] The Sporting Life October 30, 1889 |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a proposed expansion of the substitute rule; pitching rotation
| Date | Wednesday, May 29, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from Chadwick's column] As far as the tenth man rule has been tested it has worked satisfactorily, and it is now proposed to extend it so as to include the power to replace men in any innings, and so as to sue all the players on a team in a game if necessary or advisable. Anson favors this latter plan. He says:-- “Here I have a team of fifteen men and I want the right to use all of them in a match game if I find it advantageous to do so, putting four pitchers in a game if I like.” If this privilege was given a captain there would undoubtedly be fewer pitchers laid up with sore arms, while they would have daily practice for a short time in the box, instead of as now, having to wait their turn to go in once or twice a week. It would save catchers' hands, too. This rule would give a new interest to each contest. It might be tried in '90 to advantage. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a proposed merchandising agreement
| Date | Wednesday, November 20, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [reporting the NL meeting of 11/13-15/1889] A long communication from a firm of cigar dealers was read, offering to pay a royalty for the use of the name “National League,” such royalty to be devoted each year to the players of the champion team. The letter was referred to the president, with power to act. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a purported balk move
| Date | Saturday, April 27, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [Chicago vs. Pittsburgh 4/26/1889] At the commencement Anson began to draw Galvin's attention to a “balk” that Jimmy was making n shrugging his shoulders. Jeems pitched on unheedless of the Chicago Captain's remarks... |
| Source | Pittsburgh Dispatch |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a quadruple header
| Date | Wednesday, October 2, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Umpire Briody says the St. Joseph Club did the only thing it could in playing four games with Sioux City on Sunday, Sept. 15. If the St. Joseph team had not played, he argued, the club would have owed Sioux City $100. By playing the four games the Sioux Citys owed the St. Josephs $200. The Misourrians played the games, too their $200, paid their board bills and got out of town. Briody saw the games and considered them on the square. The St. Joseph Club, he remarked, had only eight men, seven of them pitchers and catchers, the vacancy being filly by an amateur, and under the circumstances the team could not win. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a raffle for a released player
| Date | Friday, July 26, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | “It is quite likely that I will be called upon to draw lots,” said President Young of the league, “to decide who is entitle to the services of Krock, recently released by the Chicagos. Both Philadelphia and Indianapolis have accepted the services of this pitcher, and in the case of the latter organization Sommers is desired also. Ten days will have elapsed the 28th inst. since these men were released, and at the expiration of that time they will be eligible to sign with clubs outside the league if they are not secured by one of our own teams. Every club in the league may put in a bid for this battery the evening of the 27th inst. and each organization would have an equal claim upon the services of the men. To obviate any future trouble, however, I will place the names of each club on a piece of paper, put them in my hat, and give them a good shaking up. Some one will then be requested to draw a slip of paper from the hat, and the club which is lucky enough to be drawn first will secure Krock. If Philadelphia comes out of the hat first Krock alone will be turned over to Manager Wright. |
| Source | Chicago Tribune |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a rejected proposal to eliminate the waiver
| Date | Wednesday, November 20, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [reporting the Arbitration Committee meeting 11/11/1889] Another innocent-looking resolution was introduced by one of the League delegates, which would probably have meant destruction to the American Association. The League idea was to eliminate the old section under which was operated the method of holding players to a league, viz., the waiving of claims, under which waivers must be obtained from all the clubs of either association before a reserved or signed player can be released to any club of another league. The Association delegates, however, quickly saw the true intent of this innocent-looking move and unceremoniously negatived it, and as ti requires the vote of two delegates from each major league to amend the resolution was lost. Had it been passed, it would have been an easy matter for any League club to purchase and transfer any Association, or an entire team, in fact, despite the protests of the Association clubs. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a relief pitching scheme by innings
| Date | Tuesday, June 18, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [Pittsburgh vs. Indianapolis 6/17/1889] It was a hard game to lose because it looked like a sure victory up to the sixth inning, and would have been had not Manager Bancroft, acting upon a standing order to do so daily, changed the pitchers and turned the tide in favor of the visitors. The opening game with Pittsburg was lost on the same account—the absurd plan of changing pitchers in the middle of every game, no matter how well the man who starts in is doing. That this plan caused yesterday's defeat cannot be doubted for a moment. It may be well enough to take a man out of the box if he is being hit freely, but to do so when he is pitching remarkably well, as was the case with G3tzein yesterday, is, to express it mildly, stupid direction. The German was doing great work, and expressed a desire to remain in the box, but was not allowed to do so. The visitors earned one run in the second inning, but after that they could not touch his delivery with any success, only four hits being made up to the time he retired. The team was supporting him in fine form and was hitting Galvin with great freedom. It was almost a sure thing that the Hoosiers would win until Burdick went into the box, at the opening of the sixth, when he was hit for three singles, a double, a triple and a home run in quick order. This, with an error by Glassock allowed five men to cross the plate. ...Just where the home management discovered this new plan is not very clear, and it is altogether probable that it will be abandoned; at least it should be. The players do not like it, and Manager Bancroft is also strongly opposed to it. He very sensibly argues that if a pitcher cannot hold up through nine innings when he is in good condition, he is of no account and does not earn his salary. If a man weakens and the opposing batters hit his delivery hard and often, then and only then, is there any sense in making a change. The Indianapolis team would have won three games instead of one from Pittsburg, had it not been for this new idea. In the case of Rusie it was a wise move to take him out, for the reason that he was being hit hard and was nervous and wild. But Getzein was doing the best work he has done this season, and the change was a great mistake. It is true, many games have been lost after the sixth inning when the pitcher has done good work up to that point ,and President Brush, hoping to turn the current, concluded to try this plan. It is a failure. The best managers in the country say it is an unwise thing to take a pitcher out in the middle of a game when he is doing even average work. |
| Source | Indianapolis Journal |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a report that the St. Louis Club applied to the League
| Date | Wednesday, November 20, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Before the League meeting adjourned an application was received from Chris Von der Ahe for the admission of the Browns into the parent organization. As soon as the application had been read by Secretary Young Mr. Spalding got up and moved to reject it without discussion. The Chicago president said the League could not afford to waste any time considering applications from Mr. Von der Ahe. Mr. Spalding's advice was taken and the application unanimously rejected. The Sporting Life November 20, 1889 [N.B. This does not appear in the League minutes.] [from an interview of Von der Ahe] The report is a malicious falsehood, and it was hatched in League circles. If any man cn prove that I ever made application to the National League for admission I will make any charitable institution that the informer may name a present of $5000 in cash. I again denounce the whole story as a lie. Do not think that I am either a Byrne or a Stern. Do you suppose that I would throw up my hands and desert such men as those who are still in the Association? No, indeed. These men stuck by me, and I was man enough not to play the Byrne-Stern act. The Sporting Life November 27, 1889 |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a rumor of a Brotherhood strike
| Date | Wednesday, March 6, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | A rumor was current yesterday [3/1] that there is a good prospect of a war this spring between the various clubs of the League and its players. It is known that the classification scheme is highly unsatisfactory to most of the players, and it is said that not a League player will take part in a championship game this season until the trouble is settled. Under the classification Sowders and Glasscock, among others, have been reduced considerably below the salaries they received last year. The rumor said that these two men were to be made test cases, and that no Brotherhood players who have not already done so, will sign contracts until they are settled. The whole story has rather an appearance of improbability, especially as Mr. Blackhurst, who is acting for the Brotherhood, denies that such is the case. J. F. C. Blackhurst was asked yesterday concerning the report that during the absence of President John M. Ward, of the Base Ball Players' Brotherhood, he is to have charge of the affairs of the Brotherhood and to manage the cases of the Brotherhood players who are dissatisfied with their classification. He said that there was no truth whatever in the statement, that he was not the attorney for the Brotherhood and had no connection whatever with that organization. He said that he was, however, the attorney for short stop Glasscock, of the Indianapolis Club, and will go to Washington to-morrow to see President N. E. Young, of the League, and attempt to settle Glasscock's case with him, without an appeal to law. He thought that difficulties between clubs and their players should be settled between themselves, and that there should be no outside interference. The Sporting Life March 6, 1889 [reporting the NL meeting of 3/5/1889] Mr. J. C. F. Blackhurst requested a hearing and was invited to appear. He stated to the League that hi client, Mr. Glasscock, of the Indianapolis Club, had decided to make no individual complaint, and that in consequence had no case before the meeting, and gracefully retired. … After Mr. Blackhurst's withdrawal, President Brush and Manager Bancroft had a long interview with Glasscock, and finally induced him to sign. He will receive a class “A” salary--$2,500--and $500 extra for captaining the team. The Sporting Life March 13, 1889 |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a rumor of a planned July 4 strike
| Date | Wednesday, July 3, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [editorial matter] The air is full of rumors of an impending strike by the League players, unless their demand for a hearing is promptly acceded to, and some of the know-alls even fix upon July Fourth as the precise date for this portentous event. If the Brotherhood really contemplates such a move it should take grave counsel with itself. Such a step at this time would inevitably defeat all the ends the players have in view. It would mean temporary disorganization for the League and grave financial consequences to the various clubs, which would surely be shared by the players; public opinion would be turned against the players who would place themselves in a false position as contract breakers and thereby render themselves liable to various harassing legal proceedings; and finally any triumph achieved or concessions gained by means of a mid-season strike would be but short-lived, and any obligations assumed by the League under such conditions would be inevitably repudiated at the earliest possible moment. The value and efficacy of strikes as a means of redressing grievances and forcing concessions depend altogether upon the conditions governing the case, and in this instance the conditions are altogether unfavorable to the hopes and chances of the players. Unlike manufacturers, base ball clubs are not in position to be materially or permanently damaged, they have no valuable plant or vast capital to lie idle at great loss; no product subject to damage; there is not a single official connected with any club in any manner dependent upon base ball for subsistence; and, finally, base ball is not a necessary of life, but a luxury, and the laws of supply and demand affect it but little. So it will be seen that a base ball strike will only, in the end, inflict serious injury upon those having most at stake in the matter—the players, whose livelihood depends altogether upon the game, and whose interests are therefore too inextricably bound up with those of the League to make a strike either desirable or profitable. Let us have no more talk of a strike. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a rumor of game throwing
| Date | Friday, July 19, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | There has been another crazy explosion over in St. Louis and it has turned the Browns' crowd from a happy family into an aggregation of players who are fighting mad. No more absurd charge was ever coined than that fathered by the Post Dispatch last night, in which Arlie Latham and Charley King were accused of throwing games in the interest of the pool-rooms. Not since the days of Devlin and Hall have any bolder accusations been made. “Ribbie,” the wide awake second baseman of the Browns, is also made a party to the alleged crookedness. The story with all its wild improbabilities came out on the eve of the Browns' departure for Cincinnati, and a more incensed lot of players never registered at a hotel than those who arrived at the Palace this morning. Indignation was not confined to those whose reputations the Post Dispatch seeks to sully... St. |
| Source | St. Louis Republic |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a rumor of short accounts by the Indianapolis manager
| Date | Sunday, January 13, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The New York correspondent of the Philadelphia Sporting Life, in the last issue of that paper, said that ex-manager Harry Spence, of the local team, had employed an attorney and intended to make it very unpleasant for some one, presumably the Indianapolis board of directors. Nothing much has ever been said about the matter, but it is well known that the management charged Spence with being short in his accounts and an effort was made at the League meeting to have him black-listed, though this was not done, because the League officials doubted their authority to act in the matter, for the reason that Spence was not at that time under engagement to the Indianapolis club. The attention of an official of the club was directed to Spence's alleged threat, and he replied that the young man might need the services of an attorney before he got through with the Indianapolis club. |
| Source | Indianapolis Journal |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a rumor of the Indianapolis players to be transferred to New York
| Date | Wednesday, December 25, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from Harry Palmer's column][a rumor explaining why the Giants haven't been signing players] When Brush and Hewitt went down to the League meeting last November, Hewitt was ready to quit, and Brush was feeling as blue as a bag of indigo. Hewitt was unwilling to continue another season, even though his men stood by him, for he had become tired of carrying the club at a financial loss, while with every man of his team pledged to the Brotherhood, Brush saw only heavy loss as the result of a struggle through another season with a team made up entirely of young talent. There were long heads at the League meeting, however, and the two League magnates who listened to the 'tales of woe' told by Hewitt and Brush one afternoon before the League meeting began, only smiled over it all and 'kidded' the two short-end presidents good naturedly for five minutes or more. When the four finally separated, however, one of the most important understandings of the week had been arrived at, and Hewitt and Brush departed for home immediately after the meeting and went to work in earnest. Both Glasscock and Denny, you know, are dead tired of playing ball in Indianapolis. Ever since their transfer from St. Louis they have been dissatisfied, for the simple reason that they wanted to get out of a light-weight Western town and play ball with a winning team in a metropolitan city, like Boston, New York or Chicago. Brush, of course, knew this, and used it in his negotiations with his two team leaders. On his return to Indianapolis the Hoosier Club president secured an interview with Glasscock and Denny and spring his surprise. It was simply this:--Both men were to sign Indianapolis League contract and use their every influence to sign every man reserved by the club, with the exception of Andrews. In the event of the courts deciding against the validity of the reserve clause the entire Indianapolis team was to be transferred to new York City, New York purchasing the release of the men outright, and in case of the League's success in the courts Glasscock and Denny were to be transferred to New York and the balance of the Indianapolis players released to such other League clubs as might desire their services. It was understood that whatever terms Brush made with his players the League would stand by, so that wherever the men play next season they will draw the salaries agreed upon between themselves and MR. Brush. T he plan, backed up by liberal salaries, caught both players, and from honest supporters of the Brotherhood they promptly became League players and League workers. And why shouldn't they, with the certainty of taking the places of Ward and Whitney in the New York team. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a rumor of the Players League
| Date | Wednesday, September 11, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from A. G. Ovens] While in Cleveland with the Hoosiers last month I hard a vague rumor in regard to a great scheme that a gentleman of that city was trying to work, by which he hopes to control the base ball market within the next sixty days. I chased the fleeing item for some time, but could not get close enough to it to locate the source from whence it came. It related to the intentions of the base ball “Brotherhood,” but no one seemed disposed to talk on the subject. Finally I concluded it was the idle dream of some visionary individual and dropped the matter. I did not think much more about it until last night, when I met a ball-player just from Cleveland, and as he appeared to be willing to talk I touched upon the alleged scheme of the Cleveland management. Had he heard of it? Well, yes, he had, but didn't care to say much about it. In the course of a long conversation, however, I learned that the Cleveland man who is supposed to be at the head of the business is Albert Johnson, who owns a street car line in that city. Mr. Johnson formerly lived in Indianapolis, and is a confirmed base ball crank. He has some money and an unlimited amount of nerve. The scheme will strike the average reader as rather a wild one, but my informant claims that it will be tried. As the story goes, Mr. Johnson has been working on the matter for some time, and has been ably assisted by John M. Ward. The great schemer's plan is to sign a contract with every ball player in the League and form a trust by which the base ball business is to be controlled. It is claimed that quite a number of the players have signed the agreement, and that Mr. Johnson is now in the East working on the scheme and securing more signatures. His plan is to get as many men to sign the agreement as possible, and when the managers of the present league clubs come to make terms with their players they will be informed that they have made other arrangements. This scheme contemplates the placing of clubs in Boston, New York, Brooklyn, Philadelphia, Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago and some other city yet to be selected. It is positively asserted that Ward and Johnson have been looking into this matter for several months and the latter has had an office in Cleveland, where he met the various players who went to that city. Ward seems to be acting in good faith and hopes to see the plan work out, but it is equally well known, so my informant says, that Johnson realizes that such a great scheme can never be carried through successfully, but he hopes to make something out of it by selling the releases of the players back to the clubs from which they jumped, the players being given a percentage of the purchase money. The Boston, New York, Chicago, Philadelphia and the players of all other big clubs are to be drawn into the trust, and it is said, that an effort will be made to get Comiskey and several more of the prominent players of the American Association into the scheme. The gentleman who gave me these facts, if they are facts, was in a position to know, and although I laughed at him and tried to show him how absurd such a move would be, he said he got his information from a source that could not be questioned. He maintained that, whether the scheme was ever carried through or not, it was now under consideration and would be attempted. Johnson left Cleveland some time in the early part of last week, and the gentleman who was in that city say that he is now in New York or Boston conferring with some of the leading Brotherhood men, and at the same time getting contracts with as many players as possible. This is said to be the mysterious business in which the Brotherhood has been engaged for several months. Mr. Johnson will probably find such an undertaking quite a risky business, but he is a man who has nerve enough to do anything to carry a point. Of course, the scheme will never work, and it only remains to be seen if it will be attempted. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a runaway horse on the field
| Date | Wednesday, October 2, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [New York vs. Pittsburgh 10/01/1889] To add to the fun of the third inning, an affrighted horse attached to a buggy, appeared on the ball field, causing the players to scamper in all directions. The run-away animal took a wild gallop round the field amid the deafening yells of the bleaching-board occupants. Even the rigid discipline of Umpire Lynch had no effect whatever on the wild steed. The horse, however, soon retraced his steps to where he had come from, and made a costly smash up there. This novel performance was taken as an omen of good for the home team, and such it turned out to be. |
| Source | Pittsburgh Dispatch |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a runner tricks the fielder into throwing away the ball
| Date | Friday, April 26, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [Chicago vs. Pittsburgh 4/25/1889] Anson ran up to the plate to make a kick about what he termed Beckley's interference with Flint. When he was talking to Lynch umpire] Gumbert, who held the ball turned around at face Maul [runner at second]. The latter invited him to “throw it here<' and he accommodatingly made the throw. Maul let the ball pass him and bolted for home, which he reached before Ryan could field the ball and get it to the plate. Anson did not realize what was going on until the run was scored. Then he began to inquire how the ball got out to centrefield. Gumbert answers: “I thought the umpire had called time, and threw the ball to Maul when he asked me to.” The spectators became almost hysterical over the performance. When Lynch overruled Anson's claim of interference and the Captain walked back to his position, looking at the ground as he went, the crow indulged in another violent outburst. |
| Source | Chicago Tribune |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a seamless ball to discourage curve pitching
| Date | Wednesday, January 2, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Al. Reach believes that the only way to bring about more batting is to handicap the pitchers with a ball they cannot curve or command as well as the present one. It is a well-known fact that the pitchers can curve a ball with a rough seam better than one with a smooth edge. By gripping the ball tightly with the front of his fingers and imbedding their nails into the seams they can put more of a twist to it and consequently there will be a shoot or a curve to the ball. Mr. Reach does not believe the pitchers can put much of a twist to the new seamless ball which he has invented and which will probably be given a trial by the Association in the spring games. It is the opinion of all who have seen it that the new ball cannot well be curved and if this proves to be the case there will be lots of batting when the pitchers are forced to throw straight balls over the plate. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a short throw against a delayed double steal 2
| Date | Sunday, October 20, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [New York vs. Brooklyn 10/19/1889] [World Series game 2] “Pop” Corkhill, the greatest centre fielder in the American Association, stood on third base. “Hub” Collins was presented with first base on called balls. Behind the bat was seen the tall, well-knit form of Capt. Ewsing. Every one knew Collins would try to steal second base and that if he did Corkhill would attempt to score. Collins started. A second later the ball left the pitcher’s box and in the twinkling or an eye landed in Ewing’s hands. The New York captain drew back his arm and feinted a threw to Ward, who covered second. Corkhill started to score. Like a flash of lightning Ewing threw the ball to third base, and before Corkhill could recover himself he had been touched out by Whitney. How the New Yorkers yelled! The huge grand stand trembled under the pressure of stamping feet and applause. The trick is ancient. Of late years it has succeeded about once in one hundred times, but as executed yesterday by Ewing it was a marvelously pretty play, and took the hear right out of the Brooklyn players. Nobody was looking for it. Every player and spectator thought the ball would be thrown to second to retire Collins, and if successful the play would have closed the inning, for two Brooklynites had previously been put out. |
| Source | New York World |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a single-admission double header
| Date | Sunday, July 28, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [St. Louis vs. Baltimore 7/27/1889] Baltimore and St. Louis played two games this afternoon and broke even. The home club won the first by a score of 4 to 2 and the visitors the second by a score of 3 to 1. Both were pitchers' games, neither side being able to do any work with the stick. Owing to the rain in the morning the attendance was only fair, about 5,253 people passing the turnstile. Had the weather not been threatening the grounds would have been packed. St. Louis Republic July 28, 1889 [from Chadwick's column] On reading this circular I sent a note to President Young, as follows: “Did you see Wikoff's latest circular? He decides that a complete inning is an even inning for each side. I contend that a complete inning is accomplished when the side first at the bat is put out and the other side goes in to complete their inning. It seems to me that Wikoff is wrong in his interpretation. How say you?” Mr. Young's reply was: “I take your view of it.” I took the document to Mr. Byrne, and I had a full discussion with him on the subject. Mr. Byrne was one of the workers of the joint committee, and he is thoroughly versed on the question of what the committee's intentions were in amending the rule, and it was to get at their intentions as regards this particular rule that I consulted him. He said the Walter Spalding was the urgent advocate of the rule, and it was his and Spalding's plain understanding that the words “completed innings” meant the innings played by each side constituting the first and second half of each of the nine innings which constitutes a game. This being so, of course that settled it, for it is what the committee intended a rule should mean, and not any special interpretation placed upon it through incorrect wording, which should govern each rule's interpretation. The Sporting Life July 31, 1889 |
| Source | St. Louis Republic |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a steal of home during an argument 2
| Date | Friday, April 26, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [Chicago vs. Pittsburgh 4/25/1889] Maul was on first base and started for second on a passed ball. Beckley was at bat and was dancing around, evidently trying to lead Flint to believe the ball was under his feet. Flint took the bait, but the ball was two or three yards in an opposite direction. This made Anson indignant, and he came in a kicked to the umpire. Amid the wrangle Maul stole his way home to the plate and scored. Lynch declared the run all right. |
| Source | Philadelphia Item |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a straight up player trade, a player not consulted
| Date | Thursday, July 18, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | President Von der Ahe received a telegram from President Lawrence Parsons of the Louisville club yesterday asking if he would exchange Nat Hudson for Tom Ramsey. President Von der Ahe replied that he would, and the deal so far a the clubs are concerned was closed. Ramsey, under proper training, will prove a valuable man for the Browns. He demonstrated when last here a couple of weeks ago that he has regained his skilful drop ball. Ramsey will report to President Von der Ahe this week. St. Louis Republic July 18, 1889 When the St. Louis and Louisville management exchanged Hudson and Ramsey, one little factor in the success of the scheme was overlooked. The clubs forgot to ask Hudson's consent to the transfer. Louisville was on the point of releasing Ramsey, when one of the directors, hearing of the trouble in which Hudson was involved with the St. Louis club, sent a dispatch to Von der Ahe asking him how he would trade Hudson for Ramsey. Before the deal was consummated Ramsey was called up by the Louisville directors and asked if he would consent to play in St. Louis. He replied in the affirmative. Hudson was not consulted at all, and he has ignored the Louisville club and repudiated the deal. Ramsey was regularly released by Louisville, and last Wednesday he signed a Brown Stocking contract and accompanied by President von der Ahe started to join the team. St. Louis did not release Hudson and he has not signed a Louisville contract, therefore under existing base ball law he is still a member of the champion team. Hudson is not probably caring a continental about the affair, but the Louisville club has received very much the worst of it all around. St. Louis Republic July 28, 1889 Nat Hudson has signed with Minneapolis, $1,000 being given for his release. He will be in Minneapolis for the opening home game with St. Paul August 24. Hudson was formerly with St. Louis,but refused to play with that team and was traded with Louisville for Ramsey. Hudson never went to Louisville, however, and the latter team, after much wiring, consented to part with him. St. Louis Republic August 18, 1889 |
| Source | St. Louis Republic |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a strike out on a quick pitch; batter leaving the box
| Date | Wednesday, May 29, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from R. M. Larner's column] Manager Crothers, of the Dallas, Tex., Club, writes Mr. Young to know if a batter can be called out on the strikes under the following circumstances:--The batsman has three balls called and the fourth ball he strikes at. The fifth ball seems to be off the plate, and the batsman takes it for granted that the umpire will call four balls. He drops his bat and starts for first base. Contrary to his expectation the umpire calls two strikes before the batsman can resume his position at the plate. The pitcher delivers a good ball, and the batter is declared out on three strikes. Mr. Young decides that the umpire was correct, as the player had no right to leave the batter's box until the umpire had decided whether the fifth ball was a strike of a bad ball. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a substitute umpire a former club employee
| Date | Thursday, August 1, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Frequent complaints have been made at League headquarters... regarding Weeden, substitute umpire at Boston, and the burden of the cry has been that he is an employee of the Boston Club. As far as can be learned, Weeden has had the score card and other privileges at the Boston Club grounds until recently, when he was made a substitute umpire of the League and assigned to duty at Boston. This has had a tendency to create dissatisfaction among visiting clubs, and President Young, in deference to the demands, declined to allow him to umpire Tuesday’s game between the Bostons and Philadelphias. There was some curiosity manifested to know the reason for such action, and it is thought that the foregoing explanation will suffice the satisfy the citizens of the Hub. |
| Source | Philadelphia Item |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a suggestion that a foul tip count as a strike
| Date | Wednesday, July 31, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from R. M. Larner's column] It is interesting to hear the various schemes proposed in the grand stand by enthusiasts who want to improve the national game according to their ideas, and the latest craze is in regard to foul tips. During a recent contest at Capitol Park a trio of regular attendants at the games were discussing this feature, and their suggestions were to the effect that a foul tip should be counted against the batsman as a strike. It is not a bad idea, and is started out upon a cold and possibly unfriendly world of sports for discussion before the meeting of the League magnates. Of course there will be a chorus of chestnuts, rats, come offs and similar choice expressions, but I am going to claim the credit of originating the topic though the heavens fall. I will be glad to hear from some of my companions in misery who are compelled to overhear numerous plans, any one of which in the estimation of the originator will be sure to revolutionize the game we all love so dearly. The Sporting Life July 31, 1889 [from W. I Harris's column] I notice in Brother Larner's notes a suggestion about foul tips which is claimed a new idea. Whether new or old it is a good one. The suggestion has been made over and over again that a foul tip should be called a strike, and in bringing the point up again Brother Larner is on the right tack. The present plan of calling tips nil is one of the most illogical rules the League ever made. It is inconsistent and it is unfair to the pitcher. It certainly ought to be a strike. This point will be a good one to push during the winter. The Sporting Life August 14, 1889 |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a tie game ended for dinner
| Date | Friday, August 23, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [Cleveland vs. Indianapolis 8/22/1889] [the first game of a double-admission double header] The first contest opened at 10 o'clock in the morning, and at the end of the ninth inning the score stood 1 to 1, with no prospects of a change. As the players had to get their dinners and arrange for the second game, Captains Glasscock and Faatz agreed to call it a draw, with the understanding that the game will be played off on Saturday. |
| Source | Indianapolis Journal |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a trainer in Brooklyn
| Date | Wednesday, June 12, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [Kansas City vs. Brooklyn 6/6/1889] Long, of Kansas City...ran into O'Brien at second base in an attempt to crowd the latter out, and Darby's right No. 12 landed plump on Long's left foot. The latter was on his back in a minute rolling over apparently in a mortal agony. There was a rush of all the players to his side. Umpire Gaffney and Manager Watkins raced to the spot. Dr. McLean, the physician to the Bridgrooms, hastened from the grand stand and big Jack McMaster, the trainer, ran from the club house with a lot of plaster, lint and several other things. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a twelve-club combined League talked of
| Date | Saturday, October 26, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The Sporting News, published by Al Spink and recognized as Von der Ahe’s official organ, to-day publishes an article to the effect that the American Association and National League are to combine, and that, pursuant to this idea, plans have been drawn up, and those which in all likelihood will be submitted and acted on favorably call for one gigantic league composed of twelve cities, including Boston, New York, Brooklyn, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Pittsburgh, Chicago, St. Louis, Cincinnati, Louisville, Columbus and Kansas City. |
| Source | Philadelphia Item |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
a wealthy ballplayer
| Date | Sunday, January 6, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Pitcher Shreve is at Louisville. He belongs to a Southern family there who think he “degrades himself by playing ball,” just as certain English families think that their sons should do no vulgar work for a living, but simply live idle lives, “like gentlemen.” Shreve, however, has common sense views on the subject, and so plays ball for a good salary. Brooklyn Eagle January 6, 1889 [See also SABR bio of Lev Shreve.] |
| Source | Brooklyn Eagle |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
A. J. Reach Co. becomes a stock company
| Date | Wednesday, January 2, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The business of the A. J. Reach Company, limited, has grown so that it was deemed advisable to enlarge its scope, and the company has accordingly been transformed into a stock company corporation. The new concern, entitled the “A. J. Reach Company of Philadelphia,” capitalized at $100,000, was chartered by the State last week. The company is authorized to manufacture and sell general sporting and athletic goods. Under the articles of incorporation 600 shares are to be issued as full-paid, non-assessable stock to A. J. Reach, and 300 shares to Ben Shibe and Emanual Hoff. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
AA 'blacklist' replaced by 'ineligible'
| Date | Wednesday, March 6, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [reporting the AA special meeting 3/5/1889] The word blacklist is wiped out of the constitution, which now refers to an offending player as being ineligible. |
| Source | New York Sun |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
AA players signing with the PL; PL policy to the AA
| Date | Wednesday, November 20, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The managers of the new Players' League team announce that A. W. Latham, third baseman of the St. Louis Browns, has been secured to take Tom Burns' place on the 1890 team, and has signed an agreement and accepted advance money. Von der Ahe has fined and stopped his pay to the amount of $900 this season, and to recover this the courts will be resorted to. Three other men will be taken from the American Association to Chicago. The question of a fight with the Association was fully discussed at the New York meeting, and it was decided that, having assigned a team to Brooklyn, the fight was on and might as well be made as hard as possible and that it was better to fight an association denuded of its stars than a covert enemy. The Sporting Life November 20, 1889 In addition to pitcher Kilroy the Baltimore club was, during the past week, robbed of several more of its stars, namely, Tom Tucker, Wm. Shindle and Frank Foreman. The latter was signed by the Philadelphia Players' Club and Tucker was corralled by John Ward, along with Mickey Welch, in Holyoke last Saturday. Tucker was signed for the Brooklyn Club. The Sporting Life November 27, 1889 |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
AA players with money to spare
| Date | Monday, February 25, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | According to the Cincinnati Enquirer, the American Association players who have money to spare are as follows: Bobby Carruthers, $30,000 and rich prospects; Nat Hudson, $30,000. These players inherited their wealth. Those who have saved money out of their earnings are Charles Comiskey and Long John Reilly, about $15,000 each. The other prudent players are John Corkhill, Bill Gleason, Biddy McPhee, Hugh Nichol, Joe Sommer, Harry Stovey, Tony Mullane, and Dock Bushong. They are worth from $7,000 to $10,000. The most notorious of the improvidents are Ramsey, Latham, Browning, Foutz, and Snyder, the latter now of the League. |
| Source | New York Sun |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
AA players with wealth
| Date | Monday, February 11, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Who is the richest player in the association, do you ask? Well, that question is not a difficult one to answer. Bob Caruthers, the $13,000 beauty of the Brooklyns, has far more wealth than any player in the country. Parisian Bob did not earn his bug lump of United States dollar by the sweat of his brow, however, he came into possession of it through inheritance. Bob is a child of fortune. He belongs to one of the richest families in Chicago. About three years ago he was left $30,000 by a grandfather, and his mother is now worth ten times that amount. Bob is one of three heirs, so that he is rich in prospects. Nat Hudson is another bloated bondholder. Nat has only been in the American Association three seasons, and the $30,000 that he owns was left him by his father. When it comes down to self-made ball-players from a financial point of view, Comiskey may be rated as being possessed of more of this world's goods than any other association players; although if it came to a case of show-down the cash balance of our own Long John Reilly would not be much less than that of the st. Louis captain-manager. Both of these players have earned nearly every dollar they possess by their efforts on the diamond. Both are sav34rs, and are each worth about $15,000. Corkhill is also well off, being worth nearly as much as the two men mentioned. Bill Gleason is another man who looks after the dollars, and does not carry a big bundle when he starts on a trip. He owns two nice pieces of property in St. Louis. McPhee is one of the exemplary men of the profession. He has been a good boy to his mother and the resto fot he family. He has also saved money and has about $7,000 invested in mortgage securities. Little Hugh Nicol was a “spender” until about three seasons ago, when he grew “cold” and began taking care of his money. He has several thousand dollars invested in real estate that is likely to bring him big returns. Carpenter, although possess of no bad habits, is of a happy-go-lucky disposition, and spends his money just about as fast as he makes it. Pete Browning, the gladiator, blows himself on any and all occasions, but he has capital in reserve, as his mother is wealthy. Joe Sommer has taken care of his earnings and is worth $7,000 or $8,000. Harry Stovey has drawn big money since 1874 and has saved quite a pile of his winnings. Mullane is well to do in spite of his numerous bad investments. Bushong, the Brooklyn catcher, is worth $10,000. St., quoting the Cincinnati Enquirer |
| Source | St. Louis Republic |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
AA recognizes ladies' day
| Date | Wednesday, March 6, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [reporting the AA special meeting 3/5/1889] A provision is made for a ladies' day, which shall not be a Sunday or holiday, and that home clubs shall not pay a percentage for their admission. |
| Source | New York Sun |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Aaron Stern on the fifty cent admission, Sunday games
| Date | Saturday, October 26, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from an interview of Stern] “Well, Cincinnati is a fifty-cent city and would, no doubt, make out well in the League. While we charged fifty cents last year we made more money than we ever made at twenty-five cents. Since our Sunday games were stopped we lost $15,000, which we would have made up during the week days at fifty cents, had we been in the League. |
| Source | The Philadelphia Item |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
abolishing player sales
| Date | Wednesday, November 20, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [reporting the NL meeting of 11/13-15/1889] Section 35 [of the NL constitution], which read, “Releases of players from contract or reservation, and future contracts with such player shall be regulated and governed by the National Agreement of professional base ball clubs and the League legislation made in pursuance thereof” was amended so as to provide that “no player, without the consent of the club with which he is under contract o reservation, can negotiate with any other club for his services; but if said consent is given said player may negotiate with any club for his services and receive money consideration therefor, which may be accepted by the releasing club” This does away with the system of sales, over which there has recently been such a cry. The Sporting Life November 20, 1889 [editorial matter] The sales system of the National League could not well be abolished so long as the reserve rule was in force. The latter makes of the player a club asset and gives him a marketable value which cannot be ignored in any negotiations for transfer. The system as amended, however, now takes the sting of slavery out of it and no longer permits a player to assume the role of a martyr. Th League now puts the effort to secure release upon the player by prohibiting sales and releases unless requested by the player, and also makes him a party to and sharer in its benefits. Unfortunately for the player, however, the club still holds the whip-hand, inasmuch as it retains the power to put s prohibitory price upon any release. The Sporting Life November 27, 1889 |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
accessibility of the New Polo Grounds
| Date | Wednesday, September 11, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from Caylor's column] [The New Polo Grounds] has a number of advantages over the old Polo Grounds. One, and the most striking, is the fact that the elevated railroad lands visitors right across the street from the entrance gates, and in going home after a game is concluded you have to make but two steps to pass from the exit gate to the foot of the elevated railroad stairs. It requires no more time to go from the One Hundred and Sixteenth Street Station (the old station at the Polo Grounds) to One Hundred and Fifty-fifth street, the new landing place, four stations beyond, than it formerly required to take the visitors from the One Hundred and Sixteenth Street Station to the Polo Grounds. Moreover, you do not have to spend that time walking across from the railroad to the grounds, or pay a hackman fifteen cents extra for a carriage ride between points; nor do you have to descend or ascend half so many steps getting to a from the trains—the elevation at One Hundred and Fifty-fifth street being only one-thi5rd what it is at One Hundred and Sixteenth street. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
admission in Washington
| Date | Wednesday, May 1, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The Washington Club has failed in its effort to gain the consent of the League to a reduction of the admission from fifty to thirty-five cents and the price will remain the same as last season. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Al Nichols on an amateur team
| Date | Wednesday, August 28, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Outfielder Ben Cake and pitcher Hart, of the Rivertons, had quite an unusual experience a week ago. These two well-iknown and popular amateurs were invited to make up a team to represent Pennington, N.J., in a contest against the Flemington Club. When they arrived at the latter's ground, where the game was to be played, they recognized among the Flemington players the notorious Al Nichols, who was blacklisted years ago along with Devlin and Hall by the Louisville Club for selling games. He was down on the card as third baseman “Williams.” When they discovered Nichols' identity, which was not denied, Cake and hart promptly refused to contaminate themselves by playing a game agaisnt a man who was debarred even from the professional field, and therefore should be the last to be allowed to compete with amateurs. The Flemington people, though aware of Nichols' character and history, positively refused to play without him, and Hart and Cake thereupon left the grounds amid the hooting and abuse of the goodly crowd assembled, which was, however, ignorant of the real reason for the withdrawal of the Philadelphians. After Cake and Hart left the Flemington Club claimed the game by default, but the Penningtons afterwards with the aid of two local players played the game. It is said to be a fact that Nichols plays right along with the so-called “amateur” teams in the vicinity of New York, Brooklyn and in various parts of New Jersey, and is making a living out of it. Though he plays under the name of Williams, his identify is no secret, and yet our Philadelphia players are, we believe, to refuse to play with or against him. This is a fine commentary on the “amateurism” that prevails in and around the metropolis and of the moral tone of these misnamed amateur players. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
American Association rumored to plan to classify players
| Date | Saturday, March 2, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | It is officially announced that at the spring meeting of the American Base-Ball Association, to be held in this city [Columbus] next Tuesday, President Byrne will present a plan of classifying the players similar to that in vogue in the league. From the same source it is understood that it will be adopted to take effect at the close of the next playing season. Chicago Tribune March 2, 1889 [N.B. It wasn't.] |
| Source | Chicago Tribune |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Amos Rusie the coming pitcher
| Date | Wednesday, October 16, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Rusie this winter proposes to learn a good style of drop delivery, that being his only weak point at present. In the language of Anson, Buck Ewing, Brouthers and others, he is the coming pitcher of the League. It will be necessary, however, for him to keep a swelling of the head from appearing at this stage of the game. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
an AA two umpire game
| Date | Friday, July 5, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [Brooklyn vs. St. Louis 7/4/1889] The double umpire system was given a trial and worked fairly well. Jack Kerins took care of the bases while Gaffney judged the balls and strikes. St. |
| Source | St. Louis Republic |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
an Association player signs with the Players League
| Date | Wednesday, November 20, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The dismemberment of the American Association and its consequent virtual destruction by the National League is nuts for the Brotherhood League and gives the latter just the opportunity to make good desertions from its ranks and to carry on reprisals it had been looking for; in fact, things could not have shaped themselves more favorably for the Brotherhood had the latter ordered it so. The first move was made yesterday [11/15] when Arthur Irwin went to Philadelphia and signed Matt Kilroy, of the Baltimores, for the new Boston Club. Kelly brought the news to the Fifth Avenue Hotel, and created considerable excitement thereby, and when “Kel” further declared that Tucker would also sign, the hearts of the Brotherhood men beat through exultant feelings. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
an Olympic Club reunion
| Date | Wednesday, March 27, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | There was a notable reunion of veteran ball players at the Bellevue last Thursday evening, composed of members of the Olympic Base Ball Club, which was first organized in 1833. about twenty members gathered about the festive board and did full justice to the fare provided for their entertainment. The post-prandial exercises consisted of appropriate speeches and reminiscences of the earlier days of our national game, and the former triumphs of the club. Col. Peter Ellmaker, D. M. Zimmerman and James A. Wright were among the speakers, and their efforts received ample encouragement from their auditors. The gentlemen present were :--John P. J. Sensenderfer, Henry Clay, D. M. Zimmerman, Gideon Marsh, G. W. Walton, George Fletcher, James A. Wright, Arthur Thacher, Charles Anspach, M .H. Taber, R. DeB. Richard, William H. Morris, Col. Peter Ellmaker, J. W. Miller, J. M. Wilkins, Charles Lincoln, Charles Boris, George E. Cummings, Robert Lindsay, Robert P. McCullough. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
an adequate supply of balls
| Date | Sunday, October 20, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [New York vs. Brooklyn 10/19/1889] [World Series game 2] It would be a good thing for Manager Mutrie to see to it that a sufficient number of balls are available for the game to-morrow. It is tiresome for players and spectators to wait five minutes every time a balls is knocked over the stand. |
| Source | New York World |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
an airing of old grievances against the League
| Date | Wednesday, November 27, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from W. D. Sullivan's column] In reading the manifesto of the magnates it would certainly seem that the players had done wrong in deserting the men that have taken them to their arms and nurtured them, only to find that they were like the serpent that stung its benefactor. The screed reads well. There is another side to it. Let us look at it. Let us look back to the second year of the League. At that time several men had signed two and three-year contracts. The League passed a law taking away a part of the salary of the men to defray the cost of traveling and uniforms. At that time they were breaking a written contract and it caused the first break between players and club. This was illegal, and to show it was so judgment was obtained against one of the clubs. None of the old-timer have got any of that money. It s well known that some of the players had to sign receipts in full with a threat of not getting the last month's salary if they did not do so. The third year of the existence of this righteous body that we read abut they got a new wrinkle. They signed men for so much a year, so rather at so much pro rata. Then when the season had nearly ended, the players was cut off a month in his wages and turned loose for the winter but held for the next season by the men that had absolutely put their hands in his pocket and robbed him. Again, the legality of the transaction was tested, and this time the money was collected by the man that took the action. He quit the business and went as an express driver, preferring to earn a thousand dollars where he could get it rather than have the name of making three times as much that only existed on paper. It could name a dozen more cases, but the readers of The Sporting Life are too well posted to need me to rehash the matter. There is only one thing that I need say, and that is that there are League clubs that have owed their old players money for years. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
an amateur umpire is given a beating
| Date | Tuesday, May 7, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | A game of ball was played at Winfield, L.I., on Sunday between the Athletics of Long Island City and the Excelsiors of Winfield. The Athletics won. The defeated club took exception to the rulings of the umpire, Robert Doyle, and as he was about leaving the grounds one of the Excelsior Club players struck him over the head with a base ball bat, knocking him down. Before his friends could interfere the rest of the defeated club joined in beating him. He attempted to defend himself and during the fight was stabbed below the left eye and through the right hand. The Athletics finally succeeded in driving his assailants away. Doyle was picked up and hurried off. The refractory members of the Excelsior Club waited for him at the depot thinking he would take the train from there to Long Island City. His friends took him home in another direction. He is seriously hurt. |
| Source | New York Sun |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
an apparently serious proposal to merge the AA and PL
| Date | Wednesday, December 11, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [reporting the AA special meeting 12/4/1889] The subject that the delegates were called to consider was that of amalgamation with the new Players' League. The situation was canvased in all its bearings, and in accordance with instructions from John M. Ward, a series of propositions were drawn up to be presented to the Players' League at its next meeting. Mr. Phelps and Mr. Thurman were the committee. The groundwork of the agreement was agreed upon, and Mr. Thurman will extend the notes he has taken and prepare the instrument in the proper legal form. In a work it provides for the admission of the St. Louis, Columbus and Louisville clubs into the Brotherhood. In Philadelphia the Athletics and the Brotherhood team will consolidate, and the new club will be known as the Athletics. The plants at the three first-named cities will be put into the new organization, and the owners of the present clubs will qualify in any proper sum that they will carry out their engagements. Sunday games will be done away with and each city will be allowed to regulate the prices of admission to its grounds. There was a disposition to hold out for Sunday games, and St. Louis and Columbus rebelled a bit at the proposed innovation, but, after a full canvass of the situation, it was agreed to waive Sunday game, for Johnny Ward placed that act as paramount for their admission to the Players' League. Further details were treated and an understanding reached that, after Mr. Thurman had properly prepared the document, President Phelps and himself should at once meet a committee of the Brotherhood and submit the proposition as agreed upon, when any necessary changes or alterations might be made. The Sporting Life December 11, 1889 Tim Keefe, the pitcher of the New York Club and secretary of the Base Ball Players' Brotherhood, was found at his place of business on Broadway to-day [12/6]. Tim had been thinking a great deal over that meeting of the American Association at Columbus on Wednesday, and had come to the conclusion that the Brotherhood had no use for the American Association. Said he:-- “I don't see what use the Association clubs would be to us. If we took them in we would only have to make a twelve-club league, and that would make so many tail-enders that the draw on the guarantee fund would be by far too great. For that reason I should certainly be against such a move. All the talk about consolidating the two organizations is being done by the American Association people, and not by the Brotherhood. You can put it down that there is nothing in it.” The Sporting Life December 11, 1889 [editorial matter] If the Association magnates were possessed of the craft and wisdom necessary to success in the base ball business they would never have proposed amalgamation at all, but would simply have remained apparently dormant, awaited the result of the League's test suit against the Players' League, and if that resulted disastrously to the latter and knocked the project out, stood prepared to jump in to take up the new League project itself and carry it out, thus once more putting itself into the base ball whirl. But what is the use of talking of wisdom in connection with Association magnates? Nothing but blunders could be expected of them even to the bitter end. The Sporting Life December 11, 1889 |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
an assessment of Wheeler Wikoff
| Date | Tuesday, October 8, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | There has been a big howl raised against Wheeler Wikoff not exercising the proper authority as the President of the Association. It was never intended that he should do so. The title was conferred on him, it is true, but it was only a case of bluff. It was intended that he should be President only in name, not in fact. The men who now howl at him understood the situation when they elected him. Wheeler, as a non-committal-never-tell-any-news sort of official, outclasses any body ever mentioned for the position. It is a question, though, whether this is the proper kind of man for the place., quoting the Cincinnati Enquirer |
| Source | Philadelphia Item |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
an early identification of the New York/Troy and Philadelphia/Worcester franchises
| Date | Wednesday, October 2, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | New York came in [to the NL] on the death of Troy in 1883, and Philadelphia supplanted Worcester the same year. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
an early wind-up delivery?
| Date | Sunday, May 5, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Cunningham, Baltimore's clever little pitcher still does the “wind-the-clock-act” while delivering the ball when none of the bases are occupied. |
| Source | Philadelphia Item |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
an ejection; an attempted steal during the argument
| Date | Monday, September 16, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [Louisville vs. Brooklyn 9/15/1889] Then ensued a regular Comiskey kick by Shannon, who, like many other captains, imagines the disputing of decisions which cannot be reversed the sole duty of captains. This fellow, however, acted like a regular loafer. He told Goldmsith that he had better go and put on a Brooklyn uniform, as he was working for them all the while. Mr. Goldsmith could not stand that. He had fined Shannon $20 for his insulting disputing of his decision, and after his second and worse offense he ordered him off the field. Shannon went to the bend and declined to go off the ground. “I’m off the field, ain’t I?” he said, but Goldsmith insisted upon his going off the grounds and threatened forfeiture of the game if his decision was not obeyed, and so the Newark rough had to leave and take off his uniform. ... While Shannon was kicking about the decision at the home base Foutz tried to steal third, but he was thrown out there by Tomney and Raymond. |
| Source | Brooklyn Eagle |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
an endorsement of the two umpire system
| Date | Wednesday, May 15, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [editorial matter] Only a spirit of cheese-paring economy in this one direction has hitherto prevented the adoption of the double umpire system, and this spirit must ultimately yield to pressure of public opinion, even if the reform be not quickened by some deplorable occurrence. Give us double umpires for all championship games, for it is more than ever needed this season, because under the new rules there is more batting and more bases on balls, thus keeping the bases occupied very much oftener and adding correspondingly to the number of decisions and to the great labor of the umpire's never easy task. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
an example of kicking
| Date | Thursday, September 26, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [New York vs. Indianapolis 9/26/1889] The more Buck kicked, the worse grew McQuaid’s decisions, and Glasscock did not mend matters by trying to outtalk both the others. At last a ten-dollar climax was reached. Buck had begged McQuaid to act like a man as follows: “Put your eyes in the front of your head. Be a man or a monkey: don’t be a cross between the two.” “For heaven’s sake if you’re dumb say so, but don’t stand there like a mummy and say ‘a ball’ when you know it’s a strike.” “I don’t think you’re a robber, old man, but if this isn’t a case of petty larceny I never was out of jail.” Such remarks as these the umpire has listened to without a murmur, but later, when he told Andrews to sit down and the latter had proved that as one of two coachers he had a right to stand, Ewing said: “That’s right, Ed.: you don’t know much, but you’ve got more sense than this fellow.” This was too much even for the meek and mistaken McQuaid and he promptly stuffed a $10 fine into Ewing’s mouth, and the latter, in a measure, subsided. |
| Source | New York World |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
an experiment with three pitchers at three innings each
| Date | Wednesday, April 10, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from George Stackhouse's column] [Newark vs. Brooklyn 3/28/1889] The Brooklyn Club's plan of having three pitcher and three catchers in these early games does not seem to be producing the good results that was expected by the management. On a warm day this plan might be all right, but in cold weather it may prove more injurious than otherwise. For instance, Hughes and Clarke were the battery for the home team in the first three innings, and then put on their overcoats and sat on the players' bench and got chilled through, while Terry and Bushong took their places for three innings. Then the latter two retired to make room for Lovett and Visner. Hughes and Bushong were just getting warmed up to their work when it was time for them to quit. They went and sat on the players' bend in the cold, and if no ill results have followed it is not the fault of the weather. They could have pitched out the remaining six innings without any bad effect at all. Had they immediately returned to their dressing rooms after they had finished their part of the game, the liability to ill results would have been decreased. The plan of running so many batteries in one game is not only a nuisance to the spectators, a nuisance to the players, but bit confuses the spectators, who half the time do not know who is pitching and catching. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
an extra ball in the pocket?
| Date | Friday, August 2, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The press reports from Boston all agree that Thompson's hit went over the fence and that Kelly had an extra ball in his pocket, which he threw against the fence, making it appear that the one Thompson hit struck there. The players and spectators saw it, but Powers did not. All umpires make mistakes, but Powers seems to make all his on one side, and they are invariably in favor of Boston. St., quoting the Philadelphia Ledger |
| Source | St. Louis Republic |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
an improved batting cage
| Date | Saturday, February 2, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Jack Lynch is out with another idea. His latest is a cord cage to practice in. he turned a sample of his new idea over to Keefe and Becannon yesterday to have them patent it. Jack says that his cord cage will only cost $50, whereas if it was made of wire it would cost $150. |
| Source | New York Sun |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
an infield fly double play; baserunner's dilemma
| Date | Sunday, September 1, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Pop Smith worked an old trick in a very slick way Tuesday. In the eighth inning, with one our and Hallman and Fogarty on second and third, respectively, Farrar popped up a fly to short left, which Smith permitted to drop safely in front of him. He then quickly gathered it in, ran over and touched Hallman and then threw to Quinn, forcing out Fogarty and retiring the side. There is no possible way of beating this trick by legitimate play. The rules committee should make a cast-iron rule declaring the batter out whenever an infielder could, by purposely muffing a ball, effect a double play., quoting the Philadelphia North American |
| Source | Indianapolis Journal |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
an infield fly triple play
| Date | Friday, June 21, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [Washington vs. Indianapolis 6/20/1889] Again, when the visitors accomplished a triple play in the eighth Lynch displayed an utter lack of ability. Any one could see that Irwin dropped the pop fly of Hines purposely, and under the rules the batter alone should have been called out. Instead, [umpire] Lynch stood like a wooden Indian, leaving three runners on base helpless on account of his stupidity in failing to make his decision promptly and giving the men a chance to run. As they all knew that Hines was the only man who could be called out under the rules, they remained in their places until it was too late to save themselves. |
| Source | Indianapolis Journal |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
an injury sliding
| Date | Wednesday, April 3, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from an letter from Ned Williamson to the Cincinnati Enquirer] I am now laid up in bed. In sliding into second base last Friday (Paris game) I injured my knee quite severely. Ia collided with a rock and tore considerable flesh from the knee cap, necessitating my having it sewed (four stitches). I was advised to remain in Paris, but , stubborn as a mule, I refused, and left with the boys for London, crossing the channel. Oh, God! what a night I put in. not only did my knee cause me excruciating pain, but I suffered greatly from sea sickness. In moving I tore one of the stitches from my knee. Immediately upon my arrival here I called in another physician and learned that the wound had not bee thoroughly cleaned—result, here I am in bed in a city that I am more anxious to see than any I have yet visited. … I apprehend no permanent inconvenience from the accident, but, of course, cannot tell what the future may have in store for me; however, I pray for the best... |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
an objection to umpires behind the pitcher
| Date | Wednesday, June 5, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [a letter from John I. Rogers to Nick Young] “I desire to enter my protest against umpires standing inside the diamond, unless in case of double umpires. They are so afraid of the balls hit that they stand within ten feet of second base and think they can umpire balls and strikes from that distance. It is utterly impossible for them to do so, and I see no warrant in the rules permitting them to umpire anywhere except behind the home plate. The diagram of a ball ground attached to our rules, and which we have by repeated publications approved, puts the umpire back of the catcher. It is impossible also for the umpire, standing in the diamond, to tell whether the ball is hit fair or foul, if a grounder close to the line. To get around this difficulty umpires have been appointing one of the players at the bat as a substitute, to tell them whether the ball is fair or foul. This is a severe test to a man if the ball be close to the line, and the man waiting his turn to bat should not be led into such temptation. Umpires, of course, will take instructions only from you, and I therefore most respectfully, but earnestly, request you to instruct all umpires to umpire behind the bat and to run down as far as they can when bases are being stolen. The present system is the laziest and saves the umpires using his legs, but it is destructive to all satisfactory systems for fairly calling balls and strikes and deciding foul balls.” President Young says there is much wisdom in the above suggestions and he has accordingly instructed the various League umpires to render their decisions from behind the plate and move around in the vicinity of the bases when base plays are being made. The Sporting Life June 5, 1889 [editorial matter] One of Umpire Gaffney's innovations has been discarded by the League umpires by order of President Young, who has instructed them to hereafter umpire from behind the plate altogether. This order is due to the many complaints received about the impossibility of judging fair and foul hits correctly from behind the pitcher, and was really inspired by Col. Rogers' argument for it in a letter to President Young. Under the new order, of course, fair and foul hits will be somewhat better gauged, while close points at second base will have to take care of themselves. Of course, some games are won and lost by decisions at second base, but that is nothing compared with the importance of having the records of the players in the matter of hits which may decide games, as well as the important matter of properly calling balls and strikes, well looked after. All things considered, the change is a good one, although the better and more lasting improvement would be the double umpire system, which would enable all points of play to be well covered, but that's too expensive, you know. The poor and struggling major leagues would rather have the everlasting umpire troubles, with undoubted loss of some patronage, than put their hands into their pockets and provide the panacea—the double umpire system. The Sporting Life June 5, 1889 |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
an oblique dig at Amos Alonzo Stagg
| Date | Sunday, January 6, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | “They tell me you were one of the famous praying pitchers of last season? (Modestly,) “I was.” “And did you always win when you offered up a prayer for victory previous to a game?” (With injured look.) “Not always. Sometimes the other side bribed the umpire.” Philadelphia Times January 6, 1889, quoting the Chicago Tribune Baltimore Club ownership It is announced to-day [1/5] that Henry R. Vonderhorst has sold his interest in the Baltimore Club to Messrs. B. F. Farren and Fred Booth, well-known oyster packers. It is also understood that Vonderhorst disposed of his stock at a sacrifice. Barnie will continue to manage the club. Mr. J. W. Walz will act in behalf of the gentlemen who purchased Mr. Vonderhorst's interest in the club. He is announced as one of the owners of the club and will, in all probability, act as assistant to Manager Barnie. It was at first thought that the capital stock would be increased by the taking in of other wealthy capitalists and by forming a company. This plan was, however, abandoned, and Mr. Vonderhorst got out of the snap as best he could. He acknowledges he quit a heavy loser. There is every reason, however, to doubt Mr. Vonderhorst's complete withdrawal from base ball, and there is ample cause for the belief that he still retains an interest in the club, but for business reasons and in deference to his father's wish no longer cares to be publicly identified with the club or base ball in general. The Sporting Life January 9, 1889 |
| Source | Philadelphia Times |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
an ugly uniform
| Date | Sunday, May 12, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The modest gray shirt and trousers worn by “The Zulus” [i.e. Pittsburgh] yesterday toned down the Dime Museum style of their regulation costume a trifle, but the yellow stockings and cap still remained an eyesore to every spectator not afflicted with color blindness. Chicago Tribune May 12, 1889 mask on the base line; character of AA players; awning over players bench; destroying a catcher's mask The following paragraph will convey a fair idea of the character of the average American Association ball-player and the degree of control exercised by the average association team manager over his players. “Quite a little excitement,” says the paragraph, “was caused in the fifth inning of last Wednesday's game between the Cincinnati and Athletic teams at Cincinnati. Duryea was on first when Holliday hit to deep left for a home run. Robinson, the catcher, took off his mask and laid it directly on the third base path, about four feet from home, and then stood on the plate. Baldwin, who was on the bench, sa the movement, and became possessed of the idea that it was an exhibition of dirty ball—that Robinson had placed the mask there so that Holliday could not slide in case of a close play. Quick as a flash Baldwin came out from under the awning, the, running up with bat in hand, hit Robinson's mask a hard blow, knocking it off the path. As soon as Robinson realized what he had done he looked around for Kid's mask. It was on the ground not far from the plate. Robinson jumped onto the mask with both feet and smashed it out of shape. It was completely collapsed. Baldwin had to use Earle's mask the rest of the game, his own being destroyed completely. Hot words followed and the audience hissed Robinson. Baldwin wanted Goldsmith to fine Robinson enough to pay for the mask. He would take no action in the matter. Robinson's trick in laying the mask on the third-base line is one originated by Jack Boyle, and by this obstruction the base-runner is prevented from sliding home unless he takes chances of being injured by the mask. Chicago Tribune May 12, 1889 |
| Source | Chicago Tribune |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
an umpire said to be fired for ejecting a player
| Date | Wednesday, September 18, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Umpire Curry received notification from President Young, yesterday, that his services as a League umpire were no longer desired. The general belief is that his action in fining Faatz and ordering his removal from the field had much to do with his release. The public sympathy is with Curry for all who saw Faatz’s disgraceful actions [game of 9/14] know that Curry would have been justified in imposing even a heavier fine. They look upon President Young’s dismissal of Curry just at this time as an indorsement of the dirty conduct of Faatz. The Philadelphia Item September 18, 1889 [quoting Nick Young] “...the facts in the case are these: For some time past Curry has been expecting to secure some position in Philadelphia, and, during a series of games when he was stationed here [Washington] he was in the habit of going over to Philadelphia every day to see about it. On one occasion he missed a game, and there was no valid excuse for his absence, so I decided to lecture him and endeavor to prevent a repetition of the offense, but he did not take kindly to what I said to him, but was inclined to think that I was reading the riot act to him for a very trifling affair. Numerous complaints were also filed against him at League headquarters, but I was inclined to deal as leniently with him as possible, and, as a matter of fact, he has not yet severed his connection with the league. Still it is quite likely that his successor will be named this week... The Philadelphia Item September 20, 1889 |
| Source | Philadelphia Item |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
an upcoming conference between the Brotherhood and the League; the Brush plan
| Date | Wednesday, June 26, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The Brotherhood's demands will be discussed by the League and Brotherhood committee at Chicago next week. The demands are: Abolition of classification and re-imbursement for all loss by its operation covered by contract. No reservation for a salary less than previous year. Absolute abolition of the practice of selling players. If no agreement is reached a strike may come. The Sporting Life June 26, 1889 Before starting for Cleveland Monday night short stop Ward, president of the Ball Player's Brotherhood, said that a conference will be held shortly, probably at Chicago, between committees representing the Brotherhood and League. Ward, of New York, Hanlon, of Pittsburg, and Brouthers, of Boston, will look after the interest of the players, and Day, of New York; Rogers, of Philadelphia, and Spalding, of Chicago, the League's. The object of the conference is to take definite action in regard to the classification system, which the Brotherhood has resolved to fight to the end. “Salary limits and classification systems,” said an officer of the Brotherhood... “will be knocked in the head altogether. A ball player is worth all a club can afford to give him, and he will get it. These schemes are devised by mean managers who want to keep the men down to rock-bottom prices in order to enable them to pocket big dividends. On account of the reserve rule, which is a necessity, we cannot play where we please, but we can and will defeat schemes of the classification order.” The Sporting Life June 26, 1889 |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Anson managing the Chicagos
| Date | Wednesday, July 24, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from an interview of Spalding by Chadwick] “I see by this week's papers...that I am 'running the Chicago team again,'... Now there is not a word of truth in any one of these statements. Anson is managing the team and doing it as well as ever. |
| Source | The Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
antedate of 'double steal'
| Date | Sunday, August 25, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [Brooklyn vs. Cincinnati 8/24/1889] A double steal was attempted, but Reilly was nailed at third. |
| Source | Brooklyn Eagle |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
antedating 'free agent'
| Date | Wednesday, December 4, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [editorial matter] The National League advances the plea that its player have given it the option of their services; that therefore they are virtually contracted men, and that it would be only taking back its own should it induce them to sign League contracts, even after they had signed Brotherhood contracts. The Brotherhood men, on the other hand, deny the League's claim, and consider themselves free agents and legally competent to dispose of their services as they see fit. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
applications for players to joint the League
| Date | Wednesday, November 27, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | All players desirous of entering the National League ranks for 1890 should file their applications promptly with President Young, Box 536, Washington, D.C., so that he can forward to the necessary blanks for information and data to help the League committee in making decisions. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Arthur Irwin's gloves
| Date | Wednesday, March 6, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Spalding has just closed a contract with Arthur A. Irwin to handle all gloves made by him for the season of 1889. The Sporting Life March 6, 1889 Anson's reason for leading all first basemen last season, July 1:--”I purchased one of Irwin's Improved Fielding Gloves, and after that it was impossible to drop a thrown ball.” The Sporting Life March 6, 1889 |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Athletic Club finances 6
| Date | Wednesday, January 2, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [reporting the Athletic Club meeting 12/27/1888] The report of Treasurer Whitaker showed the finances of the club to be in a healthy condition. The club made money last season, but how much is only known to the stockholders. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Athletic Club for sale; ownership
| Date | Wednesday, November 20, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Covetous eyes have also been cast upon the Athletic Club, and the New York Club is not the only one that is figuring on securing the valuable timber in that team. It is said to be a fact that the Philadelphia League Club had recently made an effort to purchase the Athletic Club, and that $60,000 had been named by the Philadelphia people. A short time ago it was said that the Athletic Club could have been purchased for $50,000, but negotiations then going on were discontinued, owing to the unwillingness of the prospective purchaser, Joseph Snellenburg, to pay any such figure. There are 500 shares of stock in the Athletic Club, divided up, it is said, as follows:--Pennypacker, 100; Whittaker, 100; Sharsig, 100; Snellenburg, 85; Kames, 10; Cox, 46; Mink & Son, 35; R. J. Lennon, 1; John McKinlay, 1; Shibe, 15; Thompson, 15, and a few scattering shares. Pennypacker, it is said, was anxious some time ago to sell out. So was Sharsig, but as he had been signed as manager for next year at a salary of $2000, he would only agree to sell out his stock with the understanding that he was to be retained as manager by the new management. But since the Brotherhood League break the price of the stock has, it is said, been boomed, and Pennypacker, Whittaker, Sharsig and Mink & Son, who held a big majority of the stock, formed, it is said, a combination to hold together. Each one was to refuse to sell unless the others were in the deal, and up to Thursday, it is said, they had raised their price to a basis which would have made the club valued at $80,000, or $100 per share, which is $60 above par. The New York Club was also after the Athletic Club, but Philadelphia, it was understood, was to have the preference. It was the intention of the Philadelphia Club, it is claimed, to have dropped the club out of the Association and transferred the pick of the Athletic players to their League club and sell the rest. There would have been some little opposition to this by the minority stockholders, as the Philadelphia people would have made their deal through the majority combination. The club has, it is said, a bonded indebtedness of $17,500, of which, it is said, Reach and Shibe hold $8000, The Sporting Life Publishing Company $1000, and Snellenburg and a man named O'Brien the balance. This, of course, would have to be considered in any deal to buy the club. The Sporting Life November 20, 1889 the League's division of gate receipts; admission of Brooklyn and Cincinnati; elimination of the Brush classification plan The subject that engrossed the attention of the League delegates on reassembling in the Fifth Avenue Hotel Thursday morning was that of dividing the gate receipts. This subject was taken up just before the meeting adjourned late Wednesday night, and as nothing was done then it was the first thing on the card Thursday morning. As was confidently expected, it was a bone of contention between the stronger and weaker cities. Last season the visiting clubs received 12½ cents for each spectator, or, in other words, 25 per cent of the gate receipts. Three of the clubs wanted the constitution amended so that the visiting clubs would get 50 per cent of the receipts. The others strenuously objected, and no agreement was reached during the morning session. Recess was taken between 2:30 and 4 o’clock, and then the meeting got down to work and settled the percentage and several other matters in rapid order. A compromise was unanimously agreed upon allowing visiting clubs 40 per cent of the receipts. The Philadelphia Item November 17, 1889 [reporting the NL meeting of 11/13-15/1889] Indianapolis and Washington refused to go out to make room for Cincinnati and Brooklyn, and insisted that with an equal division of receipts they could hold up their end. Pittsburg and Cleveland joined them in their demand. Chicago was willing to compromise on 40 per cent., but Boston, Philadelphia and New York held out and refused to give more than 331/3 per cent. the weaker clubs refused to vote upon any other question until this one of percentage was decided. Twenty-four ballots were taken. Cleveland, Indianapolis, Pittsburg and Washington voted for a 50 per cent. division of receipts, and Boston, Chicago, New York and Philadelphia for 33 1/3 per cent. increased percentage. At 4 o'clock in the afternoon the Philadelphia Club weakened and the deadlock was broken. Colonel John I. Rogers announced that the Philadelphia Club would second Chicago's proposition for a 40 per cent. division of the gate receipts, provided certain other things were done. The big League clubs of Boston, New York, Philadelphia and Chicago wanted Brooklyn and Cincinnati admitted, and they announced that they would agree to the 40 per cent. division provided the other side would agree to strike out the classification rule and also agree to increase the membership to ten clubs. It didn't take long to talk the weaker clubs over to this proposition, and then the League took a short recess. The convention then considered the election of new members, and, after a short discussion, Messrs. John I. Rogers and J. Palmer O'Neil were appointed a committee to wait on the Brooklyn and Cincinnati clubs. They found the representatives of these clubs and offered them memberships in the League. Applications were quickly made out in accordance with the League constitution, and the board of directors passed on them favorably. Both clubs were then unanimously elected and their delegates invited to attend the meeting. Messrs. Charles H. Byrne and F. A. Abell represented Brooklyn, and Aaron S. Stern and Harry Sterne, Cincinnati. The Sporting Life November 20, 1889 |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
attendance in Boston and Brooklyn
| Date | Wednesday, June 12, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [a breakdown of attendance figures, followed by] Boston's average attendance, according to the figures given, was 5,395 per game, while that at Brooklyn was a fraction over 7,544. Had not rain prevented last Saturday's game the latter would have been still larger. The attendance at Brooklyn's exhibition games was fully 25,000 more. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
attendance in Philadelphia
| Date | Wednesday, June 26, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The attendance at the Athletic-St. Louis games in this city [Philadelphia] was:-- Thursday, 9081; Friday, 6194; Saturday, 10,714; Sunday (estimate) 12,000, and Monday, 8461; total, 46,450. The Quaker City is somewhat of a ball town, eh? |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Australian rules football
| Date | Sunday, April 28, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [See NYS 4/28/1889 for a description of , as reported by the Spalding tourists.] |
| Source | New York Sun |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
balk moves 2
| Date | Saturday, March 30, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from an article on the new rules by Chadwick] ...whenever [the pitcher] makes a feint to throw to a base other than home base, after making such feint he must resume his original position and make a pause before he can legally deliver the ball to the bat; besides which he also commits a balk if he makes “any motion calculated to deceive a base-runner.” The strict definition of this special clause in the rules governing the pitcher renders it necessary for the pitcher to be careful in his preliminary motions in delivery. In fact, he will find it difficult to avoid making a balk unless he stands still in his position and, looking at the catcher, throws to first base by signal only. The pitcher must bear in mind the fact that the rules make a difference between a balk following the failure of the pitcher to deliver the ball after making any one of the regular preliminary motions he is accustomed to make in throwing the ball to the bat, and the balk—technically known as an “illegal delivery”--which is consequent upon his delivering the ball to the bat while stepping outside his box, or from failing to pause after making a feint to throw to a base. In the first case balks from a failure to deliver give all base-runners a base, but not the batsman; while balks from an illegal delivery give the batsman as well as the base-runners a base. |
| Source | Chicago Tribune |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
balk rule not enforced
| Date | Monday, September 2, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | During the progress of the second Kansas City game at Brooklyn on Saturday attention was called to the peculiar delivery of Pitcher Sowders, the left handed exponent of the art. Several times he made palpable balks in his endeavors to hold the runners on the bases, but the umpire did not penalize him, as the rules demand. When Bushong, who acted as the umpire, was asked his reasons for not enforcing the balk rules he said the regular umpires were allowing such balks and he therefore did the same. Kilroy continually makes similar players, but is never called down. President Byrne was in the reporters’ box at the time and discussed the subject freely and to the point. The balk rule said he “should be struck out entirely, for it is never observed. You cannot get an umpire to award a runner with a base when a balk is made no matter how definite the instructions. Pitchers are continually violating this rule, but when do you hear of one being penalized? If the rule is good enough to stand it should be lived up to, but if the umpires won’t enforce it what is the use of it? |
| Source | Philadelphia Item |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
ball ball off a telegraph pole
| Date | Tuesday, April 30, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [Chicago vs. Indianapolis 4/29/1889] McGeachy came near securing a home run in the first inning. He sent a ball high to right, and it struck near the top of a telegraph pole, rising next to the inside of the fence, and bounded back into the grounds. |
| Source | Chicago Tribune |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
balls hit into the crowd; block ball
| Date | Thursday, May 2, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [Brooklyn vs. Baltimore 5/1/1889] The rule allowing but two bases for a ball hit past the crowd in the outfield is a good one. Its working yesterday appeared to be rather rough on two of the batsmen, as it robbed Foutz of the credit of a clean home run from the beautiful line hit to right center, and also Sommers of another good hit to left center, which would have given him third base easily, both hits, too, brining in a run for each side which were lost under the rule. But it was as fair for one side as the other. Had Foutz’s hit been made by a Baltimore batsman there would have been no parting of the crowd to let the ball go by, as there was in Foutz’s case. Mr. Holland was quite right in his decision, and the kick against it was unjust. The rule where there is a crowd encircling the outfield should be two bases for a hit which sends the ball past the crowd’s line, no matter whether the crowd left their position or remained there. |
| Source | Brooklyn Eagle |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Baltimore Club ownership
| Date | Saturday, January 5, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Though it has been known for some time that there would be a change in the management of the Baltimore Base Ball Club, the announcement this morning that Mr. Von der Horst had sold out caused considerable surprise. It was expected that additional capital would be invested, and that Von der Horst, who practically owns the franchise, would continue to hold a controlling interest. The disposition he has made of his share leaves Mr. Barnie with about a third interest, Fred Booth and B. F. Farren, wealthy oyster packers, owning the remaining two-thirds. The price paid is said to have been $10,000. The amount is, however, not officially stated. Mr. Von der Horst admits to having sold at a sacrifice, and gives as a reason that base ball interfered with his business. The miserable showing of the club last season had much to do with his withdrawal. Von der Horst is an ardent admirer of the sport, and made a courageous effort to bring the club to the front. … It was officially announced at base ball headquarters this evening that Mr. J. W. Walz was also one of the purchasers of Mr. Vonderhorst's interest in the club. He will probably act as an assistant to Manager Barnie. |
| Source | New York Sun |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Baltimore Club ownership 2
| Date | Wednesday, January 23, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The Sporting Life's intimation that the Messrs. Booth and Farren had not become financially interested in the Baltimore Club is confirmed by both Messrs. Barnie and Waltz. The latter writes to a contemporary that he and a partner have purchased Vonderhorst's interest in the club and the the partner is “a prominent Baltimorean, with plenty of money, who admires the National game, but for business reasons desires that his name be not know in connection with the present deal.” Doesn't that description fit Mr. Vonderhorst exactly? Mr. J. W. Waltz is the traveling representative of a big fancy goods house in Gotham. He is said to have a comfortable bank about, and has the reputation of being a clever man of business. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Baltimore Club ownership, finances
| Date | Wednesday, October 30, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Efforts are being made here [Baltimore] to get up a stock company to buy the club from harry Vonderhorst and the one or two other owners. Vonderhorst is not the base ball man that Von der Ahe is—in fact, he is an altogether different kind of a Von, though engaged in the same line of business outside of base ball. Vonderhorst has sunk about $10,000 on the Baltimore club and would like to sell out his interest in the team at a fair enough profit to about cover his losses. This he will not be likely to do. Those friends of the club advocating the stock company scheme think this the only way to put the club on a firm basis, and, by strengthening it with additions of first-class players, make it a winner and entitled to the patronage of the people. The Sporting Life October 30, 1889 Von der Ahe's one-league plan President Von der Ahe is out with an idea to fight the Brotherhood. His plan contemplates the consolidation of the League and American Association into one organization of ten or twelve clubs, the unprofitable cities of both bodies being dropped. Each club is to contribute a large sum towards a guarantee fund, and the money in this fund will be used by the new Association in fighting the Brotherhood, should there be any in existence next year. If it is found that a League club at any point is suffering from competition with a Brotherhood team money will be advanced the League club to carry on the fight. Large sums will also be offered for the services of the best players in the Brotherhood, thus crippling that organization. This one association idea has long been a pet scheme of President Von der Ahe, and he is known to have been at work on it for a year past. He was in Chicago Wednesday in consultation with President Spalding, and later gave out that he was in favor of the consolidation. The statement is made that Von der Ahe has been offered a place in the League and will go in on condition that there is a consolidation of the League and American Association, the strong clubs in each organization being taken in as members. Mr. Von der Ahe says he will be willing to sacrifice Sunday games if the big league contemplated can be formed. The Sporting Life October 30, 1889 |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Baltimore conditionally buys Washington franchise
| Date | Wednesday, November 27, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Ever since the League meeting closed negotiations have been gone on for a transfer of the Washington Club's League franchise to Baltimore, Messrs. Vonderhorst and Barnie having determined to leave the Association at whatever cost, if possible. It is now stated that a deal has been arranged whereby Walter Hewitt is to surrender his National League membership to the Baltimores for a certain financial consideration, contingent upon the League's ratification of the bargain. The amount paid for the franchise could not be learned. Manager Barnie is now busily engaged in person and by mail in getting the consent of the other League clubs to the deal, and in a few days we shall know whether or not Baltimore is to bid the Association good-bye and become of member of the National League. The Sporting Life November 27, 1889 [from W. I. Harris's column] Two League magnates told me that it was more than probable that there would only be eight clubs for 1890 and the expectation of this was the cause of the opposition to admitting Baltimore to the League, as it might be very difficult to drop Baltimore because it was a strong city. The Sporting Life November 27, 1889 |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Baltimore purchase of Washington is off; drops out of the AA
| Date | Wednesday, December 4, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The owners of the Baltimore and Washington clubs did not come to terms during the week after all, and at the hour of going to press the deal appeared to be entirely off. Mr. Hewitt wanted far more cash for his mere franchise than Mr. Vonderhorst considered it worth, in view of the fact that Hewitt could not guarantee to deliver any of the old players. The other proposition, a combining of the two franchises, also fell through, owing to disagreement over minor details. Whether the deal will be resumed is not known, but whether it is or not the Baltimore Club is done with the Association forever, and if nothing better presents itself and no deal with the Brotherhood can be made, it will enter the Atlantic Association. The Sporting Life December 4, 1889 Nov. 30.--The Baltimore Base Ball Club has been admitted to membership in the Atlantic Association. Jas. N. Braden, Sec'y. The Sporting Life December 4, 1889 [from the Baltimore correspondent] The situation, as far as the Orioles are concerned, has not changed. Mr. Hewitt still thinks his franchise worth $10,000, and the Baltimore people don't. The Sporting Life December 25, 1889 |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
barbed wire fence at Ridgewood
| Date | Sunday, June 2, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [St. Louis vs. Brooklyn 6/2/1889] This great crowd was handled better than any crowd was ever handled at Ridgewood before, and not even ground rules were needed, as has been the custom heretofore. The six-foot barbed wire fence which has been constructed around the whole outfield since the breaking up of the Brooklyn-Athletic game was more effective than a solid like of policemen and but few attempts were made by the spectators to scale the wire fence. However, an improvement can be made to the fence; that is, it can be brought in some distance, so that more standing room can be had. During the game yesterday every foot of seating and standing room was occupied, as well as the tops of the high board fences that surround the grounds. |
| Source | New York Sun |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
base ball rounders
| Date | Tuesday, December 31, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | A letter was received by the Spaulding Brothers yesterday from their agent in London to the effect that a convention of the public schools had been held in that city, and that the American game of base ball, as outlined in The Sun on Monday, with but few modifications, had been adopted. The material changes have been as follows: The game s to be known as the “Base Ball rounders.” Eleven men will be played on a side, the two extra men being placed on a line drawn in the rear of the home plate. Instead of batting with one hand, as originally proposed, a batsman can use two hands at his own discretion. The Spaulding junior league ball has been adopted, as well as the O.B. bat, manufactured by the same firm. |
| Source | New York Sun |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
base coach deeking the fielders a dirty play
| Date | Sunday, June 9, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [Louisville vs. Brooklyn 6/8/1889] Smith ran home from the coacher’s position to induce the Louisvilles to make a misplay. This is dirty ball playing. |
| Source | Brooklyn Eagle |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
base coach when no one on base
| Date | Saturday, August 10, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [Boston vs. Chicago 8/9/1889] There was no one on first, but Kelly sent Ganzel to the coachers' line opposite that bag. Anson objected, and Kelly arose to discuss the point. Time was called, Powers read the rules, and Anson was sustained. Powers handed the book of rules to Kelly, who walked to the bench and handed the volume to Hart, saying: “We don't want anybody there. We can beat them without. |
| Source | Chicago Tribune |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
base straps
| Date | Tuesday, September 17, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | A dozen clubs have been crippled because of their best men catching their feet or shoe spikes in the or under the bags. McAleer was crippled in this way. If the bases were all like the home plate—flat and flush with the ground—and the runners allowed to overrun all bases just as they now do first base, the chances for such injuries would be reduced to a minimum. The sawdust base-bags should be shelved at once. Besides hurting the players who slide into them, they spoil pretty plays by reason of the ball striking them and bounding awkwardly. The flat rubber base would remedy this falut also. St., quoting the Chicago Tribune |
| Source | St. Louis Republic |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
baseball finances and the gate receipt split
| Date | Wednesday, June 26, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from Frank Brunell's column] The most novel point in sight is the proposition of President John B. Day, of the New York,s who offers to divide the gate receipts with the visiting club as a remedy for unequal financial ability of the clubs. It is a fair proposition. Mr. Day is a fair man with a strong leaning to League support rather than club support—the fundamental idea in the business department of the game. But it would not equalize. Here is a little tabl3 with illustrates this fact: Expenses, New York team..................................... $70,000.00 Seventy games at $2000—each one half................ $70,000.00 Home profit.............................................. $00,000.00 Seventy games foreign $1500, each one half …... $52,500.00 This represents say New York profits—a pretty little sum, but less than usual. Now turn the figures on Cleveland and show its income at an average of $1800 per home game and its team nearly as good a drawing car away from home as New York, but costing $15,000 less. Expenses, Cleveland team.................................... $55.000 Seventy home games, $900, each half................. $34,500 Loss on home series................................ $23,500 Seventy foreign games, $1000, each half............. $35,000 Profit on season....................................... $11,500 Look at the difference. And it is increased when one considers the grad stand profits in New York, Boston and Chicago, as against those of Cleveland, Indianapolis and Washington. I have given nearly actual figures, and they do not give the fair view of things, because the Cleveland team's success this year is phenomenal and the expenses light. With such a team another year it will cost $65,000 for salaries, grounds, general expenses, offices, etc., and there is a profit of $1500 left—not enough to cause such an investment to be made. May Day's principle in eye is ruinous. He would buy all the talent of the land, pay it high prices, and make a lot of money yearly. That's wise and good—fro Mr. Day. But his prices are standard price, and set the price pace for Cleveland, who, if it gets in $70,000 at the gate in one season, is doing better than New York if it takes in $200,000. This is the point to keep in eye. It is a geographical handicap which cannot be wiped out by division of the gate receipts. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
baseball manufacture: winding machines
| Date | Wednesday, January 30, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Winding base balls by hand is a thing of the past. Machines have been invented to do the work automatically, consequently every ball is just like its fellow. Each machine winds two balls at one time. A little para rubber ball, weight three-quarters of an ounce, around which one turn has been made with an end of a skein of old-fashioned gray stocking yarn, is slipped into the machine. Then another, after which the boy in charges touches a lever, the machine starts and the winding begins. The rubber ball is hidden in a few seconds and in its place appears a little gray yarn ball that rapidly grows larger and larger. When it appears to be about half the size of a regulation base ball there is a click, the machine stops, the yarn is cut, and the boy picks out the ball and tosses it into a basket. When this basket is full it is passed along to another boy, who runs a similar machine, where a half-ounce of worsted yarn is put on. The next machine adds a layer of strong white cotton thread, and by watching closely as the white appears on the surface of the gray the beauty of the winding machine can be appreciated. There is perfect regularity, and no point where the thread crosses oftener than in another. A coating of rubber cement is next applied, and a half-ounce layer of the very best fine worsted completes the ball with the exception of the cover. Each ball when completed must weigh 5¼ ounces and measure 9¼ inches in circumference. The minute differences in the balls are equalized by the thickness of the cover. Each ball and cover is weighted before the cover is sewed on. The cover resembled two figure 8s in shape, and is cut from selected and specially prepared horse hides. A.J. Reach & Co, the patentees of the winding machines, employ about 500 hands at their factory in this city, and they about 40,000 balls now in stock. Several cheap grades of ball are also manufactured, those retailing for 5 and 10 cents being made from pressed leather shavings. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
baseball manufacture; automatic winding machines
| Date | Friday, January 25, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Winding base balls by hand is a thing of the past. Machines have been invented to do the work automatically, consequently every ball is exactly like its fellow. Each machine winds two balls at one time. A little rubber ball, weighing three-quarters of an ounce, around which one turn has been made with an end of a skein of old-fashioned gray stocking yarn, is slipped into the machine. Then another, after which the boy in charge touches a lever, the machine starts and the winding behind. The rubber ball is hidden in a few seconds, and in its place appears a little gray yarn ball that rapidly grows larger and larger. When it appears to be about half the size of a regulation base ball there is a click, the machine stops, the yarn is cut, and the boy picks out the ball and tosses it into a basket. When this basket is full it is passed along to another boy, who runs a similar machine, where a half-ounce layer of worsted yarn is put on. The next machine adds a layer of strong white cotton thread, and by watching closely as the white appears on the surface of the gray the beauty of the winding-machine can be appreciated. There is perfect regularity, and no place where the thread crosses oftener than in another. A coating of rubber cement is next applied, and a half-ounce layer of the very best fine worsted completes the ball with the exception of the cover. Each ball when completed must weight 5¼ ounces and measure 9 ¼ inches in circumference. The minute differences in the balls are equalized by the thickness of the cover. Every ball and cover is weighted before the ball is sewed on. The cover resembles two figure 8s in shape and is cut from selected and specially prepared horsehides. There is only one kind of professional dead ball made, the supposed differences lying in the cover and stamps only. The patentees of the winding machines employ about 500 hands at their factor and they have about 40,000 dozen balls in stock. Several cheap grades of balls are also manufactured, those retailing for 5 and 10 cents being made from pressed leather shavings. St. |
| Source | St. Louis Post-Dispatch |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
baseball shoes
| Date | Wednesday, July 10, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | No department in base ball has made greater progress in late years than base-running and incidentally fielding, and yet one of the underlying causes is overlooked by the critics of the game and onlookers. It is a fact that the speed of our modern base-runners, and the celerity of movement of the fielders, in the major leagues, at least, is due to the modern base ball shoe, more than any other single cause. Everybody knows how much freedom of movement depends upon the foot covering. If this is so in every walk of life how much more must it apply to athletics. It is a fact that weight added to shoes impedes and reduces the speed of spring runners, and this is equally true of ball players. In former years the base ball shoe was a clumsy article of canvas and sole leather, heavy and ill-fitting. Now the base ball shoe worn by the major league players fits like a glove and is as light as human ingenuity can make it. In fact, the base ball shoe has kept up in line of progress with the ball, which is now perfect. The man who has brought about this revolution in base ball shoes is Waldo M. Claffin, of this city, whose advertisement appears in another column. Mr. Claffin, who is personally known to us as an expert in his line, is the pioneer in the improvement of base ball shoes. He made a specialty of this one article, and for years labored and experimented, until, at great expense, the shoe was brought to its present perfect condition. He expended nearly $600 alone for dies to make the shoe plates, which add so vastly to the value of this shoe, and in the direction of other improvements, too, he spent considerable money; so much in fact, that although he enjoys the sole custom of every player in the League and Association, with but three exceptions, as well be seen by the correct list of noted wearers published in another column by Mr. Claffin, he has not yet gotten back his original outlay. Mr. Claffin has been handicapped somewhat by the high price of his shoes, made necessary by the fine quality of the goods and the great care taken in their manufacture, which has enabled inferior imitations to undersell him. The superior and unrivaled Claffin shoe, however, is forcing its way into general recognition and coming into universal use. There is no good reason why major league players should monopolize these shoes. True, their large salaries enable them to pay the high price of the Claffin shoe with less concern than the lower salaried minor league players, but the latter should not let a matter of a dollar or two weight with them in the purchase of an article so necessary to their comfort and so conducive to better work in their profession, and by means of which their records and reputations can be materially bettered. In this case the best is the cheapest in the long run. All players ought to wear the Claffin shoe. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
baseball, bat sales and manufacture
| Date | Tuesday, May 14, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | “The number of base-balls used in this country must be something enormous,” said a dealer in the popular spheres yesterday. “Since the 1 st of April we have sold more than 150 gross, or 21,600 balls of various sizes and makes. Of course, this is all a jobbing trade, but the balls have been sold within thirty miles of Troy. It is a small estimate when I say that in the city of Troy, between May 1 and Ot. 1, more than 60,000 balls are used up every year, while in the country supplies by Troy three times as many are sold. The balls run in price from 5 cents to $1.50; the former are merely lumps of leather soaked in water and pressed by machinery into shape. The latter are carefully built from the very start, and represent the acme of ball-9making. They are used by the professional ball-players and by many of the amateur leagues in the field. The best bat is known as the 'wagon-tongue' bat. The makes say that they send out agents and buy up all the wagon tongues that have been worn out or broken during the year. The tongues are turned into bats, and the seasoned ash, hardened by use, makes the best bat known. Last year we sold out or stock of wagon-tongue bats in the middle of the season. We could not replenish the stock for love or money, and the bat-makers told us the above story and added that they had used up all the old wagon-tongues they could find., quoting the Troy Times |
| Source | Indianapolis Journal |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Bastian unhappy with his classification
| Date | Tuesday, April 30, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Charley Bastian is still in this city [Philadelphia], all reports to the contrary notwithstanding. Said he today: “I have heard nothing more from Nick Young and I have not been near the Philadelphia club people. I will call and see some of them pretty soon, however, for I am about ready to play ball. But I won't sign with the Chicago club at my classification figures. I am in Class D (salary $1,750) because I can't bat, I am told. I will show them that I can bat, now that the powder is out of my eye. I don't think there is any justice in the classification system. |
| Source | Chicago Tribune |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
batter stepping out of the box
| Date | Wednesday, September 11, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from Chadwick's column] I note the fact of an illegal decision rendered by Umpire McQuaid at Boston. I say “illegal” on the basis of the report of the case which I read in the New York papers on Wednesday morning, in which it is stated that “in the ninth inning when Daily, of the Indianapolis team, went to the bat he had had two strikes called on him when he stepped away from the plate to rub his hands in the dirt. Madden saw his chance, and sent the ball straight as a die for the plate. It sailed over the spot waist high as fine a ball as any batsman could desire. Umpire McQuaid could not call it a 'ball,' for to all in the grand stand it was evident that the ball was squarely over the plate. He refused to give any decision and told Madden to pitch another ball. Daily had not asked permission to step from the plate and Madden was justified in pitching the ball. The umpir4e was bound by the rules to call it either a ball or a strike. He couldn't call it a ball and eh wouldn't call it a strike. Madden pitched another ball and that one Daily met squarely, and before Captain Kelly could return it from right field Glasscock and Hines had crossed the plate with the tieing and winning runs respectively and the game was over.” If this is a true report of the case the decision was illegal. It would open the door to an endless series of disputes to allow a batsman to do what Daily did. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
batter switching sides
| Date | Wednesday, October 23, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from Questions Answered] Yes, the batsman can change his position as often as he pleases. He must do so, however, before the pitcher raises his arm to pitch, as in that case he would be out for interfering with a play or balking either the pitcher or catcher. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
batter taking a break while in the box; quick pitch
| Date | Wednesday, September 4, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [Indianapolis vs. Boston 9/3/1889] The Boston game is likely to be protested. It was won by an illegal decision, so the Boston papers claim. In the ninth Daly was at the bat and two strikes had been called on him. He stooped to rub his hands in the dust, and while he was doing this Madden pitched a ball directly over the plate and claimed the third strike. Umpire McQuaid refused to call either a ball or a strike and ordered another ball pitched. This ball Daly sent out into right field and brought in the two runs which won the game. It is a new point to settle. If batsmen are allowed to do what Daly did the door would be open to an endless number of tricks to bother the pitcher. The decision was illegal on the face of the Boston description of the play. |
| Source | Brooklyn Eagle |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
batting practice routines
| Date | Saturday, January 5, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Manager Dick [of the Brooklyn Athletic Club] proposes to introduce Harry Wright’s plan of training players at the bat at the Athletic Club grounds this season, and that is to have the team do batting practice instead of fungo hitting before the game begins. Harry Wright places the men in their regular positions in the game and then allows each batsman twelve balls to be pitched to him, either incurves, outcurves, down shoots or up shoots, as he may call for, and he is not to retire until twelve balls have been delivered, and if, in the interim he makes a base hit he runs to first base and begins practice in stealing bases. Brooklyn Eagle January 5, 1889 Captain Esterbrook has adopted a new plan of training for the Louisville. Instead of the absurd fungo practice, which only gives the outfielders practice and is death to good batting, his rule is to have the players take their regular positions in the field and one of the batteries officiate at the points. The other pitchers and catchers will take their turn at the bat. The result of this kind of practice is already clearly apparent, for even in one week the boys have shown a decided improvement in their team work. It is to be hoped that other clubs will do something like this and do away with the old fungo rut. Brooklyn Eagle April 1, 1889 This is the way Anson now exercises his team every morning: Each player on entering the field in uniform takes his regular position, as in a game. Then the others go to the bat and practice until they have each been in five time. Then they go to the field and the fielders come in for batting practice. All is done as in a regular game, and this new rule went into operation this month. It takes the place of the old fungo practice, which yields nothing but good practice for the fielders and none for batting or base running. Mr. Spalding has insisted upon this rule being observed daily in future. Brooklyn Eagle June 17, 1889 |
| Source | Brooklyn Eagle |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Beacon Club continues
| Date | Wednesday, March 20, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from the Boston correspondent] I was glad to learn yesterday that the Beacons are not going to drop out of the ring after all. They have decided to put their nine in the field again. Fred Ayer, who has played centre field for several years, will manage the team. He is now making dates for the season's games. I understand the team is in need of a catcher. The Beacons only take the best, but this is a great chance for some good amateur catcher who wants to play one game a week. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
beer at the Polo Grounds
| Date | Saturday, December 7, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Beer is openly sold on the New York grounds. Let us hear no more about the sale of beer on Association grounds. |
| Source | Philadelphia Item |
| Tags | Food at Games |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
beer privilege in Louisville; ground rent
| Date | Sunday, March 24, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Mr. Davidson's determination to have no more beer selling in the grand stand has been generally commended. Beer has never been sold in the ladies' stand, but it has always been on the men's side. The beer privilege has been let this year, as usual, but the front bar will be torn down. The privilege has heretofore sold for $1,400, and this has gone a long way toward paying park expenses. The park rental is only $600 for all except a strip about forty feet in width on the south side, which belongs to a tobacco manufacturer, whose name is Matthews, brought them to time by a threat to file a suit to have a street opened through the grounds. It seems that this can be done if the matter is ever pushed. In consequence, Mr. Matthews gets his rent, exorbitant as it is, in comparison with what is paid for the remainder of the park, and he has never pushed the street matter. In curious contradiction to this is the action of a Mr. Hoertz, who owns another little strip of the park, but who charges no rent at all, though he gets two or three season passes sent him out of pure good will. It will be seen from this that the Louisville Club does not have the big expense in keeping up its grounds that cut down the profits of other clubs. The improvements, grand stand, fences and all, only cost about $12,000. |
| Source | New York Sun |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
beer sales at the Polo Grounds 2
| Date | Wednesday, July 17, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | “Beer was sold on the ground yesterday, Mr. Day. Has the League submitted to this?”--New York Telegram. Where, oh where, have you been? The New York Club has fir six years openly violated the League rules relative to the sale of liquor on League grounds. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
bills for injunction filed in Philadelphia
| Date | Wednesday, December 25, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The first step in the legal proceedings against the seceded League players was not taken in New York, but in Philadelphia, although the New York case will still be the most important. On Saturday last the counsel of the “Philadelphia Base Ball Club, Limited,” filed in Court of Common Pleas No. 4 bills in equity against short stop William Hallman, pitcher Buffinton and H. M. Love, president of the Philadelphia Brotherhood Club, asking the court's good offices to prevent the ball players playing ball for Mr. Love and to prevent Mr. Love from hiring the ball players. The bills filed by the Phillies' counsel were against the players individually, and in each case Mr. Love was made a co-defendant with the player. The subject matter of all the bills may be summarized as follows: The bills ask in set terms that Hallman and Buffinton be enjoined “from playing base ball or giving their services as bas ball players for the season of 1890 to any club or organization, person or persons whatsoever, other than the Philadelphia Ball Club, and that President Love be restrained from employing Hallman and Buffinton, or interfering with them in giving their services to the Philadelphia Ball Club.” The bill formally st5ates that the Philadelphia Ball Club is a member of the National League, has gove to the expense of fitting up its grounds and has been at “great expense in getting together a good team.” It says that on the 24 th of October, 1888, Hallman and Buffinton signed contracts with the Philadelphia Ball Club, under which Hallman was to receive $1400 salary per annum, and Buffinton was paid a bonus of $800 and was to be paid a yearly salary of $2000. The contracts contained the reservation clause, under which the club was to have an option on their services for the season of 1890 by serving notice upon the players on or before Oct. 21, 1889. The bill further states that the notices were duly services and that notwithstanding their contracts and the notices of reservation, Hallman and Buffinton have made a contract to play for President Love for the season of 1890, with the privilege to Love to assign the contract to another base ball club to be known as the “Players' National League Base Ball Club of Philadelphia.” The special injury complained of to the Court in this violation of the contract with the Philadelphia Club is that the action of Hallman and Buffinton “will break up your orator's team of skillful players, and will injure, if not destroy, its drawing power in public exhibitions and cause great losses of money, the amount of which it is impossible to estimate or assess. |
| Source | The Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Billy Sunday abandons the Players League
| Date | Wednesday, December 4, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Billy Sunday has weakened on his stand with the Brotherhood and has notified the Pittsburg League Club that he will sign an 1890 contract. Anson and Spalding won him over on the point that he promised President Nimick the he would sign without being reserved. Sunday admitted to John Ward that he had gone into the movement with open eyes, but had weakened and begged for his release. It was granted. Thus the Players League leaders score a point and show the public that the talk of coercion was not founded in fact. Sunday can also show that there was an honorable route to the League for Glasscock, McKean, Denny and Boyle. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Billy Sunday becomes an evangelist
| Date | Wednesday, February 27, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | “Billy” Sunday, the well-known base ball player, made his first appearance in Chicago as an evangelist last Sunday evening, and met with decided success. He talked at the Farewell Hall to a large audience, making an earnest address. When he had finished, forty-eight young men raised their hands to show that they had been converted, and Mr. Sunday was well pleased. His work had been the most successful of the year. He should now try to reform the members of the Pittsburg team. That is a job compared to which the conversion of the entire city of Chicago would be child's play. The Sporting Life February 27, 1889 [from the Pittsburgh correspondent] Billy Sunday's appearance as an evangelist did not surprise anybody here. Ever since Billy made an address at a revival meeting in the spring, many people realized that the story about his Christianity were true. Many a player who has sworn in the little fellow presence will remember the look and gentle reminder of “Why I didn't think you would say such a thing!” Ned Hanlon one day felt so abashed that he was sad for the rest of the day. The Sporting Life February 27, 1889 intentional walks to load the bases At Detroit on one occasion last season the score stood 3 to 2 in favor of the visitors. Hanlon was on third base in the last inning, with one out. Irwin knew the captain would take desperate chances to get home on a ground hit, as he was a great slider. The chances were he would get there, as big Dan Brouthers was next at the bat. Irwin instructed his pitcher to give the next two batsmen their bases on balls. This would force Hanlon and the catcher would not have to touch him. The play worked like a charm, for the next batsman hit a bounding ball at the short stop, which was sent to Clements at the home plate just in time to get Hanlon. The next man put up a long fly to the outfield, and the game was won by the Phillies. The Sporting Life February 27, 1889, quoting the Boston Globe |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Billy Sunday's evangelism
| Date | Wednesday, February 20, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | This is the way Sunday talks at the gospel meetings: “Satan don't want to get a young man who after a while may dispute with him the realm of everlastin' meanness. You bet he don't. It is the generous young man, the warm-hearted young man, the ardent young man, the sociable young man who is in danger, my friends. He's the fellow that Satan behind the bat wants to catch napping. He's the chap that the devil in the box wants to pull on with a snake curve. Hold your base. Wait for your ball. |
| Source | Pittsburgh Dispatch |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Bobby Mathews coaching
| Date | Sunday, April 28, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Bobby Matthews is coaching the Lebanon Club. |
| Source | Philadelphia Item |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Bobby Mathews coaching semi-pro
| Date | Wednesday, May 8, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Bob Mathews is coaching two railroad ball teams at Lebanon, Pa. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Bobby Mathews contract to be a pitching coach
| Date | Wednesday, March 6, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Bobby Matthews is once more after the Athletic Club with a legal stick. On Thursday last he brought a suit in the common Pleas Court against that corporation to recover $600 wages on a special agreement to act as “coacher” for the club. The contract, as far as the pitching is concerned, is all right, but he says they have not paid him for his coaching. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Bobby Mathews working for the Players League
| Date | Wednesday, December 4, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | First baseman Ted Larkin was signed on Wednesday by Bobby Matthews for the Cleveland Brotherhood Club. He received a goodly slice of advance money, and expressed himself well pleased with the new arrangement. The Sporting Life December 4, 1889 early rumor of Indianapolis players to be transferred to New York [dateline Indianapolis] Base ball circles here are considerably worked up over a current statement to-day that the Indianapolis club is to be transferred to New York. Washington has already been practically absorbed by Baltimore and the scheme of the prophets is that after the Indianapolis club has been moved to New York the players of the Cleveland club will be purchased by the various league clubs, making an eight league club circuit for next year, embracing the best ball cities in the country. The local sports who make the above prediction base their opinion mainly upon the fact that New York has not signed any players, and apparently is making no effort to get players. All the members of New York's last year's team have joined the brotherhood, and it seems strange that no steps are being taken by President Day and Manager Mutrie to build up a club for next season. While the New York management is doing nothing, all the other league clubs are hustling for players for the coming season. It is also asserted that New York is willing to pay a big price for Indanapolis' crack players, who have also signed with the league; but still the persons best informed on the affairs of the local club do not think there is a particle of reason for believing that the club is to go to New York. There is no telling, though, what next April may bring forth. St. Louis Republic December 4, 1889 |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Boston Club finances 12
| Date | Wednesday, September 25, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from the Boston correspondent] ...Boston's “Three Graces” get the whole of almost $150,000 for home games. As they have drawn so well away from home this year that their receipts have been far in excess of their expenses on the trips, they have brought back money to add to this $140,000. In fact they will increase it by enough to leave over $100,000 as net profit after all salaries and other expenses have been settled. Not a bad season's income. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Boston Club mails contract notices with final paychecks
| Date | Sunday, October 27, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | When the Boston team formally disbanded and the men came to make their final settlement they were not paid in full, but a portion of their salary was retained, with the information that a check for the balance would be forwarded to them. Therefore, when the men opened their mail containing the check in payment of their salary in full for the season, attached thereto was also found an interesting legal document, not very lengthy, but straight to the point. This document was in the shape of a formal notice to the player that the Boston Club by virtue of its contract with him, holds an option on his services for next year, and that the club was ready to fulfil its claim to that option by signing him for the season of 1890. ... By sending the check and notice together the directors prevent any attempt on the part of the player to set up a claim, if he should be disposed so to do, that he never received any such notice; for if he received the check he received the notice, and if by any mishap he did not receive the check the omission can be remedied. |
| Source | Philadelphia Item |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Boston attendance
| Date | Wednesday, September 25, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from the Boston correspondent] Following is a table showing the attendance at each series: Chicago......................... 9 games............... 49,252 Cleveland...................... 9 games................ 39,538 Indianapolis................... 9 games................ 41,495 New York...................... 9 games................ 70,299 Philadelphia.................... 9 games................. 35,229 Pittsburg...................... 9 games.................. 28,094 Washington.................. 9 games................. 28,470 _______ ______ Total........................... 65 games.............. 295,377 |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Boston purportedly threatens to jump to the AA
| Date | Wednesday, September 11, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from W. I. Harris's column] What a funny bluff the Boston Club is making through Ed Stevens. They filled Stevens to the brim and he fired off a screed to the Philadelphia Press, in which he makes the threat that Boston will flop into the American Association should the League decide to throw out that disputed Philadelphia game. Such talk, is silly. The triumvirs would no more leave the League than they would jump off Bunker Hill monument. If that game doesn't belong to them, and the League so decides, the Boston Club will make the best of it. They will not jump. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Boston stiffs the Detroit Club
| Date | Sunday, July 7, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Late Thursday evening [7/4] the old Detroit League Club sued the Boston Club for $500 and interest, and attached the receipts of the games of the Fourth in the hands of the Cleveland Club. They cover the claim amounting to about $4,700 in all. It is a move that the old Detroit Club has been contemplating all the year, only waiting for Boston to get here to move. The suit is one of the side issues of the Detroit sell-out. Boston agreed to take Brouthers, Bennett, Richardson, Ganzel, and White. It didn't want White, but agreed to take him for the moral effect it had on the other men. When they signed, and White grew obstreperous, it gave Boson a chance to get out and it agreed to pay Detroit $500 to take him off its hands. They secured the league's consent, and transferred White to Pittsburg. This was in March. After it was done Boston coolly repudiated the deal, and Stearns sues for its fulfillment. The baseball contract and its peculiar relations to law will not come into the courts by way of this suit. It is on a side contract only. |
| Source | Chicago Tribune |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
boys switching cheap balls for home runs
| Date | Saturday, June 8, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The London (Canada) Advertiser says: “The small boys now linger outside the fence with a new 5 cent or 10 cent ball in their pocket. When a ball is batted over the fence they throw the cheap one back into the grounds and hang on to the good one. Score another for the small boy. |
| Source | Brooklyn Eagle |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
boys' admission rate 2
| Date | Wednesday, September 25, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from the Boston correspondent] I am told by those closely connected with the Bostons Club's bank account,that ten per cent. of the aggregate attendance is made up of boys, who only pay 25 cents admission. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Brooklyn Club ownership
| Date | Sunday, October 20, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The three owners and directors of the Brooklyn Baseball Club are Charles H. Byrne, Joseph J. Doyle and Ferdinand A. Abell. They had had no practical baseball experience until 1883, when they organized the present Brooklyn Ball Club. |
| Source | New York World |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Brooklyn Club seeking to buy real estate; finances
| Date | Sunday, January 13, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The Brooklyn Club is looking for a new ball ground,not to play Sunday games on, but an every-day ground. In a talk with one of the directors of the club the other day he said: “We want a new ball ground, and have a number of agents out looking for it. We don't want to lease one, but to buy it outright, and then construct the finest ball field in the world. We have $200,000 to lay out, and, as we are in the business to stay and to make money, we are willing to put our money in it.” The city has grown so rapidly since the present Brooklyn ground was constructed that the property has become very valuable. The owners of the land have not been slow in recognizing this fact, and each time the managers of the club have renewed their lease they have been compelled to pay more money for the ground. Then, too, they can only get a short lease, which does not suit them at all. Could they secure a twenty years' lease of the ground there is no doubt but that they would stay just where they are. Their idea is to secure a place on the line of one of the elevated roads, and have a station constructed right at the entrance. They have grown tired of depending on the go-as-you-please street car travel, and want something better. East New York is the place where they are looking for a ground now. |
| Source | New York Sun |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Brooklyn and Cincinnati invite an invitation to jump to the NL
| Date | Wednesday, September 25, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from an interview of Charles Byrne] We have not been invited into the League and don't propose to invite ourselves. Brooklyn is a great ball town, and we owe it to our patrons and ourselves in such a matter as this to stand on our dignity. If we were invited I don't know what we might do. That is another question. … And let me add one thing more. I would not be human if I did not feel hurt at the slanderous things that have been going the rounds of the press the country over and about me of late. People read them and read them again and think, seeing them so much, that there must be something in them. As they are untrue and unjust, they hurt me, and I intend to stand it no longer. The Sporting Life September 25, 1889 [from an interview of Aaron Stern] I am preparing to remain in the Association, though I will frankly acknowledge that if the League were to offer me a franchise I would take it. The Sporting Life September 25, 1889 |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Brooklyn and Cincinnati jump to the League
| Date | Wednesday, November 20, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [reporting the AA meeting of 11/13-15/1889] [after spending two days deadlocked on the election of the President] They ...were still without a prospect of reaching a decision at five o'clock, when President Byrne, of Brooklyn, and President Stern, of Cincinnati, were called from the room by a messenger from the League convention. These gentlemen were absent about half an hour, and when they returned, just after the thirty-fourth ballot had been announced, a thunderbolt was thrown into the convention by the reading of the resignations of the Brooklyn and Cincinnati clubs. … … Mr. Byrne was also interviewed and blamed the “combine” for the outcome. He stated that President Von der Ahe wrote Mr. Krauthoff a letter promising to endorse him, but when he saw him in this city said he would repudiate that promise unless Krauthoff discriminated against the Brooklyn Club, which Mr. Krauthoff, to his credit, refused to do. Then the “combine” agreed to support Zach Phelps, not, however, until the Columbus Club had been placated by the promise of the secretaryship for Mr. P. J. Sullivan, of Columbus, a former employee of Mr. Lazarus and a war politician. “Finally,” said Mr. Byrne, “the idea was to force the Brooklyn Club to pay 40 per cent. to all visiting clubs, 50 per cent. for all Sunday games and 50 per cent. of grand stand and gate receipts on holidays. It was not the intention of the “combine” to make the Athletic and St. Louis clubs pay this percentage to the weaker clubs, but the Brooklyn Club was to be squeezed. Yet, in the seven years we have been in the American Association the Brooklyn Club has paid visiting clubs 54 per cent. more than we have received from other clubs. From Monday morning at 10 o'clock until half-past 10 in the evening I and Mr. Krauthoff were working tooth and nail for the Association. Then I had no serious intention of entering the League, but when I learned that while Mr. Krauthoff and myself were working so industriously for the interests of the Association, St. Louis, Louisville, Columbus and the Athletics were holding a secret caucus to try and down me, I concluded to take the step I did . If any man can blame me for leaving the company of such a set of men I want to know who he is.” The Sporting Life November 20, 1889 At present visiting clubs get 20 per cent. of the gate receipts for all championship games. The progamme was that hereafter the division should be 40 per cent. for week days and 50 per cent of the gate and grand stand receipts on Sundays and holidays. A private agreement,w as made, however, among the combine that they would not exact such terms from each other, Brooklyn being the cow that was to be milked. In the language of Mr. Bryne this was “unadulterated highway robbery under the form of law.” The Sporting Life November 27, 1889, quoting the Brooklyn Eagle |
| Source | The Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Brooklyn and Cincinnati prospects of jumping to the NL
| Date | Wednesday, August 14, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from Frank Brunell's column] Where are the usual loud and affidavit-flanked expressions of loyalty to the Association usually issued about this season of the year from Brooklyn, N.Y., and Cincinnati, O.? Gone are their bombast and hushed and ringing eloquence of the tongues of Byrne and Stern. I can see the model League not far away and think that silence and some side ear marks point toward the coming of Brooklyn and Cincinnati to the place of prosperity and peace—the National League. The Sporting Life August 14, 1889 [from Joe Pritchard] “Will Cincinnati desert the Association next November? Said President Stern to me to-day. “Well, that is a question that I cannot answer just at present. Great influence is being brought to bear upon the officers of the Cincinnati Club to make the change.” “By whom? The League officials?” “No, by the people of Cincinnati. They want to see the League clubs.” “You have not made up your mind as to what course you will pursue at the season's end? Was asked by your correspondent. “No. Sunday ball in Cincinnati is a thing of the past, and I will finish the season's Sunday games over in Kentucky; and if I am in the Association next season, I will have everything fixed so that our regular schedule can be played out by playing Sunday games in Kentucky, as everything can be run wide open over there.” Mr. Stern said a great deal more about the League and Association, and from the general drift of his conversation it will be safe to bank on the Cincinnati Club remaining right where they are. Stern is out for the stuff, and while it can be said that Cincinnati is a fair 50 cent town, he can make more money remaining in the Association, charging 25 cents, and playing his Sunday games in Kentucky. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Brooklyn and New York the same market
| Date | Wednesday, October 2, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | As the Brooklyn grounds can be reached from the bridge in about fifteen minutes, and it takes more than twice that time to go to the Polo Grounds, it very naturally follows that with a League Club for its opponent the Brooklyns would come pretty close to dividing the League patronage with New York..., quoting the New York Press |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Brooklyn grandstand burns down;
| Date | Monday, May 20, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [reporting on the burning of the Brooklyn grandstand] The total loss to Messrs. C. H. Byrne & Co. is at least $18,000, upon which there is an insurance of $7,000 in the Phenix Company, of Brooklyn. ... The stand was well built and cost $17,000 i9n round numbers. It was built by D. E. Harris, of Third avenue and Third street, and was looked upon as one of the best in the country. Mr. Ebbets said that the work of rebuilding would be begun at once and that the new structure would certainly be ready for the game between the Brooklyn and St. Louis clubs on Decoration day. Brooklyn Eagle May 20, 1889 The new stand will be similar in form to the grand stand which was back of third base, and it will extend around to where the players’ bench is, thereby cutting off sight of the field from the willow tree seats. This will give the grand stand a seating capacity of $3,000. The press box will be located back of the wire screen facing the home base, and it will be only for the regular reporters and telegraph operators, other press members having seats elsewhere. There will be no private boxes or gallery seats, as before, and consequently fewer posts will be in the way of the grand stand occupants. Brooklyn Eagle May 21, 1889 |
| Source | Brooklyn Eagle |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Brotherhood grievances
| Date | Wednesday, May 8, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Events have so shaped themselves during the past month that makes it very probable that the League will have considerable difficulty with players during the coming season. The classification rule passed last winter, instead of allaying the discontent, was regarded by the men as a move on the part of the League to break faith with them, and take advantage of their leader's absence. The manner in which the New York Club has treated several of its players is another cause for dissatisfaction, and since Ward's return several secret conferences have been held by the Brotherhood for the purpose of formulating a programme for action. The action of the Chicago Club, in releasing players at a late day without previous warning, after taking them around the world, and then making them continue the trip in this country in order to make what they could out of it, is severely condemned by members of the Brotherhood. If Spalding had released them as soon as he landed, it would not have been thought so much of, but to give them an absolute release at the end of the tour contributed in a great measure to precipitate the present proceedings of the Brotherhood. It is known that the members of the different clubs have held several conferences within the past few days, and at a meeting of the New York and Boston members in New York on Thursday a plan of action was laid out and will be submitted to the other chapters. It is probable that the Washington and Philadelphia members have talked over the proposed plan, but if so they are very secretive in reference to what it is. They will not discuss the matter for publication, but it is evident that the Brotherhood feels itself in a position capable of demanding of the League an explanation of several instances of alleged bad faith on its part. They are taking the bull by the horns, and instead of waiting until the season is over, and their services are not needed until the following summer, they propose to make their demands and carry them through at this time, when it would be practically useless for the League to attempt to fill their places. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Brotherhood membership
| Date | Wednesday, May 29, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [reporting the Brotherhood meeting of 5/19/1889] Reports from the various Chapters showed them to be in a flourishing condition, and that every League player, with a few exceptions, is now a member of the Brotherhood or an applicant for membership. Those who are still out are Ed Williamson, Frank Flint, Arthur Whitney, Charley Smith, and one or two others. The Cleveland players were admitted in a body to membership. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Brunell moves to the Chicago Tribune; Cleveland official scorer
| Date | Wednesday, August 7, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from Frank Brunell's letter] This is the last letter I shall indite to The Sporting Life from Cleveland and perhaps the last from anywhere. I leave the city with regret, but for business reasons, and go on the sporting staff of the Chicago Tribune to do work congenial to me and to better myself generally. Mr. J. B. Foster will succeed me as official scorer of the club. The Sporting Life August 7, 1889 [from the Cleveland correspondent] Mr. John B. Foster, base ball editor of the Leader, succeeds MR. Brunell as official scorer of the Cleveland Club. The Sporting Life August 14, 1889 |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Brunell on the history of the reserve
| Date | Wednesday, December 4, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from a letter by Frank Brunell] I want to say something right here, and modestly, about the reserve rule. It has since 1883 or so been used by the operators of the older clubs to keep down salaries to the point that suckers could be attracted into the League, to make large yearly profits for them. T he history of the League backs me up. Troy, Worcester, Cleveland, Kansas City, etc., have been in the League and made little or no money, while the Chicago, Boston, New York and Philadelphia clubs have. And, of course, after getting as much as they could stand, the suckers dropped out. The reserve rule was the tongs by which the prize was drawn out of the bag by the big clubs. If they had more equitably divided the gate receipts with the clubs in the small cities a reserve rule wouldn't have been necessary, general prosperity would have been certain and $100,000 a season profits impossible. Had the salary market been open and the profits equitably divided the reserve rule and a salary limit would have been needed. Now the big operators are pushed in fairness and agree to give the weaker clubs 40 per cent. of small profits, d'you see, and only that until the trouble is over, when enough votes will be secured to reduce the percentage to 25 or less. It has been done before. Remember Detroit, 1887, and Boston's hog policy. History paints the big operators very black. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Brunell to Chicago; Cleveland Club scorer
| Date | Monday, August 5, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | F. H. Brunell, so long connected with the Cleveland Club as official scorer, goes to the Chicago Tribune sporting staff, and John B. Foster succeeds him as scorer. St. |
| Source | St. Louis Republic |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Brush proposes pooling receipts
| Date | Friday, August 9, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from an interview of John Brush in the Boston Globe] “I will tell you what is sure to come,” continued Mr. Brush,”and that is a pooling of all the receipts of the League clubs. This is the only way to keep the League up, as it should be. For instance, the Indianapolis team has furnished the patrons of the game in Boston with an article of ball that they are willing to pay to see. It's a poor business concern where one partner isn't entitled to just as much of the profits as the other. The home team should be entitled to all they can make on the extras, such as receipts from the grand stand, score cards and other privileges. Now take the Boston club alone. It is likely they take in, say over $40,000 each season for seats in the pavilion. This would be quite a large amount that the League would not have to divide. If the whole business was put into the hands of one concern, you would not hear so much about umpires and dissatisfied players, and the game would be much benefited thereby. Either pooling the whole receipts or an equal division of receipts will have to come, and that, too., very soon.” Indianapolis Journal August 9, 1889 [N.B. IJ following day Brush disclaimed most of the interview, but kept to this portion.] |
| Source | Indianapolis Journal |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Buck Ewing's mask obstructing the plate
| Date | Sunday, August 18, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [New York vs. Pittsburgh 8/17/1889] ...an act of Buck Ewing's. He, when men were run bases, laid his mask on the home plate, and Miller ran on to it, injuring himself so much that he had to retire, and Sunday took his place. Ewing was hooted extremely for this, and he foolishly enough returned the compliment to the people who had no more sense than to do it. As a result there were yells sufficient tot urn the hairs of a young man gray during the balance of the game. In the sixth inning Ewing repeated the act when Beckley was running home, and again there was pandemonium. |
| Source | Pittsburgh Dispatch |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
bulldozing by Comiskey
| Date | Saturday, August 31, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from an interview of Byrne] “An idea can be had of what I mean from the following incident: On the occasion of the second game played at St. Louis, which took place on a Sunday afternoon before 13,000 people, Mr. Comiskey made a ground rule, which allowed only two bases for a ball batted or thrown into the crowd. In the early part of the game, after the rule had been made, one of the St. Louis team batted a ball into the crowd and it was some time before it was recovered. One of the umpires, who had charge of balls and strikes, gave the batsman his base, according to the rule agreed upon. Comiskey at once protested against the decision, and claimed a home run. He indulged in his usual blustering and kicking, and on this occasion was especially objectionable. He utterly refused to obey the umpires al5though both of them decided against him. “There was a scene of wild excitement on the grounds, the crowd broke into the field, and the game was delayed for five minutes, as the record will show. Under the rule the game should have been forfeited to Brooklyn by a score of 9 to 0, said rule providing that unless the field is cleared the game is forfeited. But Comiskey bulldozed the umpires and terrorized them so that they ordered the game to proceed. It was played out in the midst of a perfect pandemonium. The play became a farce, our players became disheartened and the game went against them. This is only one of several disgraceful experience we had on our trip.” St. |
| Source | St. Louis Republic |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
bunting the ball foul
| Date | Sunday, August 11, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [St. Louis vs. Brooklyn 8/10/1889] McCarthy opened up the tenth by several times. Carruthers kicked, but in vain. McCarthy then lined out a three bagger to center... |
| Source | Brooklyn Eagle |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Byrne denies any intention of jumping to the League; comparative strength of the AA and NL
| Date | Wednesday, July 31, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from an interview of Bryne] “Will you join the League if you win the Association pennant?” “I cannot understand what relationship our sinning the pennant has with our joining the League,” he replied. “We would joint the League just as quick if we finished third or fourth as if we won the pennant. That has nothing to do with the case whatever.” “Then there is some truth in the report that you will go into the older organization?” “Not in the slightest. Myself and partners have never discussed the situation. In the first place, the Brooklyn Club has never been asked to become a League member, and I assure you once and for all that we will never appear in the role of supplicants for the place. We have a strong club, a good city and plenty of resources. This the League knows, and if it wants us it will have to ask us. Even then I do not say we would accept, for we are well contented where we are. We have always done well in the Association, and it might not be a business policy to change our base of operations.” “Do you think the League is stronger in the matter of playing strength than the American Association?” “Not in the slightest particular. There is no difference in the strength of the two bodies. The Association is just as strong as the League, and I am free to say that I think the present Brooklyn team would stand as high, if not higher, in the League than it does in the Association., quoting the Cincinnati Enquirer |
| Source | The Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
California League and reserve jumpers
| Date | Sunday, January 20, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | In view of the recent violations of the reserve rule by several minor league players, who, being dissatisfied with the salaries offered them, jumped to the California League, it is evident that some effective measure must be speedily adopted by national agreement clubs to check the demoralizing methods of the managers of the coast and put a stop to the further interference with the young players of the East, especially those of the minor organizations. Under the present condition of things, the California League is a dangerous enemy to the weaker clubs of the East, particularly since the latter adopted a salary limit. If the California managers persist in their discreditable attempts to cause dissatisfaction among the class of players referred to, the League and American Association should take some action in the matter. The California League refuses to place itself under the protection of the national agreement, and by remaining an independent organization can sign any player who feels disposed to jump the reserve rule or his contract. The club from which the man jumps has a right to black-list him, but it has been decided that the black-list of a minor league club only stands for one year, and under these circumstances, it has but little terror for a player who is dishonorable enough to violate the rule that binds him to another team. The big organizations are not liable to suffer much, as they usually pay larger salaries than the California clubs can afford, and as a consequence the League and American Association have nothing to fear from the managers who encourage this unprofessional business. |
| Source | Indianapolis Journal |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
can players be bought off?
| Date | Monday, November 4, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | ...The weak point in the [PL] movement is the fear that big money inducements may overcome some of the players who had heretofore been ardently advocating the new enterprise. For a single season the magnates of the League might be willing to enrich some of the players, if thereby they could destroy this gigantic opposition to them and their old-time money making business. The dread, however, of being denounced as a “scab” may keep any man from deserting his comrades. Because they all know that not only would this undesirable title be forever fastened upon a deserter by the members of the Brotherhood whom they have deserted, but it would be shouted at them from the bleaching seats during a game and by the “street gamins” wherever they should show their faces. |
| Source | Philadelphia Item |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
catcher mistakes the umpire for the second baseman
| Date | Friday, May 24, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [Pittsburgh vs. Washington 5/23/1889] Pittsburg scored its only run in the second inning, when Carroll and Maul were sent to base on balls . Carroll played well away from second base, and Umpire Fessenden, who was judging the base players, stood immediately behind the bag. Connie Mack mistook the umpire for a Senator, and threw the ball to second, hoping to catch Carroll napping. The result was the ball went out to center field and Carroll scored. |
| Source | Pittsburgh Dispatch |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
catcher signals the pitcher 2
| Date | Sunday, January 6, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [quoting Bushong] To insure good work at catching there must be between the pitcher and catcher an understanding of what is to be done. What sort of delivery is to be made–high orlow, in or out; the most information that can be given with the fewest signs. It is a good point or an advantage, for the pitcher is thus relieved somewhat of a share of the responsibility if a ball that is asked for is hit. He consoles himself with the thought that it wasn’t all his fault and so perhaps can do his work better. Undoubtedly “team work,” or the “pairing” of pitchers and catchers so they can work steadily together, is always beneficial. One then understands the other in a variety of ways, knows the weak and strong points of each other that are avoided in a match game, and in the end must make them more successful. The pitcher’s position is the best from from which to note the point, good or bad, of a batsman. Yet it has always been my practice to give the signs, and if satisfactory, the pitcher would deliver the ball as directed. If not, a shake of the head or a hesitation would lead to a change. So, instead of one man’s judgment, it is possible to have two. |
| Source | Brooklyn Eagle |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
catcher's mask interfering with the runner
| Date | Wednesday, July 31, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Ewing's trick of laying his mask on the base line will create a corner in the mask market if continued. Paul Hines jumped on one last week in New York and smashed it and Thompson did the same thing in Philadelphia. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
catcher's mitt
| Date | Wednesday, March 20, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [advertisement] “The Decker Safety Catching Gloves” The Sporting Life March 20, 1889 Inventive genius is constantly at work improving and perfecting that now indispensable base ball implement, the glove. E. Harry Decker, the Philadelphia Club's new catcher, is the latest man to put an improved catcher's glove on the market, and from what we hear about it the Decker glove is really a first class article. The cuts in the advertisement in another column will give our readers an idea of how the glove is made. Mr. Decker has associated himself with Paul Bickley, of Chicago, and the two have started a glove manufactory at No. 68 Monroe street, Chicago, where they will be pleased to hear from their friends, the profession and the trade. The Sporting Life April 3, 1889 |
| Source | “The Decker Safety Catching Gloves The Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
catchers not as tough as in the old days; put on equipment when they move under the bat; cup
| Date | Wednesday, July 31, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from Caylor's column][from a reminiscence about the old Cincinnati Club] I have seen [Doug] Allison stand up behind the bat and catch Brainard's cannon shots without mask, chest-protector or gloves, with the blood dripping from his wounded hand and one eye in chancery from a foul tip. But there are no Allisons catching now. Snyder comes the nearest to Dug in their day and generation. In Allison's day, when it became necessary for the catcher to come up behind the bat after two strikes or when a man reached the bases it didn't require five minutes of time for him to get on his armor. He did not have his head encased in a barbed-wire balloon; he didn't tie himself behind a stuffed mattress; neither did he wear a wire cage to interfere with his running or stick his hand into a stuffed glove the size of an elephant's cheek. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
catchers' mitts catching on
| Date | Wednesday, April 24, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The catchers of the Philadelphia and Athletic clubs are all beginning to wear Decker's catchers' gloves. Clements and Robinson both pronounce it the best they have ever seen. Decker has put the glove on sale with A. J. Reach & Col, who are prepared to promptly fill all orders sent to them. Al Reach, in speaking of the new glove, said the other day:-- “Of course, we have all kinds of gloves in our stock and it is immaterial to me which make we sell, and for that reason I can give an unbiased opinion of Decker's glove, and that is that I consider it the very best in the market. I will stake my reputation on the glove and recommend it to everybody as the best catchers' glove ever made. |
| Source | The Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Caylor sells the Carthage Democrat
| Date | Wednesday, June 26, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from Caylor's column] I have sold the Democrat for nearly twice what I paid for it a little over a year ago, and consider my fifteen months spent in this section a pretty good thing for myself. How it has appeared to some of the people who live here I will not venture to say. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Chadwick critiques the ERA rule
| Date | Wednesday, July 17, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from Chadwick's column] The existing scoring rule governing earned runs says:-- “An earned run shall be scored every time the player (of the batting side) reaches the home base, unaided by errors, before chances have been offered to retire the side.” The rule should read:-- “an earned run shall be charged against a pitcher every time a runner reaches home base by the aid of base hits only, before chances have been offered off the pitching to retire the batting side for a blank.” As it is now, everything counts as ending in earning a run except positive fielding errors, such as a wild throw, a dropped fly ball or a muffed ground ball or thrown ball, wild pitches and base on balls, together with unaccepted chances, not being counted in the error column. Under such an erroneous code of scoring rules is it surprising that the existing pitchers' averages of earned runs should be entirely worthless as a criterion of a pitcher's skill? |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Chadwick on scoring; RBIs,
| Date | Wednesday, April 10, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from Chadwick's column] In making out my scores this season for the Brooklyn Eagle—the only daily paper I now write for regularly—I have prepared a new summary to aid team work in batting. I ignore all extra-base hits credited to the individual batsman, to begin with, giving in their place credit for runs batted in and for sacrifice hits which aid runners to get bases. Then I record the chances given by each side for catches, whether accepted or not; the more such chances are given the weaker the batting. I also give a total record of battery errors for each side, these including bases on balls, wild pitches and balls hitting batsmen. I place no assistances for strikes in the assistance column, merely placing the total struck out by each pitcher in the summary. I give the total base hits on each side in the summary; also first base by fielding errors, earned runs—off the pitching only—and left on bases. Of course in official scores I adhere to the Association rule, but not in my newspaper scores. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
chalk foul lines
| Date | Wednesday, April 10, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | President Wikoff has notified all Association clubs that they must have foul lines so they can be seen by the umpire from his position behind the batter to the extension of the grounds. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
changing minor leagues and the reserve
| Date | Wednesday, February 6, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [reporting on the meeting of the Atlantic Club 1/28/1889] Prior to the meeting a committee visited Mr. Charles H. Byrne, secretary of the Board of Arbitration, and Mr. Day, also a member of the Board, to see if they could hold their players now under reservation in case they withdrew from the Central and New England leagues and formed a new association of their own. They were assured by both that so long as they did not attempt to transfer their players from one city to another they could have full control of their men. A letter was received from Chairman Young, of the Board of Arbitration, to the same effect. The Sporting Life February 6, 1889 a street opened through the Polo Grounds The New York Supreme Court has decided that One Hundred and Eleventh street is “open” and belongs to the city, and that the Commissioners of Public Works and of Parks have the right to tear dow the fences of the Polo Ground. This closes the ground of the New York Club. President Day will appeal to the Court of Appeals and pending the hearing will get a stay of proceedings for a year. But after that further legal obstructions will not avail. The Sporting Life February 6, 1889 |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
charges that the fix was in with the Indianapolis deal
| Date | Thursday, January 24, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | New York base ball people are unanimous in the belief that President Brush, of the Indianapolis team, is merely trying to squeeze out the large proportion of stockholders who are willing to share a dividend but unwilling to make up a deficit. There is not a more brainy man in the League than President Brush, and it is safe to say that he will come out on top. Indianapolis News January 24, 1889, quoting the New York World Thus the farce ends, so far as the League is concerned. The Indianapolis club, minus the seventeen stockholders who contributed $500 apiece, is resurrected, and in the freeze-out and the subsequent rehabilitation the League has taken a part that is not creditable to that organization. The entire proceedings were tricky from the day on which Mr. Brush, acting for the old club, surrendered the franchise, through the farcical repayment of the $15,000 and its subsequent transfer back again to the League, and the reinvestment of the syndicate with League membership, until yesterday's order was promulgated. Nobody who knew anything of base-ball was deceived by the air of apparent sincerity that enveloped the surrender, but a great many have been disappointed to think the League would be a party to such proceedings. If the franchise had to be returned to Indianapolis, it should have been given to Messrs. Dickson & Talbot, whose offer was infinitely better than that of the Brush syndicate. Their price was larger, and they agreed to pay the debts of the old club. They offered $20,000 for the franchise, while the people who obtained it paid much less. President Young refused, last night, to state the price, but it is certain that it did not exceed $15,000, if it reached that amount. The probabilities are the new club paid $13,000 for the franchise and $1,000 guarantee for the first year. Thus, if these figures are correct, the League loses several thou8sand dollars, which, perhaps, they can well afford, but they lose more by not insisting that every cent of the old club's indebtedness should be paid before anyone who was connected with it is allowed to regain co0ntrol of the franchise. The League may learn in time that it has set an example that in the future will return to plague its inventors. Indianapolis Journal February 4, 1889, quoting the Washington Post |
| Source | Indianapolis News |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Charlie Pabor a police chief
| Date | Tuesday, January 22, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Charlie Pabor, the once famous pitcher, is now chief of police in New Haven, and he is still trying to convince Yale students that the pitcher's position is in the center of the diamond. |
| Source | Cleveland Leader and Herald |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Chicago Club finances; grounds
| Date | Thursday, August 29, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Mr. Spalding is a big loser, personally, thus far through poor attendance, but takes his loss as a man should. He says he supposes it is Chicago's turn to have a bad year; that, while the present season is not remunerative, the club will not be in the hold it was in in 1884, when it closed the season without a dollar in the treasury. Such a statement may not be credited, but it is a fact nevertheless. When the club left the lakefront grounds all the assets it had was its charter and the old wood from the stands and fences. Its surplus had been given away to the stockholders, and the treasury was bare, but it hasn't been since and won't be again, for the directors in 1885 instituted a sinking fund and have it today. The fund, it is said, at present amounts to nearly $100,000, so there is no immediate danger of the club's throwing up its charter. That a good deal, if not all, and more, too, will be expended by the directors in the next two years is by no means uncertain, for the club proposes to spend a vast sum on the new park. Boston and Philadelphia have beautiful stands, but, according to Mr. Spalding, the new grand stand and park will be the best in the world. The ground is 650 feet long by 632 wide. Where is the batter that can hit a ball out of such an inclosure?, quoting the Boston Herald |
| Source | Chicago Tribune |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Chicago Club finances; real estate
| Date | Monday, December 30, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The Chicago League Club has declared a dividend of 20 per cent for the present season, which goes to show that the season was not so disastrous as alleged. It has been the custom of the club to place every year a certain sum to the credit of the sinking fund, which is the reason the dividend declared was not greater. When the League club bought the new grounds near the County Hospital, it paid $103,000 in cash for them, all of this having come out of the sinking fund. Had it not been for the competition of the new Brotherhood club the League club would have spent at least $150,000 on new grounds, whereas now it will not spend a cent, having leased the old grounds for another year. |
| Source | New York Sun |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Chicago Club scorer; Eliza Green
| Date | Wednesday, October 23, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The Scorers' Association will this fall urge the league and association to so amend their constitutions as to require each club to sign its official scorer to a contract, and have the name approved like players' contracts by the secretaries of the two organizations. This is aimed at the Chicago club, whose official scorer is a myth, so to speak, and the scorer's elsewhere think he is showing too much favoritism to the players of that team. St. |
| Source | St. Louis Republic |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Cincinnati Club incorporates to hold the name
| Date | Sunday, December 29, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The Brotherhood bugaboo is over, and that it is settled that Cincinnati is not to be called into the thick of the fight, some reminiscences of the recent scare are not out of place. While scarecely crediting the story that willing capitalists were lying awake nights thinking of putting a club here as rivals of the Reds, President Stern did not slumer. He traced down, as far as it was possible, every rumor, and, not to be caught asleep, he had papers drawn up to incorporate the League club as the Cincinnati Red Stockings Base Ball Club. This was done to save the name from being transferred to the premised newcomers. |
| Source | Philadelphia Sunday Item |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Cincinnati players' finances
| Date | Monday, December 9, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | “McPhee has more money saved than any man in the Cincinnati team,” said one local player. “He has $2,000 or $3,000 ready cash and $7,000 or $8,000 invested in mortgages. Long John Reilly is fairly well heeled and is next to McPhee. It is supposed that John has saved $7,000 or $8,000. Mullane has been a good saver, but he has lost considerable in his investments. Tony must have saved $5,000 or $6,000, but the Fidelity Bank failure and his Vine street saloon put a crimp in his pile. Jim Keenan used to be one of the spenders, but the last two or three years he has held them close to his breast. Jim is a good man in a quiet game, and, beside, he has raked in good money on investments. He has about $5,000 stowed away for a rainy day. St., quoting the Cincinnati Enquirer |
| Source | St. Louis Republic |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Clarence Duval hoodoos the Chicago Club
| Date | Sunday, June 9, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Clarence Duval declares that he is the [Chicago] Club's evil genius. The little colored boy still wears the cap, blue suit, and brass buttons that denoted his connection with the Spalding party abroad, but the buttons are tarnished, the rim of the cap broken, and altogether his appearance is in strong contrast to that which he presented in the banquet ahll the night of the party's arrival. “I tole 'em,” siad he, “I tole 'em afore ever we done got half way home dat I'd queer 'em when dey got back.” “Told who?” “Dat ole Baldwin, and Daly, and Pettit, and de rest ob dem aih fellahs wot trun me down de steps and held me undah the hydrant on de ship. I tole 'em I'd get even wid 'em, and now I'm doing' it. You know wot I went and done afore dem fellahs got to New Yorak? Well, I jist put de rabbit fut on em, and ebery one ob 'em got de bounce wen dey got back.” “But those men are not with the team now. Why are you continuing to 'hoodoo' the club?” “Well, I'll too yo', sah. W'en we done got back heah I ask Cap'n Anson to let me take de team on de field and he wouldn't hab it at all. Dat made me mad an' I jes' sock de rabbit fut to de hull crowd. De nespapers keep on a askin' every day, “How come it Chicago's playing in' sich poah ball?' Well, dey's 'hoodooed,' and dey's gwine ter stay 'hoodooed' till I gets ready ter take de chawn off.” Notwithstanding these utterances Clarence politely doffed his cap and looked repentant when he stood in President Spalding's office a few moments later and took his dose of good advice. “We have a five years' contract with you, sir, and we could black-list you for deserting us if we so desires,” said A.G., “but I have made up my mind to release you unconditionally and to give you a chance to do better elsewhere. Here is $10. The Chicago club is through with you and you will have to shift for yourself. Good-morning.” Clarence is now posing and swinging his baton among his acquaintances in the vicinity of Third avenue and Harrison street. He never fails to express his contempt for a team “that would let demsleves get done 'foah straight' by sich a 'no' count team as Boston. |
| Source | Chicago Tribune |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Clarence Duval released
| Date | Wednesday, June 19, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Spalding handed mascot Clarence Duval a $10 note last Saturday, and released him from his five years' contract. Clarence says that he has queered the Chicagos because Baldwin and Daly put him under the hydraulic on board the return steamer. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Clarence Duvall removes the hoodoo
| Date | Friday, June 14, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [Pittsburgh vs. Chicago 6/13/1889] With a negro boy as a mascot, the Chicago team won an exciting, but poorly played, game from Pittsburg to-day. Early in the morning Clarence Duvall, the hearse colored lad who accompanied Anson around the world and who was summarily dismissed six weeks ago, consented to remove the “hoodoo” he had placed on his late colleagues. He sat on the bench all through the game. It is evident from his work to-day that he is the most valuable player in the club. |
| Source | Pittsburgh Dispatch |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Clarkson on pitching strategy 2
| Date | Saturday, December 21, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from an interview of John Clarkson] “Do I think that curve pitching is on the decline? Well, I should answer yes and note that question. The effectiveness of curve pitching is certainly not as great now as in former years, but many reasons can be assigned for this. The “eye” of the batter is, in my opinion, better now than ever before. The old leaguers, and, for that matter, all professional ball-players, are thoroughly familiar with curve pitching. They are, as a rule, not to be deceived by any curve a pitcher may have at his command. A ball must go over the plate for old stagers of the National League. Men like Anson, Kelly, Ewing, Connor and others whom I might mention, will very rarely strike at a ball that does not come over the plate, and a curve has to be a sharp one that will deceive them. “Now, this year a pitcher is given very little chance to “work” or attempt to deceive a batter. He is allowed four balls to “work” the batsman while getting three strikes. Such being the case, the man who puts the ball over the plate most will attain the best results always. “But can he put them over and prevent the batter from hitting safe? He can if he knows the batter's weakness. Now, there isn't a batter in the country, and I have face and pitched against most of the good one,s who hasn't some soft spot, some place where you can put the ball and he will either hit it up into the air, poke it down to some infielder or miss it altogether. There isn't a batter playing ball to-day who hasn't some such weakness, and a pitcher, to be successful one, must ascertain that weakness, always to remember it and put the ball over in that particular place. “But curves come in very well yet. Now, you take a batter when he strikes at a ball. He will invariably either draw away from or move nearer to the plate. The movement in many instances is slight, but, nevertheless, there is a movement. To a pitcher who has perfect command of the ball nothing is easier or more effective than to throw the ball to the outside of the plate for the man who draws away, or keep it in close to the man who moves nearer. Now it is almost an impossibility for batters of this kind to hit the ball safe, and that should be a pitcher's main idea—to so deliver the ball that the batsman cannot hit it safe. Strike out pitchers are of the past. The great strike out pitchers of former years are now either out of base ball or are playing some position other than pitcher. They have lost their arms in a foolish desire to make a great strike out record.” “Then curve pitching having, as you are inclined to believe, seen its best days, what is the most effective style of delivery?” “High and low, fast and slow balls,” was the quick response “With change of pace and full control a pitcher can outwit the best batters in the land. A 'drop' ball is also most effective, but it is also the most dangerous one for a pitcher to use. Pitch a 'drop' very often and it will soon be good by to your arm. But change of pace and command is as I said before, about all that a pitcher needs. But his command must be perfect, and, in fact, when we come to get at the true secret of a pitcher's effectiveness it can all be expressed in two words—speed, command. That is about all there is to mere. Pitching. The man in the box must do the rest with his head. “A man my be possessed of terrific speed and have perfect control of the ball. He is hit hard, and people who see him sending the ball over the plate with lightning-like rapidity, wonder how it is that opposing batsmen hit the ball hard and safe. The reason is a simple one. Such a pitcher depends entirely on brute force. He never brings his brain power into play. He pitches the same way to the same men day in and day out, yet he never thinks to find out their weak points and work them. He is a mere machine, and the intelligent batter will never have any difficulty in hitting the delivery of such a pitcher.” St. |
| Source | St. Louis Republic |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Clarkson prepares to jump back to the NL
| Date | Tuesday, November 12, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | John Clarkson is in Chicago and, speaking to a Herald reporter, said: “I am a member of the brotherhood, and would not do or say anything to injure the plans they propose. Their scheme is a big one and will require a mighty effort to make it a go. They will have to fight dozens of things as yet unthought of. Their greatest enemy will, of course, be the National League, which in every respect except players ha the advantage. They have grounds and building which it took years to acquire, and all these things the brotherhood must put up at the start. The league salary roll will probably not be half as expensive as the brotherhood's and with the things they have established they can make a strong fight of it. The members of the brotherhood must work all together. There can't be many desertions, we shall see the end of the new organization right at its very beginning. For myself, I am, as I said, a member of the brotherhood, but I have no grievance against the league. Base ball is at present my business, and my course will be decided when I have learned what will be most advantageous to me. If I find that eh league is the best place for me to stay, and the brotherhood plan is not a paying one, why I don't intend to jump late into the river became some one else has done so. The reserve rule, against which so much is said, is, to be sure, a discouraging regulation to some players, but, as John Ward will admit himself, it is the backbone of the league. The classification and sales system, however, are not what they ought to be. But on these points I am sure the league would make concessions, if they were asked by the members of the brotherhood.” St. |
| Source | St. Louis Republic |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
classes of amateur clubs
| Date | Wednesday, January 16, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [correspondence from Chadwick] There are three distinct class of amateur clubs in the metropolis, viz:--first,, the genuine amateurs, who play their games on free grounds and for recreative exercise only; secondly, the class of legitimate amateurs who are attached to the leading athletic clubs of the metropolis, and who not only play on enclosed grounds but who also employ professional players to occupy their 'battery' positions; thirdly, the so-called semi-professional class, who play for gate money and on any grounds they can procure temporarily or otherwise, and who play either on the co-operative plan or for small salaries, according to circumstances. To these may be added the class of commercial nines, formed from the regular clerks of mercantile houses, or any employees of business firms or manufactories, these latter containing semi-professional players to a considerable extent. Each season finds the genuine amateur class more crowded to the wall than before, while the ranks of the gate-m0ney class increase year after year, the semi-professional clubs forming a reserve corps, from which the teams of the minor leagues are recruited. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Cleveland nearly buys the Detroit Club
| Date | Wednesday, November 27, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The Detroit Club directors met on Saturday last and adopted a resolution that unless 1000 season books would be subscribed for in Detroit the club would not apply for membership in the American Association. It was also given out that if financial support could not be assured in some way before the meeting of the stockholders on the 25th the club would be sold out bag and baggage. It transpired to-day [11/23] that this is no idle threat, as a deal is pending to transfer the entire team, including Manager Leadley, to a National League city. Cleveland is the purchasing club, and the deal was made at the League meeting in New York, the other League clubs agreeing to keep hands off and the Negotiations Committee promising not to interfere. The price agreed upon is not known, but it will be sufficient to let the club out without loss on the season, and possibly with a small profit. The deal only needs the sanction of the stockholders, Monday, to go into effect. If consummated, Detroit will have no base ball next season. The Sporting Life November 27, 1889 The deal with Detroit was declared off, and neither Manager Leadley nor any of his players will come to Cleveland. It was considered the best policy to have Detroit continue in the International League, if possible, for every defection from existing associations weakens the League and strengthens the Brotherhood. Detroit's price was also thought to be too high, although this would not have been a serious obstacle in the way of negotiations had Detroit been determined to sell out. The Sporting Life December 11, 1889 |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
clubs incorporate to protect their names
| Date | Friday, October 4, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The incorporated name of the champions was changed from the Metropolitan Exhibition Company to the New York Baseball Club, for the reason that the Club desired to secure a name similar to the titles of other League clubs and hereafter confine its scope to the national game. So says Director Charles T. Dillingham. New York World October 4, 1889 President Day states that the object of having the New York Club incorporated twice under similar names is to prevent any other parties from suing either of the titles “The New York Base Ball Club” or “The New York Ball Club.” The fact that different incorporators are named in each certificate is explained by the law, which so demands. The Philadelphia Item October 11, 1889 The managers of the Chicago League Ball Club have followed the plan of the New Yorkers to protect the name from the brotherhood players. Articles of incorporation were issued yesterday to the Chicago League Ball Club and the Chicago Base Ball Club, both with the old managers as incorporators. Brooklyn Eagle October 17, 1889 A certificate of incorporation of the Brooklyn Ball Club was filed to-day [12/7] with the Secretary of State. The trustees who shall manage its affairs for the first year are Charles H. Byrne, Ferdinand A. Abell and Joseph J. Doyle, of New York, and Frank Kelly and John M. Kelly, of Brooklyn. The club’s objects are set forth as follows: “To engage in and promote the game of base ball and athletic sport in the City of Brooklyn and to exercise and enjoy all rights and privileges conferred by the act of incorporation.” Brooklyn Eagle November 7, 1889 |
| Source | New York World |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
coaching chatter
| Date | Saturday, August 3, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [St. Louis vs. Brooklyn 8/2/1889] Arlie Latham was in a particularly good humor and kept up a steady chatter. He and Comiskey discussed the points of the play across the diamond while the St. Louis boys were in the field, or else Latham would invite discussion with Burns, who was coaching the team from the captain's lines. He was highly amusing and largely dulled the sting of defeat for the spectators. St. |
| Source | St. Louis Republic |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
collegians travel to England
| Date | Wednesday, July 3, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Mr. Chadwick's pet notion that the proper way to introduce base ball into England would be through gentleman amateur channels apparently has fallen into fruitful ground, and is to receive a practical trial, judging from a despatch to this effect: New Haven, Ct., June 28.--Some time ago the ball players on the Harvard and Yale College teams conceived the idea of making a trip to Europe. The plans for such a trip have now been completed, and they are to sail on July 6 by the Cunard steamship Umbria, so the report states, and are to be gone for the summer months. It is said that the boys are to be paid for their services at the rate of $20 per week, although to avoid the taint of professionalism, this is to be paid for personal expenses. … There is no truth in the report that Al Spalding has a hand in or is backing the trip, although he will doubtless watch the matter with keenest interest. Captain Noyes, of the Yale nine, said of the matter to-day:-- “We will start for England July 6, but we are not going over under the direction of an English syndicate. We intend going for the fun there is in it and also to learn to play cricket. We will join some cricket club near London, probably, and while there we will instruct the English cricketers how to play our national game, while they instruct us in the rudiments of theirs.” The Sporting Life July 3, 1889 The base ball team, composed of the best players from Yale, Harvard and Princeton Universities, which will show the English cricketers how to play America's game, sails for Europe to-day [7/6], on the steam Umbria. The team is under the management of J. W. Curtis, an old graduate of Yale University, and goes to Europe in response to an invitation from several English gentlemen who are desirous of having the game introduced in that country. It has been arranged for the team to play with the cricketers of Oxford and Cambridge universities and several cricket elevens in and around London. The Sporting Life July 10, 1889 |
| Source | The Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
collegiate players in England
| Date | Saturday, September 21, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Pitcher King of Princeton College is back from England, and this is his testimony in regard to the attempt to introduce base ball into England. “Our mission has achieved only a modicum of success, as we have made, so far, no startling strikes toward making the game universal. Yet something has been done: the seeds have been sown, and the Briton’s inherent love for cricket has been supplanted in some few cases. Our main point of attack has been toward giving the foot ball players, whose numbers are legion here, something to do during the Summer months when they would otherwise be idle, as the English foot ball season begins in September and extends to late April. |
| Source | Philadelphia Item |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
collegiate professional baseball players
| Date | Friday, July 19, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The college men in the base ball profession are beginning to make a mark. It offers them congenial occupation and large pay. Of the players in the various prominent nines many are undergraduates who pursue their studies in winter and play ball in the summer, thereby earning enough to defray all the expenses of their education. Sanders of the Philadelphia Club took a course in civil engineering last winter. Gunning of the Athletics was in attendance at the medical school of the University of Pennsylvania; Knowlton of the Eastern Club is a member of the Harvard Medical School; Garfield of the Pittsburgh Club is studying at Oberlin University; Mead and Cahill of the New Haven team are graduates of Holy Cross College in Worcester. Tyng is a Harvard graduates. Wagenhurst comes from Princeton and many other instances could be mentioned. Nor must the cases of John M. Ward and James. H. O’Rourke of the New York club be forgotten. The former took the course of political science in Columbia College, and with the latter attended the lectures in the Yale Law School, where they received their degrees of L L. B. And were afterward admitted to practise before the bar of Connecticut., quoting the Minneapolis Tribune |
| Source | New York Sun |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Comiskey on the use of trickery
| Date | Wednesday, May 1, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from an interview of Comiskey by an unidentified Western reporter] Nearly all professional ball players can catch a ball when it is thrown to them, and he is a por one indeed who cannot get a safe hit once in a while. When I size up a team I do not look at the players' batting or fielding records. A winning team is made up of players who will 'turn trucks' when they see a chance—men who study points and work every advantage to win. All is fair in love and in war, and the same may be said of base ball. It is all right for a player to acquire the reputation of being a gentleman both on and off the field, but you can bet that when he stands ace-high with him opponents he is not giving his club much service. I go on a field to win a game of ball by any hook or crook. It is the game we are after, not reputations as society dudes. Now, understand me, I do not indorse leg-breakers, brutes and ruffians, who expect to win by injuring some one or indulging in profanity. There is nothing in such treatment. The St. Louis team never yet sent any players to the hospital. I do not indorse men of that kind. I instruct my men, however, to turn a trick every time they get a chance. I think that is part of the business. It is not so much in taking advantage of your opponents as it is in getting away with it. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
competitors for the Players League ball
| Date | Wednesday, December 25, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [reporting on the PL meeting 12/16-12/17/1889] There was a great deal of wire-pulling for the privilege of furnishing the ball. Kiffe, of Brooklyn; Wright & Ditson, of Boston; Shibe Bros., of Philadelphia; Tom Lovell, representing Al Reach, and Keefe & Becannon, of New York, were the competitors. Lovell wanted $4 a dozen for balls. Keefe & Becannon offered to supply all balls for nothing. Shibe & Co. offered ti give the balls free, publish the League Guide and pay the League a certain percentage annually. Kiffe is reported to have offered to supply the balls free, also to give a bonus of $3500 for a three years' contract. The young New York firm were successful, and the Keefe & Becannon ball will be used exclusively next season in the Players' National League. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
condition of the St. George grounds
| Date | Tuesday, April 30, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Tall frames loomed up about the back of the ground, and nearly one-half of the ball field is covered with a great stage. The right field of the ball ground is about the same as it was when the Metropolitans played there, but the left field has been excavated to a depth of some ten feet,and the earth carried up to the centre of the field. The same thing has been done under the stage, so that even the thirty teams at work putting the ball ground in condition will have to keep going night and day to have it ready to play on. Then then the outfielders will have to play on the stage with rubber-soled shoes. On the first trip of the New Yorks from home work in removing the stage will be begun, but it will be very nearly the middle of the season before the ball ground will look anything as it did two years ago. The Staten Island Ferry Company will run boats every fifteen minutes on days of ball games. New York Sun April, 27, 1889 [Washington vs. New York 4/29/1889] The field was not as perfect as could have been wished for a ball game. Only about half of it was of earth; the other half consisted of the great stage upon which the “Fall of Rome” was exhibited last year. This stage is about 200 feet deep by 300 or more feet long. The outfielders of both teams wore rubber-soled shoes, and although boards do not make the finest kind of a ball ground, the outfielders were better able to play good ball than the infielders, who were darting about in the soft dirt. There were no base runs, and the foul lines only ran as far as the bases on each side. This made it very bad. … The stage on the outfield improved the long hits, for every time the ball struck fairly on the stage, no matter where, it was sure to be no less than a two-base hit. Whitney made a home run by the ball striking the stage and bounding over into the space back of the outfield. |
| Source | New York Sun |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
confusion implementing substitute rule
| Date | Tuesday, June 18, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [Chicago vs. Cleveland 6/17/1889[ Anson made the mistake of ordering Dwyer out of the box in the fourth inning after Bakley's three-bagger, with nobody out. McQuaid refused to allow the change until the half of the inning had been completed and Anson was compelled to mortify both himself and his young pitcher by calling him back from the bench. There seemed to be no good reason anyway for a removal. Cleveland had secured but six hits off Dwyer and he had been receiving wretched support. At any rate Hutchinson did no better. |
| Source | Chicago Tribune |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
contemplating an iron grand stand in Brooklyn
| Date | Sunday, May 26, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The burning of the stand at the Brooklyn base ball grounds on Sunday morning last was a sad blow to the club; still it was not nearly so bad as it might have been. The fact that the club was on the road and that no games or loss or attendance was caused by the fire is a source of satisfaction to the managers of the club. The directors have in mind the building of an iron grand stand, but that will not be done for some years yet. In the mean time the new stand now building on the grounds will be finished as soon as possible, probably by Thursday, and this will answer all requirements for the time being. |
| Source | New York Sun |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Coogan offered Day Polo Grounds III
| Date | Monday, November 4, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from an interview of James Coogan] Three weeks ago, before the new grounds were leased by the players and capitalists, C olonel E. A. McAlpin, the tobacco king, Post-master Cornelius Van Cott and G. R. Talcott, I had Day call upon me. I explained to him that parties were after the grounds, and I thought it my duty to give him first option upon them. He replied that he did not want the grounds. Of course I then leased them advantageously to the other party. I have not a dollar’s worth of stock in the Brotherhood scheme, but I am managing the Lynch estate, and I am looking out for their interests. |
| Source | Philadelphia Item |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Coogan property and the Metropolitans
| Date | Sunday, January 13, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | In regard to the New York Club and the Coogan property, it has become known that when the old Metropolitan Club was looking for that place, it was offered to them for $6,000, but as the club was shaky the idea was given up. It is now reported that the New York Club has been asked $12,000 for the same property. It looks as though the increase in the value of property in Harlem has increased rapidly in the past two or three years. |
| Source | New York Sun |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Coogan wants stock
| Date | Thursday, February 14, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | It is understood that the owner of the Coogan property at 155 th street would let the club have it at a very reasonable figure if he could secure stock in the club; but the President of the New Yorks has refused to make any such arrangement. However, there is still a slight glimmer of hope that the New Yorks may yet get the Coogan site. This hope comes from the fact that the Coogan property for which $500,000 has been asked, will be sold at auction on Feb. 21, and may be bought up by the elevated railroad in which case it would be to the advantage of the road to have the club play there. |
| Source | New York Sun |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
courtesy runner 2
| Date | Sunday, September 1, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [Chicago vs. Pittsburgh 8/31/1889] William surprised the crowd by running his own bases as far as first, and did well, although he favored his injured leg with every stride. |
| Source | Chicago Tribune |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
courtesy runner refused
| Date | Wednesday, August 28, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | “To-night Captain Glasscock called at the Bates House and informed Anson that the Indianapolis Club would insist upon Williamson running his own bases or remaining out of the game. “It's a mean trick,” said Williamson to-night. “They are simply forcing me to sit on the bench or risk straining my leg, which is not strong enough to do hard base-running.” It certainly does look to be a small piece of business.” – Chicago Tribune. Glassock's act was undoubtedly not due to any desire to injure genial Ned, but to concede nothing to the man who never concedes anything to anybody else—Captain Anson. The latter has more than once declined to allow badly injured men substitutes, and his treatment of catcher McGuire some years ago is still fresh in mind. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
crackdown on Sunday ball at Ridgewood
| Date | Tuesday, September 17, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The Grand Jury, which has been investigating Sunday base ball at Ridgewood, closed its session this afternoon [9/17] and handed in a large number if indictments. One of these is reported to be against the Ridgewood Amusement Company and Ridgewood Park, where base ball is played on Sunday. The attempt to have Mr. Charles H. Byrne and the members of the Brooklyn base ball team indicted individually did not find favor with the Grand Jury. Brooklyn Eagle September 17, 1889 A plea of not guilty was entered before Judge Cullen in the Supreme Court, Long Island City, yesterday, by the Ridgewood Exhibition Company, in answer to the indictment found against the company by the Queens County Grand Jury for Sunday base ball playing at Ridgewood Park. The case was set down for trial on Oct. 21. The Philadelphia Item October 10, 1889 [following a detailed description of the court proceedings] The jury retired at 4:30 o’clock under a charge from Judge Cullen, which was virtually a direction to convect. Nevertheless the jury had views of its own which were kept in heated debate for six hours without an agreement being reached and at 10:10 o’clock they were discharged. The vote stood nine for acquittal and three for conviction. Brooklyn Eagle October 23, 1889 |
| Source | Brooklyn Eagle |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
crackdown on Sunday baseball in Cincinnati
| Date | Sunday, May 26, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [dateline Cincinnati 5/25] The Police Commissioners yesterday issued an order to police lieutenants to arrest all violators of the Sunday law to-morrow. They were also instructed to stop Sunday base ball. There is much excitement among saloon keepers, who are at a loss what to do. The Cincinnati club has two games for Sunday. President Stern of the Cincinnati Base Ball club said to-day, when asked what he proposed to do to-morrow if his players were arrested, as proposed by the orders given to the police by the Police Commissioner: “We shall be prepared to give bond and go on with the play. We expect to play both games set for to-morrow with the Louisvilles and to have our usual large attendance. If Sunday games are prohibited I will abandon base ball, as it cannot live without them; there are so many people who cannot attend on any other day.” St. Louis Republic May 26, 1889 [N.B. The games were played.] |
| Source | St. Louis Republic |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
cracking down on Sunday baseball in Cincinnati
| Date | Thursday, August 15, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [dateline Cincinnati] The Superintendent of Police having notified theatrical and base ball managers that Sunday performances and base ball games will not hereafter be permitted, Manager Stern to day [8/14] called on Mayor Mosby to ask permission to play the remaining four games that are scheduled here for Sundays. The Mayor made a positive refusal and told him that real bona fide arrests of managers and players would be made on the sport if games were attempted. The theatrical managers all say they will not oppose the law, and most of them are glad of its enforcement. They say they can make more money by six days performances during the week than by seven. All they want is assurance that all will be served alike. St. Louis Republic August 15, 1889 [The game was attempted, stopped in the fourth inning by the police. SLR 8/26/1889] The law which prohibits Sunday ball here is a state enactment, and the announcement that Brooklyn and Cincinnati would play at Hamilton next Sunday has stirred up some of the inhabitants of that place. The Tri State League club has played there all the year on Sundays without interruption from the police authorities, but the announcement of the invasion of the association clubs has created, in the language of a special telegram from that place, “general indignation that butler County should be selected as a county where the law can be violated with impunity,” and it may be that the authorities will interfere with the game and prevent it from taking place. The Sheriff is being urged to use his authority and call out a posse, if necessary, to prevent the game. Taken altogether the situation looks rather squally for the crowd of Cincinnatians who are going to Hamilton to violate a law that they are compelled to obey in their own city. The base ball park is out of the city limits and this prevents the city authorities from taking cognizance of the matter. Just how mad the Sheriff is cannot be told at this writing. St. Louis Republic August 22, 1889 Two more Sunday games are scheduled to be played here [Cincinnati]. This week President Stern said that he would transfer the St. Louis contest booked for October 13 here to the Mound City for half the gate receipts. The other game on the 6th belongs to Louisville, and it may be played there also. There is nothing new in the Sunday question. Amateur games are permitted, and a collection is taken up at the Cincinnati Park. The liberality of a Sunday ball crowd is illustrated by the fact that at the last game $311 in coppers was taken in. St. Louis Republic August 22, 1889 The Cincinnati and Louisville base ball game scheduled here [Cincinnati] for Sunday was not played, the municipal authorities forbidding. There was an effort yesterday to secure an order from the courts forbidding the Mayor and the Chief of Police from interfering with the players, but it was refused. St. Louis Republic October 7, 1889 |
| Source | St. Louis Republic |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Cricketers wearing baseball gloves
| Date | Friday, September 20, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [New Jersey Athletic Club vs. Staten Island Cricket Club 9/19/1889] When the visitors had been at bat for some time they discovered that two of the Staten Island fielders wore base ball gloves against which the captain of the Jersey men protested. The home players refused to remove the obnoxious hand protectors, and the match was continued under protest. |
| Source | Boston Herald |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
critique of the player substitution rule
| Date | Sunday, May 19, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Manager Loftus does not think much of the rule which allows a new pitcher to be brought in at the end of an even inning. His opinion is worth something in these days. He thinks that the way to bring on new men is to put plenty of responsibility on them and not build up quitting notions. In very few games this season will the Cleveland pitchers be changed. |
| Source | New York Sun |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
cutting corners, scoring during an argument
| Date | Sunday, September 15, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [Indianapolis vs. Philadelphia 9/14/1889] Fogarty’s cut across the diamond was phenomenal in its cheekiness. Not satisfied with that effort, while Glasscock was kicking to Knight he cooly walked home as though to join in the argument, tagged home and claimed a run. |
| Source | Philadelphia Item |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
day jobs of the Boston triumvirs
| Date | Sunday, March 17, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Of the Boston triumvirate, Billings is a shoe manufacturer, and his wealth is estimated at $200,000; Soden is in tin roofing, and is worth as much as Billings; Conant is a gossamer-maker, and is worth as much as the other two combined. |
| Source | Indianapolis Journal |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Day opposed to the Brush plan; it is being evaded?
| Date | Wednesday, June 26, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [editorial matter] President Day, of the New York Club, comes out plump against the classification rule. He opposed its adoption in the first place and has been sore against it ever since, because he was badly used up in the debate upon it at the League meeting and utterly routed when it came to a vote; and his present stand will therefore create no surprise among his colleagues. Of course he has a right to his opinion, but he has no right to publicly inveigh against the rule on the ground that in its application it has been a failure, and that it has been evaded. A penalty of two thousand dollars is attached for violation of the rule, and if Mr. Day, or any member of the Brotherhood, know of any violation of the rule it is their duty to bring such violation to the attention of the League, in order that the dignity of the law, so long as it is a law, may be upheld and the offenders duly punished. It is a very easy matter to charge evasion, (which, by the way, involves rank perjury); the thing is to particularize and made the charge good. Let us have hard facts instead of vague innuendo. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Day sells the Jersey City Club
| Date | Wednesday, June 12, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The Jersey City Club was sold yesterday by John B. Day to a couple of well-known Jersey City residents. Pat Powers has been elected President as well as manager. The price paid and the names of the buyers are not yet known. Jerseyites need have no fear now that any of the crack players of their team will be transferred to the New York Club. Now that the club is owned by Jersey people the residents should give the club better support. |
| Source | New York Sun |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
deadhead tickets; graft
| Date | Thursday, April 4, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The number of deadhead politicians who find means to get the entree to the grand stand of the professional ball grounds is very large. For instance, the New York Club last season gave out to the officials 400 season books, which if used every day would amount to $52 each, or a total of $20,800 for the whole number during the season. This amount of books would have to be supplied again this season, in addition to the $10,000 offer made to the city to be permitted to stay there until October, making a total of $30,800. It would not be so bad if the crowd in question was anything like a decent one, but the books are lent to the political heeler class when the owners cannot use them, and that is why there was always such a lot of objectionable people on the grand stand last season. All this crowd will be got rid of if the club leaves the Polo Grounds and goes to Staten Island. The worst class and the noisiest of the grand stands are political deadheads. They think they hide their position by their kicking propensities, but they only show their true standing by it. |
| Source | Brooklyn Eagle |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Decker manufacturing his mitt
| Date | Wednesday, November 20, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Catcher Decker will put in the winter manufacturing the Decker glove at Reach's wholesale store. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
deeking a runner at second
| Date | Sunday, April 28, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The Harvard base-ball men have hatched up a trick which they claim will catch nearly every opponent who is lucky enough to steal second base. The player who has succeeded in reaching second base, on seeing that baseman step back to his usual position, about ten feet back of the base line, steals several feet down the path toward third. When he is about in front of shortstop that player makes a dash toward second base, which causes the runner to dart in that direction also; but the shortstop's run is only a feint, and the runner, on seeing the shortstop stop, also stops before reaching second, and the pitcher throws the ball to the second baseman, who is on base, and whom the runner has entirely forgotten, and the runner is out. |
| Source | Chicago Tribune |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
deeking the catcher on a pop up
| Date | Saturday, April 20, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [St. Louis vs. Cincinnati 4/19/1889] “Robbie” worked one of his tricks, but it availed him nothing. When he sent up a high foul fly, he whispered into Baldwin's ear: “I've got it,” and the “Kid” thought it was Viau who spoke, and Robinson's life was saved. He sent the “Kid” another that made connections. St. |
| Source | St. Louis Republic |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
defining a sacrifice hit; scoring; RBIs
| Date | Monday, May 13, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [quoting Chadwick from an unidentified source] ...what is a real sacrifice hit? and the answer is that it is a hit which obliges the fielder fielding the hit ball to put the runner out at first base, thereby enabling the runner on first or second to secure a base on the hit or to score a run if on third base. There are hits made to the field which result in putting the striker out on which runners on base are forwarded, which are not sacrifice hits, and should not be recorded as such; and these include hits to the infield, which but for errors of judgment in throwing to first, would have resulted in putting the runner out whom the hit had forced off, as in the case of a ball hit to short field when no man is out, or only one man, and the ball is sent to the first baseman either through lack of judgment or from the fact hat the second base was not properly covered at the time. Also in the case of a lunge hit to short outfield, which, while putting the striker out, allowed the runner to steal a base on the catch. These are not sacrifice hits, but hits no batsman should be given any form of credit for. But when a batsman, when he goes to the bat, finds a runner on a base with no one out, and one run in the game is likely to decide I, and he goes in with the effort to make a safe hit—a tap to short right field for instance—and in trying for the hit gives a chance for a throw-out from right short, he has made a creditable effort in batting—done team work, in fact—and merits a record for the effort. Also in the case of two or three men on bases, with but one man out, he tries to sent them all in by a hard hit ball to the outfield, which gives a fine outfielder a chance for a splendid catch and affords no opportunity for a long throwin [sic] to cut off a runner at the home plate, such a hit is a creditable sacrifice, and deserves records as team work at the bat. … Though the official rule governing the record of sacrifice hits is not to my liking, still I am glad to see it there, if only as an entering wedge to a scoring system which will give due credit to team workers at the bat and take off the premium now offered for record batting. What does a batsman see when he looks at a newspaper score this season? 'Two-base hits—Jones, 1; Brown, 2. Three-base hits—Robinson, 1; White, 1,' etc. Is there any record showing how many runners a batsman forwarded by clean hits, or how many runs he similarly batted in? Not a record. All the credit is given to the slugger, who reaches third base by his hits three times in a game, and neither forwards a single runner or bats in a single run. |
| Source | Pittsburgh Dispatch |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
defining an earned run 2
| Date | Wednesday, June 12, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from Questions Answered] All runs cored before three chances have been offered to retire the side are earned excepting those made on runners reaching first on errors, bases on balls, illegal deliveries or hit by pitched balls. A man cannot earn a run unless he reaches first base on a hit. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Denny jumps back to the NL
| Date | Monday, November 11, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | “I wish you would say, through The Item,” said Mr. Denny, “that I have decided to remain in Indianapolis, and no offer the Brotherhood could make me would induce me to alter my purpose, all reports to the contrary notwithstanding. I like Indianapolis and the management of the local club. Mr. Brush is one of the squarest men on earth, and he has been a good friend to me. In this matter, however, I am simply looking out for myself. If I remain with the Indianapolis Club I am sure of a fair salary, and I do not intend to throw it away and follow some visionary scheme with no substantial backing. Not a bit of it. And I will be found in the local team next season just the same. |
| Source | The Philadelphia Item |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Detroit Club affairs wrapped up; finances; Rowe-White
| Date | Wednesday, May 29, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from an interview of Fred Stearns] “I have just made my final report to a meeting of the directors of the old Detroit Base Ball Club; it was very favorably received, and the affairs of the old club, with the exception of the Rowe-White matter, are wound up.” “And what is the amount of the assessment the stockholders are called on to pay?” “Assessment! Ha! Not much. We declared a dividend of $54,000, and there is still more money in bank to be divided.” “What! A dividend of $54,000?” “Exactly. It is payable June 1, and the holders of the shares, the par value of each being $50, will receive $135 each. Of course, four-fifth of the shares are held by the directors,” and Mr. Stearns smiled softly. The largest portion of the sum to be divided was derived from the sale of star players. There is $7000 still due for Row and White, if these players will consent to go to Pittsburg. They want $4000 of the $7000 which Pittsburg agrees to pay Detroit for their release. The Detroit people are willing to give the players $2000 of the release money, and as Pittsburg agreed to pay each a salary of $35000 for the season it is seen that these players are throwing $9000 in cold cash for their pig-headedness. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Diddlebock with the Philadelphia Inquirer
| Date | Saturday, March 9, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Henry H. Diddlebock, a veteran journalist who has for many years ably edited the baseball and sporting columns of The Times,of Philadelphia, has severed his connection with that establishment and is now engaged in a similar capacity on The Philadelphia Inquirer, which has been improved wonderfully under its new management, and promises to resume its former leading position. |
| Source | New York Clipper |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
dirty ball play
| Date | Wednesday, September 4, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Pitcher Billy Blair, of Hamilton, was angry at Rochester Friday week, and claimed that W. O'Brien stood too near the plate, but Umpire Emslie said that he was in a proper position. There was quite a dispute, and finally Emslie threatened to find Blair if he did not pitch. Blair then deliberately threw the ball at O'Briedn but O'Brien dodged it. Blair threw at O'Brien again, but the ball just missing his head. Then O'Brien started out on the diamond with uplifted club, but thought better of it and came back to his position. Blair threw another ball, though that almost hit O'Brien. The big first baseman started out toward Blair again, and the crowd yelled “kill him!” O'Brien did not molest Blair, however, and went to first on balls. Blair then lost control of the ball, and two bases on balls, three singles and a home run brought in five runs. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Dirty ball playing
| Date | Wednesday, September 4, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [Chicago vs. Pittsburgh 8/30/1889] ...there was considerable dirty ball playing. Carroll collided with Pfeffer in stealing second in the third, and Anson called for a fine. In the next inning Pfeffer ran into Dunlap in a similar way, but it looked very much as if it was done on purpose. Lynch refused to fine him, but a moment later Dunlap made a frightful lunge at the Chicago second baseman with his right, which was very cleverly “ducked.” Lynch saw the move and promptly fined Dunlap $25 for the “pass. |
| Source | The Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
dirty play
| Date | Sunday, May 12, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | President Byrne, of the Brooklyns, will encourage his team in rough playing every time an opposing team begins such tactics. He says he does not intend to have his men injured without doing anything to prevent it, and the only way for the players to defend themselves is to fight fire with fire. |
| Source | Philadelphia Item |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
dirty tricks
| Date | Sunday, July 14, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The Boston Globe scores Curry for his umpiring on Wednesday; says the crowd sympathized with the Spiders; declares that Tebeau prevented Richardson from scoring by holding him at third and that Stricker tripped Kelly and made him “sprawl on his hands for twenty feet.” Poor things. Yet the same failed to condemn Kelly’s mas on the line trick last Saturday, and the same writer excused Kelly by saying that “all catchers work that trick.” Boston is evidently not fair. |
| Source | Cleveland Plain Dealer |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
dismissing the possibility of a Players League
| Date | Wednesday, May 29, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from R. M. Larner's column] While at League headquarters last Monday I had a chat with Nick Young about the Sunday meeting of the Brotherhood. Our talk was of an informal nature, and as Mr. Young is the head of the League it would hardly be proper to quote him on this subject. It is sufficient to say that there is but little danger of a strike among the leading ball players of the country for the reason that they have no just grounds for complaint, besides they would find it a very difficult matter to obtain similar employment elsewhere at the same rates they are now receiving. It is all rot to talk about the capitalists who are ready to come forward and supply the funds necessary to maintain an anti-League Association. I have some personal experience with captalistic ball cranks, but they do not materialize when they are called to the scratch. Besides, where would the strikers obtain a play ground in New York, Boston, Washington and in other League cities? It is surprising that intelligent men take stock in such fairy stories. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
disputed area of responsibility in the two umpire system
| Date | Wednesday, May 22, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | To-day [5/21] a Washington crowd was permitted to see the double umpire act. Fessenden presided behind the bat and curry judged the base plays. Had the game been close the home club would have had cause to protest several of Fessenden's decisions, for he deliberately showed to the players and the spectators that he lacked confidence in his own judgment. On one occasion Hoy made a clean bunt and took first base by fast running. It suddenly occurred to Capt. Anson that the ball struck the batsman. He appealed to Fessenden, who decided the runner safe. Anson then appealed to Curry, who was standing over near first base, and the latter said he thought the ball had struck the batsman, whereupon, to the disgust of the spectators, including the President of the League, Mr. Young, Fessenden reversed his decision and called Hoy to bat again. |
| Source | New York Sun |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
dissatisfied Boston stockholders and the Players League
| Date | Wednesday, October 23, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | John Morrill reports that he has met with gratifying success in working up the Brotherhood business in the Hub. … It was an easy matter to get the old dissatisfied stockholders interested, for it would give them a chance to get even with the three men who forced them out of the club. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
distinction between manager and captain
| Date | Tuesday, March 19, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | John Morrill signed a Boston classified contract to-day. “He will neither manage nor Captin the team and will most likely play shortstop,” says President Soden. It is well known that Morrill has been put in Class A by Nick Young. Ray has sent word that his classification is satisfactory and he will sign at once. |
| Source | Chicago Tribune |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
dividing up the Kansas City players
| Date | Wednesday, November 20, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | There was some lively hustling by the League club managers for some of the Kansas City players in the early part of the day. The Boston people discovered Thursday night that the Kansas City Club would withdraw from the Association and would sell some of its players. Mr. Soden immediately field a claim for the services of short stop Long and fielder Hamilton. On Friday morning, as soon as the Kansas City Club had officially withdrawn from the Association, John I. Rogers put in a claim for the same players, and five other clubs followed suit. Under the rules Philadelphia, by reason of Rogers' acuteness, would have got the players, as the Boston Club's claim was illegal, having been filed while Kansas City was yet a member of the Association. As it is, the League's resolution as to the acquirement of players put the entire business into Mr. Young's hands. It is understood that the Kansas City Club has filed with Mr. Young a schedule giving the names and prices of the player they are willing to sell. In this list, it is said, that Long and Hamilton are put in at $6000 each. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
division of responsibility between the manager and the captain
| Date | Wednesday, April 17, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The Boston Herald says that Manager Hart has not the authority to select the team to play from day to day. This power has been delegated to the captain of the club. Mr. Hart, therefore, has no authority at all on the field, as is the case with all the other managers. He controls the team off the field, but not on it. Brooklyn Eagle April 17, 1889 Mike Kelly has been given the bounce by the Boston triumvirate; that is, he is still nominally the captain of the team, but virtually Manager Hart is the boss of the team now. Messrs. Soden, Billings and Conant have plainly seen that Kelly is incompetent to control the team. No man respects him and he lacks every qualification which makes Anson, Harry Wright and comiskey so successful. When Jim Hart was first engaged it was with the understanding that he should have control of the team off the field only. When the club left Boston yesterday morning Manager Hart carried in his pocket a new contract with the Boston Club, which gave him full control of the team, both on and off the field. In fact, the same authority as Harry Wright has. Mr. Hart made his appearance on the players’ bench for the first time yesterday since the club has played hereabouts. Brooklyn Eagle April 24, 1889 |
| Source | Brooklyn Eagle |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
drainage at the Huntingdon Street grounds 2
| Date | Wednesday, April 3, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The field has been raised fourteen inches along the pavilion and back of the bat, casting the surface water toward second base. Then the field has been so graded as to throw the field water off from second base and the line, from which it is carried off in an iron pipe to Lehigh avenue. Several large, roomy, underground drains carry the water from the field about the catcher's stand to a point near the home players' bench, from which point an iron pip carries it out to the street. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
drainage at the New Polo Grounds; proto-mound
| Date | Wednesday, August 7, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Another defect at the New Polo Grounds has revealed itself. When the grounds were constructed the north side of the field was left almost on a level with the meadow beyond. The drainage of the new ground was made as nearly perfect as possible, but President Day has made the discovery that all the sewers or blind ditches that he could put in the new ball grounds would not carry off the great body of water that flows down the high bluff back of the grounds and overflows the low lands. As soon as the water settles somewhat an embankment is to be thrown up along the west fence of the grounds to keep out the overflow, after which the sewers will be able to keep the grounds and the diamond free from water at all times. The Sporting Life August 7, 1889 The diamond at the Polo Grounds has been raised eight inches and resodded, so that it will be impossible for the rain to settle in or around it. The Sporting Life August 28, 1889 |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
dueling interpretations when a substitution can be made
| Date | Thursday, July 18, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [discussing a circular from Wikoff] Mr. Wikoff in this last circular of his defines the words, “completed inning,” contained in the rule itself, to mean an even inning, including the first and second part. In this he differs from President Young, of the league, who defines completed inning to mean the one inning played by the side at the bat, and not the two inning played by each nine comprising the first inning of the game on each side. The question is, which president is right? |
| Source | Brooklyn Eagle |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
early Players League rumor
| Date | Sunday, September 8, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | A wild and woolly rumor has reached here from Cleveland that Albert Johnson, a street car man of that city, is at the head of a scheme to corner the baseball market this fall and control the whole business next season. It is said that Johnson's scheme is to sign agreements with all of the league players and place clubs in Boston, New York, Brooklyn, Philadelphia, Chicago, Cleveland, Cincinnati, and one other city not yet named, ignoring the league altogether. A gentleman who has just returned from Cleveland says that Johnson, who is a man of means and the wildest kind of a crank on baseball, has actually secured the names of several prominent brotherhood layers, and is now in the east working on his ponderous scheme. It is further claimed that John Ward, the New York shortstop, is giving the Cleveland man his assistance. The gentleman from Cleveland asserts that this is the mysterious business on which the brotherhood has been working for several months, which has been referred to in some of the metropolitan papers. |
| Source | Chicago Tribune |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
early homemade baseballs
| Date | Monday, March 18, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from a reminiscence of Charles S. Clampitt, formerly of the Olympics of Philadelphia] [speaking apparently of the early 1860s:] We played for honor, the only trophy being a ball. In our club we made our own balls. Every six months a committee was appointed for this purpose, and the balls were made of a piece of India rubber covered with twine, worsted and a calf skin. |
| Source | Pittsburgh Dispatch |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
early rumor of Indianapolis signing players for sale to New York
| Date | Thursday, December 5, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Mr. Day says there is no truth in the report that the Indianapolis Club is signing players with the idea of ultimately selling them to New York. “I am sure,” says Mr. Day, “that our players of last year are legally bound by their contracts to play with us next year, and don’t see the necessity of engaging others. |
| Source | The Philadelphia Item |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
early sighting of William Becannon
| Date | Friday, January 4, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Tim Keefe will have for his partner in the sporting goods business William Becannon, who has been for a long time with A. G. Spalding. Mr. Becannon has been a feature in amateur base ball hereabouts for many years. It will be next to impossible for T. J. Keefe & Co. to get a store before the middle or latter part of March, so that in the mean time they will secure a large down-town office as a starter. New York Sun January 4, 1889 William Becannon is making a strong move to organize a commercial league in this city for next season. Already three clubs have agreed to join the movement. The idea is to secure six clubs to play ten games during June, July, and August. Mr. Becannon will try to secure teams from the largest business houses in town. New York Sun January 11, 1889 |
| Source | New York Sun |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
early talk of abolishing the Brush plan
| Date | Friday, October 18, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | President Day intimates that the classification plan will be abolished. He says: “The classification rule if lived up to would be a good thing, but as it is it can be dropped and never missed. In the case of Rowe and White and similar cases I don't think it was right. No man should be compelled to play with a club that he did not want to join, and the rule was never made with the idea of sheltering such an evil. It is one of the things that has crept into the rules that was never intended.” St. |
| Source | St. Louis Republic |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
early talk of the Players League; and of Day favoring the Brotherhood; League delaying tactics
| Date | Monday, May 27, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The opinions of the different league club Presidents upon the situation, as published in a New York paper, show the league magnates, with the single exception of John B. Day, to be united in support of the classification rule. Mr. Day, however, seems disposed to mouth matters, a thing he can but ill afford to do at the present time, as he and his lieutenant, James Mutrie, are none too popular with the rest of the league Presidents. Judging from Mr. Day's published views he would be as likely to stick to the players as the league in case of a rupture between the two, and it is almost certain that the first manifestation of any such spirit upon his part would be the signal for the forfeiture of the present New York club's franchise. In case of a break between clubs and players it might at first seem a good play—and it would certainly betw quite a feather in the cap of the brotherhood—to have the New York club bolt the league and openly cast its fortunes with the players' organization. The end of the fight, however, if a fight there should be, would be apt to find Day, Mutrie & Co. in the soup; as a fight between the league—with its organized circuit, its money, its systematic management, its experience in base-ball legislation, and its long established name—and the brotherhood would presumably bring about the latter's ultimate def3eat or result in a compromise. In either event Mutrie & Co. would be out in the cold. There will probably be no fight, for the at the November meeting of the league a committee composed of representatives of each brotherhood chapter will be asked to confer with the league and offer some better rule, if they can, than the classification rule for the protection of clubs in the smaller league cities. In other words, the league will endeavor by arbitration, by diplomacy, by amicable discussion, by every peaceable means in its power, to arrange a form of agreement that will be mutually acceptable to clubs and players. Failing in this, however, the league, to use a prominent league magnate's expression, “will throw weak-kneed league members and unreasonable players out of the grounds and continue the game.” Chicago Tribune May 27, 1889 comparing the Polo and the Staten Island grounds The Polo Grounds made a model base ball field. Located in the heart of the city they were easy of access and were patronized by many thousands of business men who would otherwise have been compelled to remain away from the games. The seating capacity of the place was large, the arrangements for viewing the field were excellent, and all the accommodations necessary to please and attract patrons of the national sport were amply provided. Now this is greatly changed. A visit to the Staten Island grounds entails a long, though pleasant, journey on water which business men, however much inclined, are not at all at liberty to take. To miss a boat means a monstrous delay of twenty minutes or half an hour, which is quite a consideration when time is precious. Arrived at the grounds, the spectators are well accommodated, but the filed being yet new, the playing must necessarily be inferior to what could be done at the Polo grounds, and they are, therefore, subject to much disappointment. Staten Island is frequently invaded by hosts of mosquitoes in Summer, which fact is in itself a great drawback to enjoyment, and at this particular season fogs are also apt to hang over the field and obscure players. Storms sometimes interfere with the games, and Staten Island is not a pleasant place when it rains. These at least are a few objections to the new grounds, gathered by a reporter last week. They originated from the grand stand as well as from the white benches, and were the free expressions of men who would follow a favorite base ball team to Hellsville if fate decreed that they should play nowhere else. They conceded that every thing that could be done to make the place attractive and enjoyable has been done, but nevertheless they condemned it. The Philadelphia Item May 27, 1889 |
| Source | Chicago Tribune |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
early use of 'ginger'
| Date | Thursday, April 4, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Galvin, Dunlap, Beckley and Sunday showed up with a full supply of “ginger,” but the others are still short of that article. St. |
| Source | St. Louis Republic |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
early use of 'high sky'
| Date | Thursday, June 20, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [Philadelphia vs. Chicago 6/19/1889] A “high sky” rendered the judging of fly balls a difficult matter, yet there was some pretty work done by the outfield, Farrell, Wood, and Fogarty each making one or more clever catches of hard hit balls. |
| Source | Chicago Tribune |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
early use of Cleveland 'Spiders'
| Date | Wednesday, May 22, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The Cleveland Spiders—so called on account of their peculiar appearance in their suits of black and blue... |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
effects of the minor league reserve
| Date | Wednesday, May 8, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [editorial matter] One result of minor league reservation is that the young blood craze has been effectually checked in the National League at least, and with the exception of Cleveland and Philadelphia none of the League clubs will present many new faces. To stock clubs with youngsters, who, though men of fame in minor leagues are at best but experiments in the faster major league class, now entails greater expense than even big clubs can afford to indulge in, as all minor league young blood now commands a price. And all things considered this state of affairs is a good thing for the old players and the new, and the clubs as well, as the former are more certain of their positions, the youngsters are less liable to be shuffled around from town to town and clubs are saved the expense of generally wasteful and useless experimenting. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
ejections
| Date | Wednesday, August 7, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Buck Ewing says that he does not care for fines, and does not have to pay them, but he does care when he is ordered off the field. That is giving umpires a very strong tip. The Sporting Life August 7, 1889 Captain Ewing has now twice been suspended from games, and speculation is rife as to when that will happen to Captains Comiskey and Anson and who will be the umpire that will do it. The Sporting Life August 7, 1889 |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
ejections 2
| Date | Wednesday, September 25, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from Chadwick's column] Never was a rule made which is more necessary to the welfare of the game than that empowering the umpire to order from the field a player or captain of a team who offensively disputes his decisions. The only fault in connection with it is that it has not been enforced often enough. The Sporting Life September 25, 1889 [editorial matter] How potent for good the rule empowering the umpires to suspend obstreperous players from the field can be made was illustrated on last Sunday in Brooklyn. Had Captain Shannon, of the Louisvilles, not been removed from the game for his insolence to Umpire Goldsmith, his club would undoubtedly have won the game, as his substitute's errors lost it. With a little more backbone in the enforcement of this rule, clubs will soon tire of losing games by means of suspensions, and themselves take offending players in hand. The Sporting Life September 25, 1889 |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
elevated pitcher's box; mound
| Date | Thursday, June 27, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Manager Phillips has discovered why all pitchers who come here are more effective on these grounds than they are on their own respective grounds. He states that this is caused by the rear part of the box being elevated a little. He will have it leveled down to-day. |
| Source | Pittsburgh Dispatch |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
enforcement of the territorial limit
| Date | Tuesday, February 5, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | President Byrne of the Brooklyn Club promises a revolution in Sunday base ball games. Heretofore there have been many games played at different points on Long Island in addition to those by the Brooklyn Club. Already many minor league clubs have arranged for Sunday games on Long Island, and Mr. Byrne has concluded to enforce his five-mile privilege and is going to stop all these games. From what Mr. Byrne says, he can not only stop all national agreement clubs from playing on his territory, but any club not under its protection that breaks the rule can be barred from playing a national agreement club afterward. Mr. Byrne says that this change was made in the rules at the Pittsburgh meeting. Before the change was made he had control of the territory five miles from the city line; not it is five miles from the county line. |
| Source | New York Sun |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Erastus Wiman; early rumor of the Players' League
| Date | Tuesday, May 28, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from an interview of Wiman] Now, in talking about baseball, let me explain a matter to the public which concerns me considerably there have been reports in circulation to the effect that I was inclined to back up the Ball Players' Brotherhood in their proposed fight with the National League. The rumor definitely was that I would find money and help to organize another league or association. Now, stories like these are wrong. When the brotherhood was first formed there was a prospect of a conflict between it and the League. I was asked what I would do for the players, and I stated that I could only allow them the use of my grounds. This I would do for anybody, because it is to my benefit to have people visiting my grounds. But to offer to set up a rival to the National League would be folly. |
| Source | Pittsburgh Dispatch |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
errors on foul balls
| Date | Wednesday, May 22, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from Questions Answered] It matters not what happens afterwards, whether the batter reaches first or not it is an error. All muffs of foul flies are scored as errors when made, and they are not erased afterwards in case the batsman does not reach first. A muff is a muff whether made on fair or foul ground, and must be scored as an error as soon as it is made. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
estimated New York Club finances
| Date | Wednesday, December 18, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [reporting on the PL meeting 12/16-12/17/1889] One of the most amusing incidents of the day was the reading of a tabulated statement of the New York Club’s business during last season. The statement shows that the Club made just $30,300. While the traveling expenses were included in the expenditures, not a cent was allowed for the Club’s share of the gate receipts while playing abroad, and in Boston alone it played before more than 70,000 people. The table follows: INCOME 250,000 admissions, at 50 cents ................................... $125,000 100,000 admissions to grand stand, at 25 cents.............$ 25,000 Total receipts..................................................... $150,000 EXPENDITURES LAST SEASON Salaries............................................................. $ 50,000 Traveling expenses........................................... $ 15,000 Ground rent...................................................... $ 5,000 Help at the grounds........................................... $ 4,000 Advertisements in daily papers, 70 days, at $60 per day$ 4,200 For supplies, such as uniforms and necessaries at the grounds ........................................ $ 4,000 Percentages paid to visiting clubs on 250,000 admissions, at 15 cents.............................. $ 37,500 Total output.............................................. $119,700 RECAPITULATIONS 250,000 admissions at 50 cents.............................. $125,000 Grand stand admissions at 25 cents........................ $ 25,000 Total receipts............................................ $150,000 Expenses................................................................... $119,700 Balance in favor of club............................. $ 30,300 The Philadelphia Item December 18, 1889 [N.B. These numbers clearly are approximate guesses. Baseball-almanac gives attendance at 201,989.] |
| Source | Philadelphia Item |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
estimated club profits; finances
| Date | Friday, October 18, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from an interview of Secretary Scandrett of the Pittsburgh Club] The way in which players talk about the profits of ball clubs is absurd. I estimate that Boston clears $80,000, New York 60,000, Chicago $40,000 and Philadelphia about $10,000. The other clubs, on an average, are losers. Well, then, the profits named make a total of $190,000. Messrs. Ward, Keefe and others may know all about playing ball, but depend upon it they have little idea of the financial department of the club, and that is the most vital after all. |
| Source | Pittsburgh Dispatch |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
evading the Brush classification plan
| Date | Sunday, March 10, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | How beautifully the case of John Glasscock was arranged despite all the emphatic declarations of President Brush and others to the effect that Glasscock could not possibly get more than $2,500 for the season. The player, accompanied by his lawyer, was at the [NL] meeting to demand, according to contract, the same amount of money for this season as he received last year, viz., $3,000. The sagacious League knew better than to tackle a question of this sort in open hostility, and Glasscock was given his $3,000. But we are told that $500 of this is for Glasscock as captain of the team; this specious arrangement is to give a confiding public to understand that the latest limit of salary, $2,500, has not been tampered with. Common sense will certainly tell us that Glasscock is receiving $3,000 for his services to the Indianapolis club, divide or classify these serves as we will. Pittsburgh Dispatch March 10, 1889 clarifying the ejection rule The umpire rule has been so defined that an umpire can at his own discretion remove a player, but the captain of a team to which the player belongs can name the substitute to take his place. The Philadelphia Times March 10, 1889 advertising expenses; marketing; travel expenses The expenses of the local club are to be cut to a very large extent this season. During the last few days Manager Phillips, at the request of President Nimick, has been preparing an estimate of what the season's expenses will be. He has finished his estimate for advertising and figures out that it will be within the $3,000 allowed him by the club. This will reduce the cost of advertising about $2,600 below that of last year. “But,” said Mr. Phillips last evening, “had I been allowed $4,000 for the season I would have turned things over. With that amount I could have had a band engaged to parade the streets and give promenade concerts every day we had a championship game.” “However, with the $3,000 we will do some great work. I have engaged the Great Western Band for a street parade and concert on the championship opening day. I am also inclined to have silk ribbons of the club's colors, with the name of the club inscribed on them, and present one to each lady present on the opening day. These ladies can, therefore, wear the club's colors at every game they attend during the season.” Although Mr. Phillps has not completed his other estimates for the season, eh thinks the club's traveling expenses will be about $1,500 less than last year. This will make a total of $4,100. Pittsburgh Dispatch March 11, 1889 |
| Source | Pittsburgh Dispatch |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Ewing's catcher's gloves
| Date | Saturday, January 26, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Last season Buck Ewing had a pair of catcher’s gloves made especially to order. They were made according to Buck’s own ideas, and were so easy and serviceable that he used them throughout the season. Keefe has taken Ewing’s idea and is on the market with a glove which he calls “The Ewing. |
| Source | Pittsburgh Dispatch |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
exaggerated attendance figures
| Date | Wednesday, May 8, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | President Byrne, in speaking of the exaggeration indulged in by the Philadelphians about the crowds at their grounds, says of the large attendance the Brooklyns had in one game there: “There was an exceptionally large crowd on the Athletics’ ground in our game. Ropes were stretched all around the field and we were compelled to make special ground rules. There was a gib crowd there, and the lowest number I have heard estimated is 12,000, and I am informed that the Athletic management gave out 15,000 as the figure. As a matter of fact there were about 10,000 people on the ground. This much I am certain of, and that is that the Brooklyn Club was paid for 9.935 admissions at the three gates. It is these false reports about the sizes of crowds,” continued Mr. Byrne, “that sets the ball players crazy and makes the jump up in salaries. Now, over in Brooklyn we never lie about our crowds. There are the turnstiles, and the exact number of persons passing through them are given to the press and the public. That is what the turnstiles are for. |
| Source | Brooklyn Eagle |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
exchange of score cards; starting gong
| Date | Sunday, April 7, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [New York vs. Brooklyn 4/6/1889] At 3:30 Umpires Ferguson and Kelly came on the field and the score cards having been compared the gong sounded for the game to begin. |
| Source | Brooklyn Eagle |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
expanding the substitute player rule
| Date | Wednesday, November 20, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [reporting the Joint Rules Committee meeting 11/12/1889] Heretofore clubs were required to have one uniformed layer in readiness at all times during a game, but hereafter they will be called upon to have two such players, in accordance with the change made in Sec. 1 of Rule 28. This change was necessitated by the radical change of Sec. 2 of the same rule, which now permits a club to name two substitute players on the score card instead of one. Formerly the substitute was permitted to come into a game at the conclusion of an even innings only, but the new rule will permit the change to be made at any time. The Sporting Life November 20, 1889 [from Chadwick's column] Captain Anson, who was admitted to the conference, favored the extension of the rule so as to include any number of new players, but it was finally decided to limit the number to two. … Under the new rule the captain can replace any two players of his nine at any time during the progress of a game without waiting even for the close of the first or second half of an inning. … Thus the captain can try no less than three pitchers in a game, viz., the one named in the opening inning of the game and the two substitutes who can now be legally introduced. This amendment cannot but add greatly to the interest of the contest, as under the rule three pitchers can be tried in a game, each pitching three innings. The Sporting Life November 20, 1889 |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
expenses as a salary limit dodge
| Date | Wednesday, April 17, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from Frank Brunell's column] Have youn oticed the latest trick in the salary line? Where leagues and teams are bound down to a limit, the management signs men it needs and rewards them additionally by the payment of “expenses,” which means board, etc. There never was a rule kept to the letter. And it is also a question whether this extra trick is not a violation of the rules. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
experimental battery in an exhibition game
| Date | Sunday, April 14, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [Athletic vs. Philadelphia 4/13/1889] The Philadelphias had out their strongest team, while the Athletics were weakened by placing in Smith and Brennan as the battery. … Manager Sharsig was criticized by some for experimenting in a game apparently of so much importance, but he fully justified himself by saying: “If I do not try my batteries in these games which are of over-rated importance how will I know whether they will be good enough for championship games? Better experiment now than do so on games that count.” And Billy was right. It is the championship games we want, not exhibition victories and championship defeats. |
| Source | Philadelphia Item |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
fair-foul hits in the air
| Date | Wednesday, October 16, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from Chadwick's column] A Knoxville, Tenn., correspondent asks me the following question. He says:-- “Please give in the next issue of The Sporting Life your opinion of the following described play, one frequently happening in base ball, yet which is not at all thoroughly understood:--A ball hit up into the air, falls two or three feet inside the foul line, but takes a side bound into foul ground. Is this not a fair ball by rule 37 of Spalding's Guide, which says, 'A fair hit is a ball batted by the batsman standing in his position, that first touches the ground, first base or third base, any part of the person or a player, umpire or any other objects that is in front of or on either of the foul lines,' etc. The rule then goes on to state the difference in the case of balls batted directly to the ground. In the play mentioned above the 'pop fly,' which fell on fair ground, but bounded onto foul ground, was called a foul by the umpire, and this is but one of several similar decisions I have seen. Was not this a violation o Rule 37?” It was. A case in point occurred in one of the Brooklyn-Columbus games of September. Collins bunted a short ball in the air which fell on fair ground and then rolled to foul ground. Marr went for the ball, and seeing it rolling towards foul ground, did not handle it, and when he picked it up and claimed a foul he then leatned of the mistake he had made, as Collins was, of course, given his base on the hit. The difference lies in a ball hit direct from the bat to the ground and one hit so as to rise in the air at least the height of the batsman's head. In the former case wherever the ball settles after the hit it becomes fair or foul. In the latter case it becomes fair or foul according to where it first strikes the ground, regardless of where it may afterwards bound or roll. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
fans bringing horns to the game; noisemakers
| Date | Sunday, October 20, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [New York vs. Brooklyn 10/19/1889] Horns were plentiful on the grounds and were used frequently; in fact every good play brought out a blast which was heard a block away. A misplay of any of the opposing teams also caused a loud blast of derision. The New Yorkers had small tin horns, but the Brooklynites went further and procured fog horns which were heard every time a Bridegroom made a good hit or a fine play. |
| Source | Brooklyn Eagle |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
fee passes for New York politicians
| Date | Wednesday, April 10, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The surprising statement was made last week that the New York Club last season gave out to the officials of New York City 400 season books, which, if used every day, would amount to a total of $52 each, or a total of $20,800 for the whole number during the season. This goes to show how the New York Club has been squeezed for years. Adding to the city officials the newspaper men, actors and other people admitted free to the Polo Grounds, the New York Club seems to be saddled with quite an array of deadheads. In fact, this crowd made quite a goodly base ball audience of itself. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
fielders gloves left on the field
| Date | Wednesday, May 29, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [Chicago vs. Boston 5/28/1889] Johnston next hit to Burns. It was a hot one, but he stopped it, and Anson [first baseman] made a pretty pick up for a ball thrown a trifle low. The man was clearly out. Anson threw his gloves on the grass, as did the whole Chicago team. Even Bennett had his body protector unbuckled and Jonston had really turned to go to his position in the field when to everybody's surprise Barnum gave Johnston safe, and Bennett again resumed his mask and gloves. |
| Source | Chicago Tribune |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
fielders' gloves 2
| Date | Wednesday, October 9, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [editorial matter] “A ridiculous custom now in vogue is the wearing of big cumbersome gloves by outfielders. They are just about as necessary as the wearing of white kid gloves by the pitcher. Medium weight gloves may be a necessity for infielders, who have to handle at short range terrific drives from the bat and swift thrown balls. The outfielder's duty is not so arduous and the catches he has to make would not bruise the flesh of a delicate lady's palm. The ball when it reaches the outfielders has lost much of its momentum and can be handled better without than with gloves.” New York Tribune. That reads well, but doesn't work worth a cent in practice. If the writer of the above paragraph will hie himself to the outfield some day while the Giants or Brooklyns are at practice and endeavor to catch a long line hit or high fly he will quickly wish he had donned the gloves. If he catches the ball at all he will have a very distinct impression that about half a ton of lead dropped into his hands. It's ever so easy for the dilletanti to say how and why a thing should be done in theory, but the practical doing is a vast different thing. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
finances between Players League clubs
| Date | Wednesday, November 13, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [reporting the Players League meeting 11/6/1889] Some modifications were also made in the agreement, and the new documents is in most respects essentially different from the original agreement which contained Mr. Ward's plan of campaign. The $25,000 stock clause was stricken out, and the various clubs can issue stock to any amount they see fit. Each club is to be on its own basis so far as the stockholders are concerned. That is to say, under the original scheme the clubs were to be co-operative; all profits and losses were to be pooled, and the stronger clubs were thus to indirectly contribute to the support of the weaker clubs. This is now changed. The pooling is done on a basis by which a club that is making money is sure of a fair interest on its investment before any other club shall share in its profits. Each club stands on its own basis. After all expenses and a contribution of $2500 has been made to the prize fund, the first $10,000 of profit goes to the stockholders. The next $10,000 or any part thereof is to be put into a pool to be divided pro rata among the players of the League at the end of the season. A second pool will be made of all profits or any portion thereof exceeding $20,000. This second pool will be divided—half to the eight clubs and half to the players. It will thus be seen that no club will contribute to the support of another club, unless its profits exceed the sum of $20,000. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
first day to resign players and the Brotherhood
| Date | Sunday, October 20, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | There will be a hustling among the managers to get players’ names on contracts to-morrow and many a League Manager awaits this day, with ill concealed unrest as it will to a great extent force the League Brotherhood to show its hand. If the League players refuse to sign then the League managers will know that the fight is at hand and they will lose no time in signing young players to take the place of the deserters. The Philadelphia Item October 20, 1889 Not a single Brotherhood player signed League contract yesterday, and the war between the players and managers is now fairly started. In this city the Philadelphia players were served with notices that their services were claimed by the club and the latter was now ready to receive their signatures. The players in one or two instances expressed their contempt of the notice by slurring remarks and tearing them up. The Philadelphia Item October 22, 1889 |
| Source | Philadelphia Item |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
flaws in the Players League structure
| Date | Wednesday, November 27, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [editorial matter] The National Player's League is a fact, a substantial reality, and not even the most hide-bound partizans can now ignore its existence. It's a very important factor in base ball now; whether for good or evil, for but a season or for years, time alone can tell. It means to crush the National League if possible, or failing that to at least establish itself as a rival on equal footing, and its success or failure depends, next to the public, on itself. As has been repeatedly pointed out in these columns its foundation is defective. Its financial system is not likely to produce satisfactory results, and therefore not conducive to longevity, neither is its method of government calculated to tide it safely over the many complications and obstacles it may encounter. Its percentage system is fairer than that of the League, and the inducements held out for the best efforts of the players novel and effective, but the provisions for disaster are vitally defective and the method of division of profits not such as to insure the permanency of the League and the development of individual clubs or the game. It will also find its executive machinery too cumbersome and totally inadequate to an effective administration. But experience is a good teacher, and if but the honest, steadfast endeavor be there, the will to succeed, and more important of all, if public patronage be liberally accorded, everything can be altered to advantage and properly arranged in time. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
foul flags 2
| Date | Wednesday, August 14, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from J. F. Donnally's column] The Brooklyn Club was presented with two magnificent on Saturday last. They are of heavy crimson silk, with the word “Brooklyn” in raised gold embroidered letters, and are mounted on ebony poles and surmounted by eagles of heavy gold plate. The gift was a generous one, the donors being true and tried friends of base ball and “rooters” for the Brooklyn Club. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
foul tip double plays
| Date | Wednesday, May 8, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The abolishment of the foul tip helps not only batting, but also base-running. A runner can now make a break or play off base without that former constant fear of a sudden foul tip or double play. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
foul tips
| Date | Wednesday, May 22, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from Questions Answered] Foul tips do no longer count as outs when caught by the catcher while under the bat. They are out, however, when caught while the catcher is playing back, or when he is behind the ten-foot line. Foul flies are out the same as heretofore. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Frank Ringo commits suicide
| Date | Saturday, April 13, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Frank Ringo, the well-known base ball player, died at 9 o’clock Friday morning at his mother’s resident... his second attempt at suicide thus proving successful. Ringo began drinking again a few weeks ago, and he so incapacitated himself for work that he was given his release from the American Base Ball Club of this city [Kansas City]. This worked so on his mind that Thursday he took forty grains of morphine. |
| Source | Philadelphia Evening Item |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
free passes for players in New York versus in Boston
| Date | Monday, October 14, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from an interview of Ned Hanlon] There is an imperiousness about these Boston triumvirs that is much to be deplored. They don't seen to have time to condescend and notice courtesies due to visitors. It is quite different with the New York management. Nothing gives President Day or Manager Mutrie more pleasure than to grant visiting players favors. If any of us went into Mr. Day's office and said we had 20 friends whom we would like passes to see the game for, he would cheerfully remark: "All right; get them into the stand." |
| Source | Pittsburgh Dispatch |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
gamesmanship about switching in a new ball
| Date | Sunday, June 2, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | In the ninth inning in one of the New York games Glasscock tried to play one of his famous tricks, but was nipped in the bud; with two men out and Hines and Seer on the bases, the foul ball that was knocked over the fence had been returned. At first Umpire Lynch did not see it, but the Hoosier captain slyly walked over, and while pretending to scratch his leg, picked up the ball and put in his pocket. The ball then in play was knocked out of the lot, and a call for a new one was made. The New Yorks objected, but the old sphere could not be found. One of the crowd then informed Lynch where it was, and Glasscock was compelled to hand it over after a dispute. He then turned to the informer and said: “You came in here to see the game, not to interfere in it,” but the crowd laughed at him. |
| Source | Indianapolis Journal |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
gate receipt split and deadheads
| Date | Thursday, April 4, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The rule of the division of gate receipts of the American Association this season, by which the home club has to pay the visiting club for every person admitted to the grounds except a limited number of representatives of the press, makes deadhead pass books costly to the club management. Under the old rule of the guarantee plan it was different. Now, when the club gives a pass book it makes the party a present of just so many dollars. |
| Source | Brooklyn Eagle |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
gate receipt split and the classification rule; grandstand
| Date | Monday, June 24, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from an interview of Hewitt] He says there are five members of the League who favor the equal division of the gate receipts, and only one vote is needed to carry the point. If such a modification in the rules can be effect he will be willing to abolish the classification rule and make his own terms with his players. Mr. Hewitt says he believes the day is not far distant when there will be a general demand for an equal division of the receipts. He says the attendance at Capital Park so far this season, has exceeded that at Staten Island. In Philadelphia a club has to draw about 2,400 people to get more than the guarantee. The grand-stand there is the most profitable part of the Philadelphia enterprise. People there kick about paying 50 cents to go in at the gate, the yet majority of them put up an additional 25 cents to get into the grand stand. This of course operates to the disadvantage of the visiting clubs. All of these matters have to be considered in connection with the classification rule, in the interest of promoting meritorious players and giving them reasonable compensation for their services. Mr. Hewitt insists that the life and elevation of the game demands the continuance of the classification rule or a similar provision. |
| Source | Pittsburgh Dispatch |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
George Wright at the Players' League meeting
| Date | Wednesday, November 6, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [reporting on the PL meeting of 11/5/1889] There were some twenty-five or thirty players present, as well as several of the backers, including George Wright, Gen. Dixwell, and Al. Johnson. |
| Source | Philadelphia Item |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Giant's negotiating with Coogan for new grounds; Mets negotiated for the same ground
| Date | Wednesday, January 16, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from George Stackhouse's column] ...President John B. Day, of the Giants, had another interview with James J. Coogan, the representative of the Lynch estate, during the week. Mr. Coogan, by the way, is the late defeated labor candidate for Mayor. President Day's interview with Mr. Coogan lasted half an hour, and at its termination Mr. Day said that no arrangements had been arrived at. “In fact,” said Mr. Day, “I don't think we will take the grounds anyway.” It is whispered in certain circles that the property owners wanted in the neighborhood of $12,000 a year rental for the grounds. This sum brings to mind the efforts of certain American Association men to secure the same grounds about a year ago. At that time, however, the property owners only wanted $6,000 rental for the grounds. Then the Brooklyn Club had the Metropolitan franchise on its hands, and efforts were being made to re-establish the “Indians” in Manhattan Island. The base ball men who were engineering the deal could not get the long lease they wanted, and the poor old “Mets” were allowed to die. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Giants fans from Brooklyn
| Date | Tuesday, February 12, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | “It is an ill wind that blows nobody any good,” and the breaking up of the Polo Grounds will cut off the Brooklyn contingent of the New York Club’s patronage, much, of course, to the benefit of the home club. There will be very few likely to take the tedious and hot journey from Brooklyn to the Jersey City Heights grounds to see the New York team play this Summer, especially when better attraction will be afforded at home. |
| Source | Brooklyn Eagle |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Giants' alcohol policy
| Date | Sunday, July 21, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Manager Mutrie has this to say about his management of the New Yorks: “I lay no restrictions whatever on the drinking, the outgoing or the incoming of my team. If I were to attempt to control them in the matter of drink, I should be forced to the necessity of dogging them eternally and forcing them up back alleys into speak easies. My men will come into a saloon while I am there, step up to the bar, take a drink, and act as if I were in no way concerned in them. I find the plan an admirable one, as I have yet to reprimand a man for either drinking to excess or remaining out at night beyond reasonable hours. |
| Source | Indianapolis Journal |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Giants' alcohol policy 2
| Date | Sunday, July 21, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Manager Mutrie has this to say about his management of the New Yorks: “I lay no restrictions whatever on the drinking, the outgoing or the incoming of my team. If I were to attempt to control them in the matter of drink, I should be forced to the necessity of dogging them eternally and forcing them up back alleys into speak easies. My men will come into a saloon while I am there, step up to the bar, take a drink, and act as if I were in no way concerned in them. I find the plan an admirable one, as I have yet to reprimand a man for either drinking to excess or remaining out at night beyond reasonable hours. |
| Source | Indianapolis Journal |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Glasscock jumps to the NL
| Date | Wednesday, November 20, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from an interview of Jack Glasscock] “I'm looking out for myself. It is not true that I signed a league contract, nor have I signed a brotherhood contract, although I have one in my pocket.” In reply to a question he said he supposed there would be desertions from the brotherhood, adding: “You can't blame any player for going where he gets the most money.” St. Louis Republic November 20, 1889 It is now definitely known that Glasscock has bound himself to stand by President Brush, and there is every reason to believe that Denny, Boyle and Rusie have also attached their names to Indianapolis contracts. Glasscock, having concluded to remain in Indianapolis, will lose no time in securing for next season just as many of the old members of the club as possible. He left Indianapolis with instructions to visit all the members of the club and persuade them, if possible, to desert the brotherhood and stand by Indianapolis. His trip to Chicago was for the purposes of seeing Getzein and Buckley. It is whispered that during the six hours Glasscock was closeted with Mr. Brush something like a 2,000-mile trip was planned for the shrewd captain and manager. He is to visit every man on the reserve list of the Indianapolis club and use all his influence to get them to desert the brotherhood and remain with the Indianapolis club. In other words, he is to go out in the field and make a determined fight against the brotherhood. St. Louis Republic November 21, 1889 |
| Source | St. Louis Republic |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Glasscock makes his case
| Date | Friday, November 29, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [a letter to the sporting editor of the Pittsburgh Dispatch dated 11/26/1889] Having read the papers in reference to my alleged treachery to the Brotherhood, I would like to lay the facts in the case before the public, through your agency, to show that the blame does not rest on me entirely. On the evening of the 7th of last September the new York and Indianapolis players met at Nick Engel's, and held a meeting for the purpose of signing this agreement. It was read by Mr. Ward, and he asked us to sign it. Denny and I objected to sign any such article, as we understood it. It required me to play ball in Brooklyn for the same salary as I received at Indianapolis. I told them I would not sign any such agreement, and that caused a kick, Denny siding with me. Ward said he did not care whether any players signed it or not, he would, and followed it by signing. Buck Ewing and Johnson talked to me about it, and said the agreement was only a form to say you would go with them if they should make terms satisfactory. I signed on that understanding, but with the condition emphatically stated that I was to better my condition. I lately received a contract from Ward; it was not fully filled out. There was no party of the first part, and had I signed it that blank could have been filled out so as to make me play anywhere. Then, again, it was for a term of three years, and the consideration named was $3,000 per year, which I might get if the club had good luck, as the contract stated that the player's salary was to be paid out of the net earning. I think I would be very foolish to go with the Brotherhood for less money than I have been getting, and without any certainty of getting even that. I cannot sacrifice my prospects, and run the risk of injuring my family, just to accommodate Ward and others. I think I have taken the right step in this matter; if I am wrong I will be the loser. I defy Messrs. Al Johnson and Ewing to deny that Denny and I signed that agreement on any conditions other than I have stated. The objects of the Brotherhood, as I understand them, were to enable the players to better their condition financially, the abolition of the sales system and the doing away of classification. As the Brotherhood called for me to play ball anywhere for less than I got last year, and as I was practically classified by Mr. Ward, and held for a term of three years, wherein was I to better my condition, and wherein does the new system improve on the old one? Hoping I have not taken up too much of your time, and that you will help place in a right light before the public, I am respectfully yours, John W. Glasscock. |
| Source | Indianapolis Journal |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
grace period for playing off postponed games
| Date | Saturday, October 12, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | In the association constitution of 1887 article 65 provided that “postponed games might be played off at any time prior to the 17th day of October.” It appears that this clause, though not embodied in the revised constitution by specific date, has, by tacit consent, been continued in force ever since, and consequently, though the scheduled season, under the constitution, extends only to the 14th of October, the three days’ grace for the playing off of postponed games still exists. |
| Source | Brooklyn Eagle |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Harry Stevens a hustler
| Date | Wednesday, September 11, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from F. W. Arnold's column] Col. Harry Stevens, who has charge of the score cards at the ball park, seems to catch the eye of nearly all the managers who come here, and it's quite a compliment to the hustling young fellow to say that he has offers to sell cards in nearly every Association park in the country. He has also the privilege for the Ohio State Fair and the Tri-State Fair at Toledo, also tilting tournament to come off here this fall. Cincinnati and Cleveland have made him flattering offers. No class wishes Harry any better luck than the press boys, who are treated like princes by the Colonel. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Harry Wright on pitchers on the roster
| Date | Sunday, July 7, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | That veteran, Harry Wright, told me the other day that three good pitchers are plenty for a club to carry, and, he added, that he can always get along best when he has only the three, providing they are in form. |
| Source | Pittsburgh Dispatch |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Harry Wright on the American Association
| Date | Monday, July 1, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from an interview of Wright] There is always considerable distrust in that organization [the AA], as one club is invariably suspecting another making a move to join the League. This proves that the Association members themselves look to the League as a superior organization. However, there is plenty of room in the country for both, and if Brooklyn were to take Washington's place in the League there is no reason why Washington should not become an Association. City. There are plenty second-class cities that could be secured which would still keep the Association ahead of all the minor leagues. |
| Source | Pittsburgh Dispatch |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Harwood & Sons baseball manufacture
| Date | Sunday, June 2, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The base-ball of today, as produced at Natick... is made by hand. The laborers employed in the work are nearly all girls. The spherical core, of best rubber, is first carefully wrapped with a given amount of the most costly yarn. When the ball has thus grown to about two-thirds of the size it is to be a leather cover is stitched on with a needle and waxed thread. This cover has the effect of keeping the ball compact and in shape and of regulating its elasticity. Then more yarn is wound upon it, until it is found to turn the scales at precisely the right point. Finally the outer cover of horsehide is sewn on, and the ball, after being stamped and again weighed to make sure that it is just five ounces, is wrapped in tin foil, put into a box with five more like it, and declared ready for sale. The cover, as an examination of a base-ball will show you, is stamped out of the leather in but two curiously shaped pieces, which, sewn on the ball, together exactly cover it. This device was not invented until 1865. The cheaper grades of base-balls are made of poorer yarn and rubber scraps, the latter pressed into a pulp by powerful machinery. T he less expensive the ball the less yarn and more scraps will be sued in its manufacture until, when you get to the “Small Boy's Own,” price five cents, there is nothing to be found inside the flimsy cover but melted remnants of rubber shoes. |
| Source | Chicago Tribune |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Hatfield's delivery
| Date | Tuesday, May 14, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Hatfield has a very peculiar delivery. It is of the same style that characterizes that of Chamberlain of St. Louis and Weyhing of the Athletics. He brings his arm far back behind him, and after a kind of hang lets the ball fly. He has considerable speed and remarkably good command for one not a regular pitcher., quoting the Boston Herald |
| Source | New York Sun |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Hewitt disposes of his option on Capitol Park real estate; prospects of staying in the League
| Date | Wednesday, August 14, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from R. M. Larner's column] The leading topic in base ball circles here is the announcement that MR. Hewitt has disposed of the option he has held for several years on Capital Park. … The next question to be considered is:--Does Mr. Hewitt intend to remain in the League, and , if so, where does he propose to locate the new home for the Senatorial combination? He says he is in the base ball business to stay, and he shrewdly evades inquiries which he regards as to [sic] penetrating, leaving the questioner in a haze of doubt as to the young magnate's intentions for the future. The Sporting Life August 14, 1889 The facts of the sale of the Washington Club's grounds are stated as follows:-- “More than four years ago R. C. Hewitt secured an option from Wm. M. Galt and Thomas W. Smith, on square 678, the term of the agreement running for five years and the price to be paid by Mr. Hewitt at the conclusion of that term being fixed at fifty cents per square foot. Not it is said that President Walter Hewitt has sold the option to C. A Snow for the moderate price of seventy cents per square foot, and Mr. Snow can have possession as soon as he wants to after November. The amount of ground involved in the transfer is about 325,000 feet, and the profit, as can be readily calculated, will foot up somewhere in the vicinity of $65,000. The Sporting Life August 14, 1889 |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Hewitt rumored to be leaving baseball
| Date | Monday, October 14, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Walter Hewitt announced yesterday that he has had enough of the base ball business, and the material at Capital Park will be sold at auction next week. It is rumored that he has disposed of his League franchise to the Brooklyn Club, but it is hardly probable that such a deal has been consummated. The League magnates are loth to part company with Mr. Hewitt, not only on account of his general popularity and financial standing, but because it is desirable to have a club located at League headquarters. During the past year the Senatorial team has been a constant drain upon the Hewitt estate, and as executor of his father’s will he does not feel justified in drawing any further upon the family treasury for funds to invest in base ball. He realizes that he can not attend to his real estate business in conjunction with a base ball club, and as the latter yields him no profit it will have to go. |
| Source | Philadelphia Item |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
holdouts
| Date | Sunday, April 14, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from the St. Louis correspondent] The custom of holding out among the ball players has always been in vogue under a different title, but in the last two seasons it has grown wonderfully popular among the ball tossers. On every hand the ball player is on the “hold out,” whether he is worth 5 cents or $5,000 a season; whether he be a minor leaguer or a major leaguer. In 9 cases out of every 10 in which players hold out for accession to their demands the players sign for the same, or pretty near the same, salary they received the season prior. |
| Source | Philadelphia Item |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Horace Phillips insane
| Date | Wednesday, August 7, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The long siege of serious sickness last winter, coupled with the vexatious worries and harassments inevitable to the management of a losing ball team, has been too much for Manager Horace Phillips, and he has succumbed to the most dreadful of human afflictions—mental derangement. [The details of his delusions follow.] |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
hot water in the clubhouse
| Date | Wednesday, March 13, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | It is the intention of the management to repair the club-house for the use of the men as soon as it can be done. Natural gas is to be put in so that they can have both hot and cold water, and all other necessary arrangements will be made at an early date. |
| Source | Indianapolis Journal |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
how Kansas City signed Herman Long
| Date | Friday, April 26, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The report that the Chicago club has offered big money for the release of Long of the Kansas City club is probably based on events of last season. Long is a Chicago boy, who was developed as a professional last summer in Sam Morton's Maroons. His playing in that team was of the most brilliant character. Morton sold him to the Kansas City Western Association Club, managed by Menges, Spalding's agent at Kansas City. That Spalding expected to get him and thought he practically had him, is well known. It is claimed that in part payment of indebtedness of Menges to Spalding Long was to be turned over to Spalding. Manager Watkins of the Kansas City American Association team outwitted both Menges and Spalding. He waited until the night before Long became eligible to sign, watched him get on a train for Chicago, and boarded the train himself, engaging Long in conversation until after midnight. He then asked him how much he wanted for next season. Long stated his terms, as he says, thinking Watkins would not have any idea of accepting them. The next question was “How much advance money do you want?” Long mentioned the amount, and Watkins, who was prepared for the occasion, went into his pocket, and drew out a roll from which he counted out the money and secured his man. Watkins was accused of all kinds of trickery, even to getting Long drunk in order to obtain his signature, but persons on the inside vouch for the story as it is now related. |
| Source | Chicago Tribune |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
how the Players League was organized
| Date | Wednesday, November 6, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [an interview with Albert Johnson' “Last summer Ed Hanlon called on me and told how the League had broken faith with them so often, and said he, Ward, Pfeffer and Fogarty on their trip around the world had through of getting capital in each city to build the grounds for them, for which they would allow a fair percentage for their risk, the players to receive a portion of the profits of the thing that they themselves were the real cause of making, and to try, if such were possible, to liberate themselves from the tyrannical rule of the League. So I suggested that he introduce some of the Clevelands to me, for then I was only acquainted with the older members of the League. “The result was he brought Twitchell the next evening to see me, and after a long talk I agreed to lend all the assistance within my power to help them accomplish their aim. So, as each visiting club came, we held meeting after meeting until every League player had heard our views and had a chance to express himself and suggest whatever he thought would be for the best interests of such an organization. While at first sight one may be misled into thinking that co-operation is against good discipline, yet we think, our interests being identical, that with strict rules there is a sufficient guarantee we will increase the chances of better behavior on the part of the men, and as we intend that the first club shall receive $7000, the second $5000, the third $3000, the fourth $2000, the fifth $1500, the sixth $1000 and the seventh $500, offering no inducement to the last, there will be, even to the end of the season, something more than empty honor, as at present, to play for. “I know of but three League players to-day who have not pledged themselves to support this organization with every possible influence within their reach. They have all pledged themselves, and there yet remains only the question as to whether or not they will keep their word, for as certain as they do the capital awaits them in every city. |
| Source | The Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
how three Philadelphia players were induced to jump back to the NL
| Date | Thursday, November 21, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | “The signing of Clements, Gleason, and Schriver by the Philadelphia Club,” says the Inquirer of that city, “required considerable diplomacy, and it was only accomplished by the aid of a detective, who was acting as agent of the Philadelphia Club.” Gleason was the first one approached by the detective. He promised to sign a League contract provided he was assured that other Brotherhood players had deserted. This couldn't be done, but Gleason was asked whether he would sign if Clements would do likewise. His answer was in the affirmative. Gleason and the detective then went to Clements's' house, and, while the later was very stubborn a first, he finally consented to sign with the Philadelphia Club, provided he was given a salary of $3,000 and $1,000 advance. Gleason then said he would sign for $2,500 and $500 advance. The detective had only $800 ready money with him, and this he paid over to Clements, giving him at the same time an order for $200 on John I. Rogers. Gleason received his $500 in advance. Both players then placed their names to contracts. The same afternoon the detective visited Brooklyn, the home of Catcher Schriver. The contracts of Clements and Gleason were shown the Brooklynite, and he then consented to sign for $2,200, with $500 advance. Schriver was to have been given an answer the following morning. In the meantime Ben Hilt of the Brotherhood Club in Philadelphia arrived in New York and met Schriver at the Grand Central Hotel. Schriver was offered $2,500 to sign a Brotherhood contract. He told President Reach of the offer and said he would not sign for a less amount. Terms were at once agreed upon and Schriver received $500 in advance. |
| Source | New York Sun |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
how veterans' salaries decline; a classification system
| Date | Tuesday, January 22, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [quoting O. P. Caylor] There is something radically wrong with the present system of professional baseball. I wish others could see it as I do. There is no use denying the fact that dissatisfaction of no small or insignificant nature is slowly but surely creeping into the ranks of the best players in the profession. This is bound to bear fruit in time that will not be healthful to the game. I have touched upon the subject before, but it cannot be too often brought to the attention of the “magnates.” Something must be done or confusion will follow. The way things now stand, the longer a player stays with a club and the more faithful he has been in his work the less he is rewarded; whereas a new man coming in from another association reaps the reward of his own figures. I have in mind three players of a certain club whose releases could not be purchased for $8,000. If they were to be transferred to another club their combined salaries would be nearly $10,000 as salaries go. Yet these men are asked and expected to play for less than $6,500, while newcomers and ordinary outfielders far their inferior are receiving at least from $300 to $600 a year more, whereas they are not worth as much as either of the players named by $500. Take a club like the St. Louis club. There's Boyle—a boy who never got $2,000 a year in his life, I suppose. He is worth three Cudworths to the club, and two Fullers; yet I'm willing to stake my reputation as a prophet that both Fuller and Cudworth are to receive higher salaries by 30 per cent than Boyle. There is King, who practically won the club the championship last year. Suppose King belonged to Louisville and St. Louis wanted. If Louisville would release him St. Louis would willingly agree to pay him $3,500. When tony Mullane was a member of the Toledo club and the Cincinnatis wanted him they paid him $2,000 in spot cash advance and agreed to pay him $3,000 more during the season. Had he played he would have gotten it. Now he is lucky if he gets $2,000. My argument is not that Mullane was worth $5,000 or that Kind is worth $3,500; nor yet that the three players I have mentioned are worth $9,000. The point I make is against the inequality of the salaries paid as to new players and old and faithful men. It is hurting the reserve rule and I think the time for classification must come. As it now stands, the longer a player stays with a club the less he gains by it, while the opposite should be the case. And here comes in my old theory—a general classification. Let us make a commission on classification. Let it be composed of Nick Young, Wheeler C. Wikoff, Comiskey, Anson and A. G. Mills, John b. Sage or George Wright. Let these men meet next September and divide up every player in the League or Association into five classes. Make the salaries $3,000, $2,500, $2,000, $1,500 and $1,000. I believe there is just that difference among players. Let long service, good condition and good conduct go with qualifications of play in making up this class. The players worthy to be classed “A” are not more than two to a club in my opinion, and some clubs have none of that calibre. When you get down to about class C the players might average four to a club. Merit and demerit should have a large influence in putting a player into his class and keeping him there. |
| Source | Pittsburgh Dispatch |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Hub Collins 'interested' in Anheuser Busch
| Date | Thursday, May 30, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Hub Collins, who is interested in the Anheuser-Busch Brewing Company, of St. Louis, sports a handsome new gold and silver watch charm in the form of the company’s emblem–the A and the eagle. |
| Source | Brooklyn Eagle |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
implementation of the Brush plan
| Date | Wednesday, May 1, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [editorial matter] The classification system has been generally accepted by the League players, and in spite of the unfavorable comment upon it by certain star players the records at League headquarters will show that out of a list of over seventy men who have been classified by President Young not over five of that number have objected to the rating given them. Wise, O'Day, Farrar and many others have declared their intention to work themselves up to class A during the present season. If all of the graded League players go into the championship contest with that ambition and live up to it, this will be one of the greatest seasons in the history of the National League. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
implementing the Brush plan
| Date | Wednesday, January 16, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [editorial matter] There appears to be no disposition on the part of classified players to grumble at the rating given them, and Mr. Young feels encourages to hope that the new system is going to be carried out in the proper spirit. There would not have been such smooth sailing, however, if an ingenious way had not been found—by Mr. Day, we understand—of evading the rule so far as the highest salaried of the stars are concerned. With them placated there was no room left for serious opposition, as most of the smaller fry which came in for classification did not receive more than, or indeed as much as, the limit set by the League. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
inconvenience of getting to the Staten Island grounds
| Date | Wednesday, May 15, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from J. F. Donnolly's column] The truth about St. George is that unless a man means to take a day and a night off, there is little use of him going there. The brokers and office men who in year's past have simply skipped from their places of business into an elevated train, and were whirled uptown and almost dumped at the gates of the ball ground, and then after the game found themselves within easy distance of home and dinner, will not take kindly to Wyman's [sic: should be Wiman] resort on the bay. To reach there means a walk or a short ride to the ferry, then a half-hour's sail at the very least across the bay, and then a nine-inning battle with the mosquitoes. And then coming home—there's the rub, indeed. For nine-tenths of the patrons of the Giants it means a return journey in a overpacked ferry boat, a long ride up town home and dinner somewhere about eight o'clock. How many times a week will a man risk that? Then again, if a man misses a boat going to the game it means the loss of probably an inning or two. There is very little figuring required to get at the bottom of the present difficulty. The Sporting Life May 15, 1889 It is an ill wind that blows nobody good, and therefore the Brooklyn Club is benefited directly by the New Yorks' loss, as many New Yorkers prefer going to the Brooklyn games to taking the long ride to Staten Island. The Sporting Life May 15, 1889 |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
increased scoring under the new rules
| Date | Saturday, June 1, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Plenty of batting and big scores are generally the outcome of the changes in the base ball rules, which have also been the means of bringing to grief many a good pitcher. Four balls and three strikes, with foul tips not out, seems to be the toughest problem the pitchers have yet tackled. Nearly every club in the country is now carrying a number of men who under last year’s rules were first-class pitchers, but who so far this year have proved rank failures. |
| Source | ~ |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Indianapolis Club finances 3
| Date | Wednesday, February 6, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The cost and profits of running a League base ball team are prominently brought to light by the financial troubles of the Indianapolis Base Ball Club. Each stockholder and guarantor of that club on Jan. 26 received a very elaborate and exhaustive printed statement of the organization's affairs, covering the entire period since it was bought from St. Louis, in March 1887, up to the time of the surrender of the franchise on January 21. This reveals the following interesting state of affairs briefly told in figures, which we all now never or hardly ever lie: Receipts Sale of stock................................................ $17,295.00 Sale of grand stand, personal property and assignment of lease................... 1.,000.00 Games at home in 1887.............................. $32,496.96 Games at home in 1888............................... 32,791.05 Games away from home in 1887................. 10,809.51 Games away from home in 1888................ 17,628.77 Sale of season tickets from 1887.................. 5,862.50 Sale of season tickets from 1888.................. 7,235.79 Sale of players' releases................................ 2,740.00 All other miscellaneous sources................... 3,243.83 112,808.41 _________ Bank loans.................................................... $42,775.00 Guarantors' loans......................................... 9,250.00 Mortgage loan............................................... 1,000.00 53,025.00 _________ __________ Total $184,128.41 Disbursements League franchise and annual fees............... $ 15,000.00 Salaries for season of 1887........................ $28,745.94 Salaries for season of 1888........................ 33,898.26 Percentage and guarantees to visiting clubs in 1887.................................. 10,932.16 Percentage and guarantees to visiting clubs in 1888.................................. 12,081.68 Purchase players' release............................ 6,126.00 New grand stand in 1888............................ 4,546.08 Expenses to grounds, permanent improvements, in 1888................... 722.19 Ground expenses, rent, etc., in 1887.......... 4,740.99 Ground expenses, rent, etc., in 1888.......... 4,077.70 Equipments (uniforms, shoes, balls, bats, etc) 2,521.82 General expenses (railroads, hotels, printing, advertising, etc.)............................. 26,779.07 135,171.89 __________ Payment of bank loans................................ $32,775.00 Payment of mortgage loan............................ 1,000.00 33,775.00 __________ Total................................................... $183,946.89 The indebtedness at this time is as follows: Amount due directors, secured by first lien on franchise $10,000.00 Amount due guarantors.................................. 9,250.00 __________ Total.................................................... $19,250.00 |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Indianapolis Club ownership
| Date | Wednesday, February 6, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from A. G. Ovens' column] For the last week it has not been a question as to whether or not there would be a club here in 1889, but rather a question as to what syndicate would secure the prize. This seems about settled now... In the light of all the facts, there seems to be no reason to doubt that the combination of which President Brush is at the head will secure the franchise and players of the collapsed organization. In fact this has never been doubted by some, and among these may be found a few kickers, who charge that the whole scheme was pre-arranged and understood from the start. Personally, I do not believe this, and only a limited number do. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
indoor baseball 4
| Date | Wednesday, January 2, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The experiment of playing base ball indoors was given a trial on Christmas day, and the much-mooted question as to whether a game can be played under roof is settled once for all. The base ball world is indebted to Charley Mason for making the experiment which resulted in demonstrating one things, viz.: that the great game can be made a winter sport and played indoors. The game was played in the main building on the Pennsylvania State Fair grounds and was witnessed by about 2,000 people. The building is about 300 feet long, 125 feet wide and 50 feet high. The structure was never intended for base ball, and owing to the numerous posts scattered all over the floor to support the galleries and roof, it was with great difficulty that a diamond could be laid out and a match played. Despite these drawbacks the game was well played and everybody present enjoyed it very much. All that is necessary to make base ball a winter sport is to erect buildings about 300 x 200 in dimensions and the roof about 75 feet from the ground floor. Of course the structure on the inside wants to be free from supporting posts so as to give the fielders full sway in running after fly balls. In this game a deadened ball was used and the fielders experienced no difficulty in handling it. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
indoor baseball 5
| Date | Wednesday, February 13, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from the Boston correspondent] Winter base ball is something we don't have here. The Quakers put us in the shade in that line. But the sport in Philadelphia's big Fair building has been talked over down here, and now some of our local stars are planning to go into Harry Wright's town and try for themselves what indoor playing is like. Arthur Irwin hatched the scheme. He thought there would be a lot of fun and perhaps a few dollars for nine players who are wintering in this locality to go on to Philadelphia for a couple of games in the Fair building. When Arthur hits on any plan he don't lose any time in working it out, and he has rushed things this time. He has picked his team out and the men have all consented to go. The Sporting Life February 13, 1889 Mason's team added another game to its unbroken record of victories on Friday, by defeating Arthur Irwin's nine from Boston, by the one-sided score of 25 to 4. The Sporting Life February 20, 1889 |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
indoor baseball 6
| Date | Wednesday, November 20, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The game was played with a ball that resembled a large apple turnover and a bat that Roger Connor might use as a toothpick. |
| Source | Chicago Tribune |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
indoor baseball in Brooklyn
| Date | Wednesday, December 4, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from Chadwick's column] A new phase of base ball is to be introduced this winter as a recreated exercise feature for the members of the Thirteenth Regiment of Brooklyn, at their armory on Flatbush avenue. Last Saturday night a committee of several of the companies of the Regiment who have base ball players in their ranks met at the armory to perfect the scheme for a base ball tournament, to be held indoors, between nines from all the companies that desire to enter. It was agreed after some discussion that the novel game it is proposed to inaugurate should be governed by Spalding's base ball rules wherever these are applicable. Of course, rules like those which pertain to balls knocked over the fence could not obtain in an armory game. If a man can knock the ball into the gallery and get around the bases before it is fielded he will score a home run. A ball of the regulation size, covered with leather, will be used. Its composition, however, will be such that it will be considerably lighter and softer than the base ball used for outdoors. Bats as light as will serve the purpose will be used. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
indoor baseball in Brooklyn 2
| Date | Sunday, December 8, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [reporting plans of the Thirteenth Regiment] The rules of the American Association, modified to suit the confines of the armory, have been adopted. The playing floor occupies a space 198 feet long and 125 feet wide. Wire screens will be sued to protect the chandeliers and gun racks. Rubber mats will be placed in position to indicate the pitcher's plate and home base and the bases, instead of the regulation distance, 30 yards apart, will be confined to 24 yards. The playing ball will be made out of a lawn tennis ball, covered with yarn, and it will be of regulation size and appearance, but will weight one ounce less. According to the rules a ball striking the ceiling or any other portion of the building, which is caught by a fielder shall be declared a fair catch and the batsman is out. The umpire's decision is final and there cannot be any appeal. … The one obstacle to the success of the scheme seems to be in the fact that the games will be played by gaslight. Those directly interested, however, stated that a test game has already been played, and the only thing unfavorable discovered was the use of a regulation ball. New York Sun December 8, 1889 ...The players will wear canvas shoes with rubber soles,and no substitute player will be permitted to play in the place of another player without having the regulation shoes. … The ball to be sued is to be known as the “National Guard League Ball.” It will weight about two ounces less than the League or Association ball, and will be furnished by the Gymnasium Association. The last ball in play will become the property of the winning club. The bats will be regulation size, but will be made as light as possible. Championship games will consist of as many innings as can be played in one hour and thirty minutes. Whenever a fair ball is knocked into the left field gallery the player will be entitled to two bases. A ball batted into the gallery at the extreme end of the armory is to be credited as a home run. New York Sun December 15, 1889 |
| Source | New York Sun |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
indoor baseball in Brooklyn 3
| Date | Wednesday, December 25, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from J. F. Donnolly's column] Indoor base ball was successfully inaugurated here last night. The scene of the game was the Thirteenth Regiment Armory, where the soldier boys went at the sport in a manner that proved how much in earnest they were. There was a large audience, and the teams were uniformed. There was a conventional diamond marked out on the floor, and League playing rules governed the contest, with the one exception that the baes were twenty-five instead of thirty yards apart. Companies E and F were the contestants, and considering the defective light, which fault will be remedied, the playing was of a passable order. Owing to a time limit, only four innings were played. The Sporting Life December 25, 1889 [from Chadwick's column] John Ward and his talented wife visited the Thirteen Regiment armory last Saturday night to see the soldier nines play ball under trying circumstances of a very bad light. They were the cynosure of all eyes. I was too sick to be there that night, much to my regret. The veteran Ferguson received quite an ovation on the occasion. The armory is not fitted for ball playing as that of the Twenty-third Regiment is. The Sporting Life January 22, 1890 |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
intentional walk to set up the double play
| Date | Wednesday, October 23, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | When Hecker was in his prime as a pitcher he always took chances on the working of a double play when he was in a corner. Often when there were two men on bases and only one out, he gave the next batter his base on balls and then ran the risk of retiring the side on a double up; and he succeeded in disappointing many an opposing team by such head work. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
intentionally fouling the ball
| Date | Saturday, March 30, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from an article on the new rules by Chadwick] A new interpretation has been given the rule which gives a called strike on any ball which the batsman intentionally hits to foul ground. Last year every bunted ball which went foul was declared a called strike, now, under the new interpretation, the attempt to bat a ball foul intentionally must be plainly obvious, and it can only be so when repeatedly done, and not so when it is obvious that it is the reverse of a good batting point to play to hit the ball foul, as in the case in bunting a ball when a runner is on a base. |
| Source | Chicago Tribune |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
interpreting a force as applying when the runner is tagged
| Date | Wednesday, November 6, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from Chadwick's column] A correspondent writing to me from Piqua, Ohio, requests me to answer the following question. He says: “Two men are out and A, B, and C are on first, second and third, respectively. D., who is at bat, hits to the short stop, E., who throws to third baseman, F., to force B. Instead of touching his base, F. attempts to touch B., who turns back towards second. Before B. was touched out, A. had crossed the plate with what proved to be the winning run. The umpire ordered the run to be scored, and it created much discussion. In your opinion, does the run count?” The rule governing the play—rule 36—reads:-- “If the third man is forced out, or is put out before reaching first base, a run shall not count.” The player in question was unquestionably put out through being forced to run to third; the mere fact that he was touched off the base does not change the fact that he was forced. The decision was illegal; the run did not count. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
interpreting foul bunts
| Date | Wednesday, March 13, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [reporting on a meeting of the AA officials and umpires] The official definition of the rule, which refers to “an obvious attempt to hit a ball foul,” is that the batsman can only be considered as hitting the ball foul intentionally when such intention is apparent to the umpire. When the game is in such a position as to render the hitting a ball foul as a detriment to the batting side—as in the case of a bunted ball when a runner is on a base—in such case the umpire cannot legally call the bunted ball a strike as was wrongfully done, time and again, last year. In fact to call a strike on a ball hit foul at any time can only be done when the intention to do so is obvious, that is, unmistakeable. The Sporting Life March 13, 1889 [from Chadwick's column] In the case of all bunted balls, when runners are on bases no strike can be called on a ball bunted foul, unless such foul hits are repeatedly made and plainly made for the purpose of hitting them foul. Last year all balls bunted foul after two strikes were called when called a third strike. This is no longer the rule. The Sporting Life March 20, 1889 |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
interpreting the substitute player rule
| Date | Sunday, July 14, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | To-day [7/13] President Wikoff placed an official construction upon the rule regarding the time an extra player may be substituted. He says: “Any team desiring to put in an extra player must notify the umpire of their intention at the close of even innings and before the beginning of a succeeding inning.” St. |
| Source | St. Louis Republic |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
interpreting the substitute player rule 2
| Date | Wednesday, July 24, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [a circular from Wikoff] To managers, captains and umpires—The question of the construction of Rule 28, Section 2, of the joint playing rules, having been raised by Umpire Robert Ferguson, and in order that said rule may be understood alike by all, the following construction is placed on the same.-- “In order to take a player out of a game the captain must notify the umpire of his intention to put in the substitute at the close of an even inning and before the succeeding inning is begun. An 'even inning' is held to be a turn both at the bat and in the field by each team. If no notice is given the umpire of intention to make a change at the end of an even inning, before the succeeding inning is begun, then the change shall not be made during that inning. Those interested will take notice and be governed accordingly. |
| Source | The Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
it ain't over till it's over
| Date | Friday, May 24, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [Chicago vs. New York 5/23/1889] The truth of the old saying that a ball game is not ended until the last man is out was fully shown in the second game between the Chicago and New York Clubs at Staten Island yesterday. |
| Source | New York Sun |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Jack Rowe on the Players' League
| Date | Wednesday, November 6, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [reporting on the PL meeting of 11/5/1889] Jack Rowe of Pittsburgh was asked if it was the Brotherhood movement that culminated yesterday that induced White and himself to go to Pittsburgh when they did and play the season out. “Yes, that was it,” he said. “We got a long letter from John Ward, and, upon consideration, determined to go to Pittsburgh. After I had been there a few days a reporter asked me how I liked the place. I think I told him I liked it as well as Oshkosh, Kalamazoo, or some place of that sort. We were forced to play against our will there, and told Nimick so. We wanted to get a release, but all the satisfaction we could get from Stearns of Detroit was “Play in Pittsburgh or get off the earth.” The League has brought this action on itself. Imagine a case like our own. We were not permitted, on account of a rule distorted to suit the purposes of the magnates, to act like free men and play where we chose. I feel like a manumitted slave. |
| Source | Philadelphia Item |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
James Hart Spalding's private secretary
| Date | Wednesday, August 14, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Manager Jas. Hart, of Boston, on Friday signed a contract with A. G. Spalding to act as his private secretary, at $3000 per annum. The contract goes into effect Nov. 5. Spalding wanted Hart last spring, but consented to wait to give Boston a chance to profit by Hart's experience. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
James O'Rourke on League bad faith
| Date | Wednesday, October 9, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [a letter from James O'Rourke][after recounting the cases of Bastian and Boyle suspended on weak pretenses] Still we hear the same old discordant cry year after year go up from these happy magnates of the League:--Our interests are identical with the players; yes, in common one with the other. We have kept faith with the players (excepting where it was to our disadvantage), and we love the player most affectionately when the player has been taught by experience to be extremely incredulous and cautious of you. Gentlemen you must prove your sincerity to the ball player, not by your (false) declarations of love, but by your acts, as it is by your acts the players know you, and by your acts they will judge you. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Jerry Denny withdraws from the Brotherhood; working a day job for Brush
| Date | Saturday, November 9, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [quoting Denny] I no longer have any interest in the Brotherhood, and I have written to Glasscock to that effect. … I am not inclined to discard a sure thing for a wild-cat experiment. I have a wife and children to support, and that fact justified me in considering seriously my own interests before giving assistance to a scheme that cannot succeed. I will stand by Mr. Brush and play in Indianapolis. He has treated me well, and to do anything antagonistic to his interests, even if my own were of no consideration, would be an act of ingratitude. I am satisfied to remain in Indianapolis and to play with her club. Indianapolis Journal November 9, 1889 Jerry Denny, the great third baseman, who is now clerking in President Brush's clothing store, will not join the brotherhood. He says, “It appears plainly evident to me that it is the intention of the promoters of the brotherhood league to feather their own nests and leave the rest of us, who have always suffered, in the same old condition. What do I know about this secret meeting in New York except what I see in the newspapers? How am I informed as to what benefit it proposes to bring me? Base ball playing is my business, and I expect to make money out of it and for that reason I don't want to jump into an airy project, at the sacrifice of what I now have. In other words I don't propose to have a contract to play in Pittsburg or some such place, at a stipulated sum, thrust under my nose, form to sign and then whistle for my pay. I propose to stay in Indianapolis, where I have received the best treatment and have every reason to expect its continuance. As I understand the scheme, I am not relieved of any of the burdens that are now placed on me, but I am to be classified by some of those who have always received $4,000 to $5,000 a season at no doubt the same old figure. I think all ball players should be given the advantage of transfers, and entitled to a portion of the purchase money, and that they should be allowed to make as much money as they can.” St. Louis Republic November 10, 1889 |
| Source | Indianapolis Journal |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Jimmy Williams out of baseball
| Date | Wednesday, January 16, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Jimmy Williams is rid of his Cleveland stock and out of base ball for good. After all the many years of his connection with the game he quits loser on the whole. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
John Corkhill a real estate investor; player finances, salary
| Date | Monday, January 21, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | John [Corkhill] is at this time busy putting up three cottages in Camden, built on his savings of the past three years. |
| Source | Brooklyn Eagle |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Justus Thorner reminiscences about the founding of the AA; the telegram story
| Date | Saturday, November 9, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from an interview of Justus Thorner] “Let me tell you how the American Association was formed by a few of us in Pittsburg, and then you'll see that, however small the beginning may be, we never can tell what the end may be. Well, Horace Phillips, that remarkable hustler, conceived the idea to start up an organization in rivalry to the National League, and he wrote me time and time again about the matter. Finally we called a meeting at Washington, and all who were present in the room at meeting time was Horace and myself and a little boy who shined my shoes. “We didn't lose heart, but packed up and left. We called another meeting at the St. Clair Hotel, Pittsburg, and I brought on with me. O. P. Caylor, from Cincinnati, and another reporter named Wright. These two, Mr. Phillips and myself were all the people who showed up then and it really looked blue. Phillips and I took a stroll into Diamond street and there learned that a baseball crank named Al. Pratt was working in one of the mills, and we found him. He told us of Denny McKnight and he also was secured. We then held our meeting, and as a starter I suggested myself as Chairman and Mr. Caylor. We were so few that I was compelled to ask the meeting to vote as I suggested. “then,” Mr. Thorner went on to say, “we were organized for all practical purposes, and I suggested that we have baseball representatives at Louisville, Washington, Philadelphia, New York and St. Louis to send me their proxy as to where the next meeting should be held. “We led everybody wired to believe that he was the only one absent from the meeting, and that caused an immediate reply. Among others we wired Messrs. J. B. Day, James Mutrie and Jerry Scanlon. As a result we had a rousing meeting the next time. I remember that a Mr. Appleton represented Mr. Day, and the former held aloof at the meeting, until he saw that there was plenty of money behind the scheme. However, we soon had plenty of money, and the whole of America knows now that the Association started amid tremendous opposition, but is now living, strong, and well. |
| Source | Pittsburgh Dispatch |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
kangaroo court
| Date | Tuesday, February 5, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | There were cliques, rings and back-cappers in the New York club until Day called the players into the club room on one occasion and said: “We will get along better if we have open and mutual daily discussions. I want every one to speak out. I am Chairman. Let me hear from you on O'Rourke's play in the seventh inning yesterday.” This brought O'Rourke to his feet flushed in the face, and he said: “What was the matter with Ward's blunder in the fifth?” and so it went on, till every man had picked out flaws in some one else. Day listened quietly until all had finished, and when he said: “Here is the whole trou8ble. We see the bad plays of each other, but fail to see our own. This has been a good meeting. Come to-morrow at the same time.” The meetings were continued and there was less back-biting each day as they saw how childish their fault-finding was and it ceased altogether. Then they began the team work which gave the club the pennant. |
| Source | Pittsburgh Dispatch |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
kangaroo court?
| Date | Sunday, April 28, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | It has now come to that point where something must be done [with regard to the Brooklyns]. Why not try the same plan that the New York team did last season? Each man that did not play was considered one of a committee to criticise the work of the team on the field, not in order to find fault, but merely in a friendly way. The shortcomings of the men could then be talked over before the next game, and an effort could then be made to improve the play. This could be tried, and in case it was not a success it could do no harm. |
| Source | New York Sun |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Kansas City drops out of the AA
| Date | Wednesday, November 20, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [reporting the AA meeting of 11/13-15/1889] On Friday the six remaining clubs of the Association met again at the hotel. J. J. O'Neill, of St. Louis, acted as chairman, and L. C. Parsons, of Louisville, as secretary. The first business was in the nature of a surprise to the Association. It consisted of the resignation of the Kansas City Club from membership, which was presented by L. C. Krauthoff. The Kansas City men then withdrew, and the Association proceeded to elect its officials for 1890... … Immediately after tendering their resignation, Messrs. Krauthoff and Speas, of the Kansas City Club, held a consultation with Manager Sam Morton, of the Minneapolis Club, and sent to the secretary of the Western Association a telegraphic application for admission of that body to fill the vacancy caused by the withdrawal of the St. Joseph Club. Later in the day Messrs. Krauthoff and Morton declared that as a result of a telegraphic vote Kansas City had been admitted to membership in the Western Association. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Keefe and Becannon
| Date | Saturday, March 9, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The old Metropolitan Base-Ball Club of this city [New York] is now on a good way towards reorganization. The meeting was held this afternoon in the office of Keefe & Becannon, No. 149 Broadway, and the old players were well represented... |
| Source | Chicago Tribune |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Keefe holds out
| Date | Thursday, April 18, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Keefe is indifferent about playing ball this season, as he wants to build up his sporting goods business, and he is, therefore, quite independent as to the salary question. He thinks it worth $5,000 to neglect his business to play ball and, therefore, demands that salary from New York. Day won’t give over $4,000 and so Keefe will not sign. They may compromise at $4,500, the salary paid by Boston to Radbourne in 1887. |
| Source | Brooklyn Eagle |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Keefe on the Brotherhood's demands
| Date | Wednesday, October 16, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Tim Keefe was in town [Boston] to-day [10/12] on his way to New York. Before he got away he was corralled by a reporter and made to divulge. Said he: “We want the abolition of the classification of the players and we want the sale of players entirely done away with. It is not true that we want a share of the purchase money. |
| Source | The Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Keefe signs without Brush plan classification
| Date | Sunday, May 19, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Nearly a month and a half of the base ball season has gone by, and, for about five months' work, Tim Keefe will receive $4,500, which is $500 less than he originally held out for. John B. Day said, before knuckling down to Keefe: “Time wanted $5,000 for the season, then he was willing to compromise and sign for $4,500. |
| Source | The Philadelphia Item |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Keefe wins his hold out
| Date | Sunday, May 12, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The signing of Keefe was a necessity on the part of the New York Club. They held out as long as they could, almost too long, before they gave in. Had the other pitchers of the club remained in condition it is quite likely that Keefe would not have been signed yet. The giving out of the young pitchers settled the question, and President Day was not long in making up his mind in saying so. He found that one Keefe was better than two colts who were not in condition one-half the time. The knowing ones knew from the start that it was only a question of time before the New York Club would sign Keefe. |
| Source | New York Sun |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Keefe's wealth; investment; setting up sporting goods store
| Date | Tuesday, January 15, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The fact that Tim Keefe has not yet signed to pitch for the Giants next season has caused considerable talk of late, although the opinion prevails that he will be on hand when needed. At present he is busy establishing a sporting goods emporium in this city [New York], and is naturally independent. Another cause for this independence, it is said is the sudden increase in value of some property owned by Tim at Cambridge, Mass. A few years ago, so the story runs, Keefe invested in a plot of land near the grounds of Harvard College, paying for it a small price. Recently the town officials of Cambridge decided to erect a public library, and selected as a site for it the ground owned by Tim. The latter heard of these plans, and when offered a fair price for the property refused the offer. He has refused several others since, the last being $30,000. Tim, it is said, holds off for $50,000, and is confident of obtaining that sum. He has also, it is said, a comfortable bank account, and looks hopefully to the time when he can put the name of Timothy J. Keefe to a check for $100,000. |
| Source | Pittsburgh Dispatch |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Kelly cutting corners
| Date | Wednesday, July 3, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [Boston vs. Chicago 7/2/1889] Kelly cut third fully six feet yesterday in the third innings on Brouthers' drive to right, but Lynch did not see it and would not allow it when Dwyer ran to the plate, took the ball from Farrell, and tossed it to Burns. This is an old trick of Kell's. Many is the time he has worked it successfully for Chicago. |
| Source | Chicago Tribune |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
keys to the press box
| Date | Sunday, February 24, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The Cincinnati club management will not permit anybody other than active members of the press to occupy the press quarters at the Cincinnati park the coming season. The quarters will be put under lock, and the base ball reporters will be furnished keys. They will also be requested not to take outsiders to the box with them. St. Louis Republic February 24, 1889 musings on the legal existence of the League [writing in reference to the Umpire Decker case] In my way of thinking the League resembles one of the old-fashioned trades unions. These organizations had laws or understandings among themselves. They would agree one with another to carry out certain rules or requirements. Those who broke faith could in many cases not be made responsible to law, but the unions could blacklist them; that is, to a very great extent deprive them of their work. Of course this deprivation had to be skillfully managed. It could be done as follows: A man blacklisted by the unions would secure work at a union concern but the workmen there would refuse to work if he was continued on the premises. There is no law to make a man work where he does not desire, and sooner than have trouble the employers would wash their hands of the non-union men. The National Baseball League is identical to the union above quoted. Those who compose it, whatever it may be, have an understanding one with another that such and such rules and regulations will be carried out. Whoever violates these rules will be blacklisted, be he player or anybody else. The blacklist simply means that those who remain in harmony with the League and its rules refuse to work, that is play, with the blacklisted man or men. Certainly there is no civil law to force one club to play with another, or compel one man to play with or against another. This, then, is just how the League stands to-day. Its officials admit that many things connected with it which would not stand the test of law, but it is only fair to add that if it was carried on in strict accordance with civil law it would not be the League. However, it is to be hoped that before long we will learn definitely what the League is, both for legal and practical purposes. Pittsburgh Dispatch February 24, 1889 |
| Source | St. Louis Republic |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
knocking the ball out of the baseman's hand
| Date | Wednesday, September 11, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from R. M. Larner's column] [The Cleveland Club] were unsuccessful in their efforts to trick the Senators while here, and on one occasion Hoy, our deaf and dumb centre fielder, outwitted Tebeau, McKean, Stricker and McAleer at their own game. They mute had reached second base on a passed ball. The ball was thrown down to second, and McKean, McAleer and Stricker handled the ball alternately until Stricker got hold of it and crept up behind Hoy, hoping that the latter would step off the base. The mute was onto the little game, and when Stricker stood beside him he smacked the hand that hld the ball, and the dogskin rolled several feet away. Before Stricker realized what had happened Hoy was safe on third base. Captain Faatz made a vigorous kick, but Umpire Knight held that there was no rule to cover such a play. It was simply a case of dog eat dog. Tebau captured the ball during the dispute and concealed it under his arm with the intention of getting even with the mute. The latter was wide awake as usual, and deliberately squatted down on the base and would not move until he saw the ball returned to Gruber, who was pitching. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
ladies admitted free in Louisville
| Date | Friday, April 19, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | President Davidson has decided that ladies shall witness the games free of charge this season. This was settled yesterday, and, beginning with this afternoon, each lady accompanied by a gentleman was admitted to the grounds without price. Mr. Davidson recognizes that the presence of the ladies is very essential, and there are many fair enthusiasts in the city who take a deep interest in the national game. The management will not admit ladies who come unattended. |
| Source | New York Sun |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
League clubs signing minor leaguers
| Date | Thursday, October 10, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | It is a well-known fact that every League club is hustling for minor league players to take the places of their old men in case the Brotherhood plans are carried out. An agent of the Philadelphia Club started West last evening after a first baseman and two good pitchers. |
| Source | Philadelphia Item |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
League signing minor leaguers, buying minor league clubs to counter the Players League
| Date | Wednesday, October 2, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | There is no doubt that steps are being taken by the League to fill up its clubs from the minor leagues when the Brotherhood men go out. But the move is being made as a bluff to meet a bluff. This is a mistake. The players' move is past the bluff stage, and when met must be met by a lasting and business arrangement. No move by the League clubs will be likely to turn the Brotherhood's mission aside. The Sporting Life October 2, 1889 At a secret meeting of the president and directors of the Omaha Base Ball Association to-day [9/24] it was decided to accept the proposition of Messrs. Soden, Conant and Billings, of Boston, for the sale of the entire Omaha team to that city. The probable result will be that Omaha will have no team in the field next year. Whether she does or not will depend on the concession to be obtained in the way of new grounds, cable privileges, etc. For a handsome sum, running up into the thousands Boston virtually agrees to take the entire team, but after selecting as many of them as they deem of use to them out of the thirteen now on Omaha's roster, the balance are to remain the property of the Omaha Club to form a nucleus of a team for next year, if the management here [Omaha] sees proper to continue the venture. Further, out of the thirteen men constituting the Omaha Club the Boston parties agree to hold out eight, leaving Omaha a balance of five without cost. At the close of the Western Association championship season at Milwaukee last Sunday, the proposition further specifies, Manager Selee is to take the entire team to the Hub, and the selections will then be made after the boys have been sized up on the field. The price offered by Conant & Co. could not be ascertained, but it is of such tempting dimensions that the Omaha contingent deemed it foolhardy to ignore it... The Sporting Life October 2, 1889 Manager Morton, of the Minneapolis Club, has sold Elmer Forster and Martin Duke, the pitcher, to A. G. Spalding, for the Chicago League team, the price paid being $4000. Right fielder Carroll, of St. Paul, has been sold to Minneapolis for $1000. The Sporting Life October 9, 1889 |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
League stratagems
| Date | Wednesday, November 20, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [editorial matter] ...the repeal of the classification law and the radical modification of the sale system, complete stultification though it was, is designed to make doubly effective future efforts to divide the forces of the Brotherhood, inasmuch as it removes all restrictions upon the clubs and opens the door wide for the return of even the highest priced deserters. … …in the repeal of the classification rule and the modification of the sales system, which is equivalent to confession on the part of the League that the strong protests of the players against both laws were right; its failure to heed these remonstrances and give the players a hearing was a mistake and that therefore the result was justifiable. The Brotherhood can now point to the record and show that it kicked unavailingly against a system of sales which was held to be unavoidable, yet the League, under the plea of necessity, could promptly find a way out; that they vainly protested against the classification rule, which was held to be indispensable to the perpetuation of the League, and yet the League could obviate the necessity for such a rule by simply raising percentage and compelling the richer clubs to support the weaker clubs, thus showing conclusively that classification and salary limit, as practiced heretofore, were nothing more than a tax upon the players for the support of clubs which could have been, and will in future be, partially supported by the proper parties—the richer clubs, which have heretofore bagged the major portion of the profits, and compelled less fortunate clubs to even up on the salaries of their players. In short the action of the League in this legislation will be held by the Brotherhood as a confession that the League's past policy was all wrong, and that had the players' demands for a conference and a revision or modification of methods been heeded by the stiff-necked League, and that done in compliance with their wishes which has now been done as a matter of policy, the present revolt and consequent temporary disorganization could have been easily avoided. By its legislation last week the League furnished splendid ammunition for the Brotherhood, which the latter will surely use to good advantage. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
League violation of the Brotherhood contract
| Date | Wednesday, July 17, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from W. I. Harris's column]”It has been asserted, Mr. Ward, that there has been no violation of the letter of the agreement made by the League with the Brotherhood when it accepted the contract prepared by the Brotherhood and amended by the League. Is that a fact?” “No, it is not. There have been instances where it was not observed.” “Well, for instance?” “Why, there is the case of Sutcliffe of the Cleveland Club. Sutcliffe was reserved and transferred without his consent, and was then classified at a figure less than that contained in paragraph twenty of the 1888 contract, when in the contract it especially provides that the salary of Sutcliffe, if he was reserved, should not be less than the amount named in paragraph 20. This was not only a violation of the spirit, but of the very letter of the agreement with him. Sutcliffe assented, of course, but he did not assent willingly. He did so because there was nothing else for him to do. He had to assent or quit ball playing. |
| Source | The Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
legal opinions of the League contract
| Date | Wednesday, December 25, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from an interview of John M. Vanderslice] When we submitted a League contract to a certain leading lawyer at the Philadelphia bar, and explained matters to him, he snapped his fingers and said it was not worth the paper it was printed on. “Why,” said he, “where is the equivalent? Where is the consideration? This contract is all one-sided. The League claims the services of a player for an indefinite period. Can that player hold the League to that contract for an indefinite period also? No; it claims the right to discharge him on ten days' notice. On the one side the contract runs on forever, while on the other side it can be terminated on ten days' notice. Do you suppose any court will ever uphold such a contract? Never!” The Sporting Life December 25, 1889 [from an opinion by attorney David M. Newberger, given at Ward's request] The first clause, which refers to the right to reserve, is the most important of the two. If it can be said to be valid and binding the party of the second part may justly be termed to be in the absolute power and under the absolute control of the party of the first part; for under the clause the right to reserve if such exists at all, may be exercised at any time and under any circumstances, leaving the party of the second part to comply with the whim of the party of the first part in any and every particular, and shackling him to the disposition and power of the part of the first part, until such time as the party of the first part (if ever) exercise his so-called extraordinary right of privilege. The part of the second part, in the interim within the grasp of the other party, is debarred not only from securing employment, but even from obtaining his livelihood elsewhere. And if by the terms the ensuing season is about to arrive or has actually commenced, this extraordinary right or privilege has not bee exercised, the same state of affairs and condition of the party of the second part continues, and his opportunities to obtain employment in the business wherein he has been engaged, and has undoubtedly devoted many years to perfect himself, are lost. This would be the result of the clause under consideration if it could be successfully contended that the clause is valid, which contention, in my opinion, with the result on the enforcement of the clause, as stated, would be error. The clause is invalid and not binding (and I think it would not be so held), for the reason that a literal performance of it, if not impossible, would work a great injury and hardship to the party of the second part, and courts would refuse its enforcement. The Sporting Life December 25, 1889 [from George F. Duyster, attorney for John B. Day] The system has been to have contracts for one year ahead, in order that the several clubs might depend on at least fourteen players the following year. Our position, therefore, is that we have a contract with them for the season of 1890, after which they are free to do as they please. It would also be well to remember that a majority of these Brotherhood players have gained their reputations and acquired their skill while drawing very large salaries in the employ of the clubs which they are now using every effort to damage. With the exercise of their option the club holds a player for two years at the outside, and how many hundreds of thousands of good and reputable men would consider a hardship to contract to give their services for two years in a business which is neither particularly hard or disagreeable, which has in it the element of popularity, and which would give the men six months of the year to do as they please, and salaries ranging from $2500 to $5000 a year? The question of hardship has nothing to do with the case. I never knew of an instance where the court would entertain such a plea in cases of a similar kind. The Sporting Life December 25, 1889 [from an interview of “ex-Judge Howland, counsel for Ward] ...what does the word “reserve” mean in this particular? Why, absolutely nothing. In the first place, the player contracts to play for seven months, and no longer. That breaks all the effects of the reserve clause. Then again, the word “reserve” was not placed in the contracts so that an option could be had on a player's services for more than a year, and it was so explained by the magnates to the players at the time of signing. Is it a hardship to be held for two years? It is a very great hardship, indeed, if you sign to do one thing and you are compelled to do another, just as the League magnates want the players to do. It's a big mistake to say that the reserve clause means the holding of a player for two years. It is a well known fact that there have been players held for a longer time, and not asked to sign a contract, either. I express no fears of the result of any application made to the court for an injunction after it is in full possession of the facts. The Sporting Life December 25, 1889 |
| Source | The Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
loaning out players
| Date | Wednesday, July 17, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The Cleveland Club is also in the farming-out business, having loaned catcher Lohbeck to Milwaukee for the season. The Cleveland Club evidently believes in “doing as the Romans do when in Rome. |
| Source | The Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Louisville Club on strike; Davidson loses it
| Date | Wednesday, June 19, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | There is a crisis in the affairs of the Louisville Club. If Manager Davidson is not an insane man his actions would indicate it. He fined Shannon, Cook and Raymond $25 each for errors made in Thursday's game. Each one of these men played an earnest game to win. In addition, Davidson gave the team notice that if they did not win Friday's game every man of them would receive a find of $25 more. Very naturally the men protested, but owing to the excited talk and frantic actions of Davidson, did it in a neat and novel manner, and in such a way that he could not distinguish the order of signing the document, which was the regular form of a sailor's “round robin,” signed by the entire team of ten men. This mild and respectful protest only served to agitate Davidson all the more, and he became furious, threatening to fine each player $100. This brought matters to a climax, and the players absolutely are on a strike. In the game started yesterday only six Louisville players appeared, and Gaul, Fisher and John Traffley, three Baltimore semi-professionals, played the outfield for Louisville until rain ended the farce at the close of the second inning. Davidson left town with the avowed intention of attending the Association meeting in New York. The Louisville players telegraphed President Wikoff for advice, but had not received a reply last night [6/14] … [a supplement later the same day] The strike of the Louisville players continues. Two games are to be played this afternoon, and one of them is now in progress with but six of the Louisville players, viz:--Wolf, Weaver, Stratton, Gleason, Vaughn and Ramsey. Three amateurs make up the nine. President Wikoff and Mr. Waltz were to-day closeted with the strikers, but they refused to be moved from the stand which they have taken unless the fines already imposed are remitted and the threats withdrawn. Manager Davidson refuses to do either. President Wikoff says he is powerless to do more than advise, and leaves for his home in Columbus to-morrow. The Sporting Life June 19, 1889 [reporting the AA special meeting of 6/14/1889] The purpose for which the meeting was called was well known, to wit: to ascertain the exact status of the Louisville Club, a member of the Association, the poor work of the club, and its straitened financial condition warranting the other clubs in taking steps to protect their mutual interests. … ...Mr. Davidson, on behalf of the Louisville Club, had made some propositions to the Association, admitting he was in trouble, which were not favorably entertained, and that, therefore, he was placed in a position where he must carry out his games as scheduled or suffer the consequences. … It appears that Mr. Davidson owns, on behalf of himself and others, whom he represents, merely a controlling interest of the Louisville Club stock, and he being desirous of holding on to his stock urged the Association, while admitting to his inability perhaps to pull through to protect him financially to enable him to meet his obligations. This he stated openly to all with whom he talked at the hotel. The other clubs of the Association, it leaked out, were willing to advance a liberal amount of money, enough to work out the season, providing some security was given or good faith was shown in the matter of carrying out all obligations. No positive assurance could be given, and the only alternative left was to insist on the Louisville Club fulfilling its obligations. It was reported subsequently that Mr. Davidson was asked to name a figure at which he would dispose of the controlling interest in the club to the Association, the latter to accept the same as an option, and to make efforts to sell the club to Louisville parties who had expressed a willingness to purchase, run the club, and spend money to put new life and vigor into the organization. No terms could be agreed upon and Mr. Davidson determined that he could better protect his interests after he reached home. The desire to keep Louisville a member of the Association was unanimous, and such it will remain if thre are any enterprising men in that city to assume a reasonable risk. No player will be released or sold until ample time has been given for property national for sale of the club, and in the event of the club not fulfilling all its obligations its disbandment naturally follows, and the players revert to the Association. If this emergency arises, it is safe to assume from newspaper reports and telegrams sent to a number of the prominent men in the Association little difficulty will be experienced in placing the club in responsible hands and on a substantial basis. The Sporting Life June 19, 1889 [from the Louisville correspondent] If Manager Charley Byrne and his Brooklyn team were to appear on the Louisville grounds this afternoon they would receive a royal welcome. Mr. Bryne has made himself a perpetual favorite in Louisville by the emphatic manner in which he informed Mr. Davidson that he could not sell off the team piece-meal. That he would do so was the result eared by all enthusiasts here, notwithstanding his frequent assertions to the contrary. The Sporting Life June 26, 1889 |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Louisville Club ownership
| Date | Tuesday, May 21, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | ...President Davidson had again reconsidered his intention not to sell, and was anxious to dispose of the club. He owns 307 shares of stock, the par value of which is $10 each, making a total of $3,070. The price offered for the stock was just double its face value, and Mr. Davidson's price was $1,500 more. It was stated this morning that he had come down $500 in his valuation, and there was now only a difference of $1,000 between them. This may be split or compromised in some way before the club leaves. |
| Source | New York Sun |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Louisville blocked from selling its players
| Date | Wednesday, July 17, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Davidson, of Louisville, is very violent in his abuse of Mr. Byrne, of Brooklyn. If it had not been for the prompt work put in by the latter, Davidson would have disposed of his best players, pocketed the proceeds, and left the Association in the lurch. He got tripped up and is naturally bitter on the man from Brooklyn. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Louisville ownership
| Date | Sunday, January 13, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Mr. Davidson has little money himself, but has the strongest sort of backing in the shape of the firm for which he has been bookkeeper for several years. This is a wealthy auction and commission house, and Mr. Davidson stands very well with his employers. He owned a good block of the club's stock before he bought out the Phelps brothers and W. L. Lyons, then the president. When they made the “give or take” offer to him last spring he bought them at their price, and him employers promised to help him out of a tight place if the club did not pay its way. When he went in there was $5,000 to the credit of the club in the bank, but this rapidly disappeared before the combined effects of wretched work and bad weather. When the club returned from its second Eastern trip the reserve fund had all been wiped out and there was $2,000 more to be raised. A little money was made later in the season, and Mr. Davidson swapped dates to Cincinnati and Philadelphia, realizing a handsome sum from the extra inducements they offered. But there was a considerable deficit, which was provided for later in the season by the sale of Chamberlain, Collins, and Cross. Mr. Davidson then paid up every cent the club owed and has money to being the new year on and buy one or more players if he wants. He can get all the backing he needs, and it is not at all likely that he will quit the business unless luck goes very much against him, in which event any man is liable to give up. These statements may be regarded as authoritative. New York Sun January 13, 1889 Mr. Davidson owns three-fifth of the stock of the club or three hundred shares. For the stock he bought of Mr. Zack Phelps and his brother last spring he paid $5,700, and it is generally understood that this took about all the money he had. He is consequently depending upon his receipts this season to meet expenses and make a support for himself and family. It was thought for a while that he was being backed by the commission house of he has been head bookkeeper for many years, but the bad success of the club last year disheartened the members of the firm, and they gave Mr. Davidson to understand that he would have to run the club himself. This is the reason he sold the three star players, Chamberlain, Collins, and Cross, last season; it was absolutely necessary to raise money. He can continue to run the club if it is self-sustaining, but not otherwise. He thinks it will be so with the present players, but he is almost alone in his opinion. New York Sun February 24, 1889 |
| Source | New York Sun |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Louisville record, transferring home games
| Date | Wednesday, June 12, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [editorial matter] It has been for some time an open secret that the Louisville Club was in a straitened situation. Its support at home has fallen off, for the reason that the patrons of base ball in Louisville—and they are numbered by thousands—lost interest in the club after the management, for money consideration, disposed of such men as Chamberlain, Collins and Cross, and apparently made no effort to strengthen the team. The poor success of the club naturally had its effect, and patronage fell off. … Instead of playing his [Davidson's] scheduled games at home, he is making efforts to have games scheduled to be played in Louisville transferred to other cities. He has already had four transferred to Cincinnati, everyone of which the latter, of course, won. He is now trying to have the series of games scheduled between the Athletics and Louisvilles at Louisville, transferred to Philadelphia. The result is, the press and public of Louisville are up in arms and denouncing the course pursued by the club's management. To keep on changing these games means simply and clearly the breaking up of the Louisville Club... … There is no telling where the demoralizing practice would stop or how it would end, and it is therefore well to call a halt right now... Much to their credit three clubs—Brooklyn, Kansas City and St. Louis—have refused consent to any further changes in the schedule. This whole business is another evidence of the narrow, selfish methods which govern a number of the Association clubs, who never seem to be able to see anything beyond their gate receipts and the fences enclosing their grounds or to realize that a championship won or a place in the race secured under such methods will redound but little to the credit of the club securing either in the estimation of the base ball world, and therefore at the next annual meeting of the Association the constitution should be amended to absolutely prohibit the transfer of scheduled games except in the case of single postponed games which it may be impossible to play off in any other way. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
manager, not captain, sets the lineup
| Date | Wednesday, May 1, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [Chicago vs. Indianapolis 4/30/1889] On account of his indifferent work with the stick in the past few games, Manager Bancroft placed Hines down in the batting order and put Glasscock at the top. Indianapolis Journal May 1, 1889 [N.B. Glasscock was the team captain.] |
| Source | Indianapolis Journal |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
manufacture of baseballs
| Date | Wednesday, May 22, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | J. D. Shibe & Co., the well-known Philadelphia manufacturers of base balls and base ball goods exclusively, have by reason of increased business found it necessary to build a new factory which is one of the largest in the country. The main building is 100 x 40 feet in extent and consists of five floors. This is supplemented by a large warehouse for the storage of goods. In the basement of the main building will be found the engine room and packing department, on the first floor the office and pressing and winding machinery as well as the immense drying room, capable of holding 2000 dozen balls. On the second floor is the sewing department for the fine grades of balls. In the later department skilled men only are employed, this firm being the first to originate this feature, the only successful system we believe, of placing on balls covers that will not rip or loosen in batting. The third floor contains the sewing department for medium grades, retailing for twenty-five cents and fifty cents; here some fifty or sixty girls are employed. Altogether the factory gives work to about 250 hands, who actually turn out daily 1500 dozen balls. The cheapest grades are given out for sewing to married women who return them to the factory when finished. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Mayor Grant behind the PL New Yorks
| Date | Monday, November 4, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from an interview of James Coogan] Colonel Coogan assured a reporter that Mayor Hugh J. Grant would surely sign the lease to-day. There are two other capitalists who are going to sign also to-day. Mayor Grant, Mr. Coogan said, had been in the Brotherhood project from the beginning, and was one of the warmest and staunchest friends the players had. |
| Source | Philadelphia Item |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Mike Kelly get s stage fright; Casey at the Bat
| Date | Saturday, March 16, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Nobody ever though it was possible for Mike Kelly to have stage fright, but he had a bad dose of it yesterday when he essayed to recite “Casey at the Bat” before a Boston audience. He couldn't spunk up enough courage to open his mouth, so he was introduced to show that the managers of the performance had not deceived the public, and was bowed off the stage on the threadbare excuse of a bad col. There are two serious rumors afloat in regard to this sudden shyness on the part of the $10,000 beauty. He had never been known to shake when 30,000 eyes were levelled at him on the ball field, but he was keeled over by the audience that attended the Elks' benefit at the Boston Theatre. Kelly told some friends that he was afraid of being hissed, and he knew that would break him up. There were others who openly avow that “the only” was incapable of making a speech. |
| Source | New York Sun |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Mike Kelly is ejected from the game
| Date | Thursday, October 3, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [Boston vs. Cleveland 10/2/1889] The most notable occurrence in connection with the last game between the Bostons and Clevelands to-day was the ejection of Capt. Kelly, who was not in the game, from the grounds in compliance with the order of Umpire McQuaid, whom he had insulted. The disturbance occurred in the seventh inning when the Spiders had scored five runs. Bennett had retired on a chance to the outfield and Clarkson got his base on balls. Richardson hit for two bases and tried to score when Nash hit to right. He was declared out and Kelly came up from the visiting players’ bench wildly gesticulating and declaring that the decision was wrong. “You came West to beat Boston out of the championship so that you could umpire in the world’s series for New York,” he said, and the umpire ordered him removed from the grounds. Kelly resisted the officer and two more policemen came to the latter’s assistance. No player was ever before ejected from the Payne Avenue Grounds. The Boston captain was exasperated at the decision of McQuaid and was also slightly under the influence of liquor, the result of the preceding night. |
| Source | New York World |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Mills on the history of the National Agreement, club jumps
| Date | Wednesday, December 18, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from a letter from A. G. Mills] The National Agreement was created at a meeting of the Arbitration Committee held in New York in October, 1883. The draft of that instrument as prepared and submitted by me contained no provision for the exclusive occupancy by a particular club of a particular city, nor for the transfer of a club from one association to another. The clause containing such a provision was added at the instance of the American Association's delegates, pursuant to the unanimous vote of instructions given by that body to its delegates. The clause containing these stipulations was the only addition advocated by any of the delegates and was incorporated in the instrument as the seventh article of the Agreement, which was shortly afterwards ratified and adopted by the unanimous vote of the Northwestern and National Leagues and the American Association. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Mills on the status of the reserve
| Date | Wednesday, December 18, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from a letter from A. G. Mills] The proposition that these express contract stipulations [i.e. the reserve clause] confer upon a club complying with the specified conditions the exclusive right—as against the whole world—to the service of the contracting player “for the season next ensuing the term mentioned in paragraph 2,” does not need the opinions of eminent counsel, the clear demonstration in your editorial of Oct. 2, nor judgment of courts to sustain it; nor can any conceivable jugglery with justice weaken its force. It is perfectly plain and obvious in itself. No intelligent player could possibly have understood it differently, and if any “leader” has succeeded in persuaded a fellow player to accept any different view of his duty, he has simply burdened his own conscience without in any degree impairing the contract obligation. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
mimic games telegraphed to an auditorium
| Date | Wednesday, June 26, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | An ingenious Bostonian is coining money by means of a device which he has duly copyrighted, whereby the ball cranks of the Hub can be given almost as good an exhibition of the games played by their club abroad as they could from their own grand-stand were the games played at home. He has rented Music Hall, and on a huge blackboard, covering a large portion of one end of the auditorium, the ball field is represented. The players are represented by pins placed in the positions the men occupy. An operator sits in the Indianapolis grand-stand, for instance, and as each man steps to the plate the result of his effort is promptly wired, and the pin so moved as to indicate exactly what has happened. Base hits, errors, runs, fly catches, assists—everything, in short, is exactly reproduced. Five thousand people in Boston witnessed the Boston-Indianapolis game by this means yesterday and day before at 10 cents a head. Indianapolis Journal June 26, 1889 The game of the Philadelphia and Indianapolis teams yesterday [played in Philadelphia] was shown on McDaniel's black-board at Tomlinson Hall to about 500 people. That of to-day will be presented with the little annoyances that attended the first presentation wholly overcome. Ladies are admitted free. Indianapolis Journal July 9, 1889 The Philadelphia-Indianapolis game at Tomlinson Hall, yesterday afternoon, was witnessed by a much larger crowd than the opening game, and the apparatus worked more perfectly, very few mistakes occurring. To-day's game will be called at 3 o'clock prompt, Indianapolis time. Beside the game played on the black-board, showing the plays as they occur, two large score-boards have been placed on the stage, to be sued in scoring all the games. Indianapolis Journal July 10, 1889 The base-ball games at Tomlinson Hall are attracting large crowds, and the thorough manner in which they are given makes them very interesting. Every detail of the contest is shown as it occurs, even down to the number of balls, strikes, fouls, and all other minor incidents of that character, as rapidly as they take place. Men are seen on the bases, and every movement is noted with accuracy. When a hit is made it is known to what part of the field the ball went, and how it was handled. A new feature has been added to the system in the way of two large score boards, one for the Hoosiers and the other for their opponents, on which a complete score of the game is kept, showing just how every play is made. In this way the contest can be followed from start to finish. When a brilliant play is made it is so announced, even to the extent of telling with what hand the fielder picked up the ball. In short, the game is as complete as one could wish. Indianapolis Journal July 12, 1889 |
| Source | Indianapolis Journal |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
mimic games telegraphed to the music hall
| Date | Sunday, June 30, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Immense crowds have attended the mimic games played by electricity here [Boston] in Music Hall daily, and the enterprise has been crowned with the greatest success. There is great applause at every successful play of the Bostons. All of the Western games of the Bostons will be reported in this way. Chicago Tribune June 30, 1889 [See also CT 890707c] |
| Source | Chicago Tribune |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
minor league pay scales
| Date | Sunday, July 21, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | It is true that some of the minor leagues pay as large salaries to good men as the major organizations, but the leagues which are doing so are losing money by the thousands, and are slowly fading away, and in the opinion of shrewd observers it is only a question of time when baseball in the minor leagues will get down to hard pan, and the number of such organizations will fall away to almost nothing. |
| Source | Chicago Tribune |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
minor league umpire salaries
| Date | Wednesday, April 10, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [editorial matter] The Southern League in its efforts at retrenchment has acted well in every direction but one. The reduction of the umpires' salaries to $125 per month, including expenses, was most unwise, as it will impair the League's service in a most important particular. It will be utterly impossible to secure umpires of even mediocre calibre for that money, and if there is any section where good umpires are needed it is in the fiery South. It would have been far better had the League not reduced the amount from the old figure, $175 per month, and it would be well to reconsider and return to that figure. Better economize at some other point, or if that be impossible, make up the difference somehow and have a decent umpire service—a most essential requisite to good ball playing and popular enjoyment of the game. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
minor leagues and the National Agreement; minor league classifications; reserve tax
| Date | Wednesday, November 20, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [reporting the Arbitration Committee meeting 11/11/1889] ...the minor league delegates were invited into the meeting, the object being to hold a general consultation as to the advisability of making changes. These gentlemen had previously held a consultation for the purpose of deciding what changes in the supplementary articles they should urge. Spalding's famous scheme of classifying the minor leagues...was unanimously sat upon, and when it was presented in the joint conference the representatives of the Western and Atlantic associations attacked it so fiercely that the International delegates had no opportunity to express their views before Mr. Spalding came forward and said he would withdraw it. The matter of reducing the tax for minor league protection was then taken up, the minor league delegates favoring a considerable reduction. In the midst of the discussion upon this matter President Hoch, of Minneapolis, arose and made a new and novel point, which at once captured the fancy of the entire minor league delegation and promptly squelched all idea of a reduction of the tax. Mr. Hoch held that the three principal minor leagues present should be perfectly willing to have the present high tax retained as a measure of self-protection. If the tax were lowered he held that every petty state league in the country would be enabled to secure reservation privileges, and that the minor leagues, after disposing of their rising talent to the major leagues, would in turn have to go to the little leagues and purchase players, thus simply nullifying all the financial advantages derived from the present system of holding and disposing of players. This argument was so plausible and touched the minor leagues so effectually at that tender spot—the pockets—that the resolution requesting a reduction was promptly withdrawn. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
morning versus afternoon newspapers
| Date | Wednesday, June 19, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | In the new Brooklyn grand stand the morning newspaper men are separated from the reporters of the afternoon papers. This is a happy thought and merits the attention of all clubs in cities where large numbers of the journalistic fraternity turn out to witness the games, because the average newspaper pen is anything but a comfortable place to work in; not because of lack of room, but because, as a rule, the morning paper contingent are present to work while the rest of the newspaper men gather simply to have a good view of the game, talk shop and exchange views with more or less emphasis. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
multi-year League contracts and the reserve; gate split
| Date | Sunday, December 8, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | It looks as if the National League club operators had little confidence in the reserve rule upon which they declare they rest their legal case against the ball players who have gone away from them. A number of the men who have left the brotherhood and gone back to the league clubs have signed contracts for a term of years, and more men who have not broken away have been offered contracts for more than one season. The fact is that the reserve rule has outlived its usefulness if it ever had any. It has been a delusion and a snare from its inception. The excuse behind its false front was that it enabled a small town to hold part of or a full team when it could not do so in an open market with the larger cities as bidders. When the rule was passed in 1880 but five players could be reserved. Gradually the number has been increased to fourteen. The scheme behind it was to enable the large cities to get a team at small city salaries and create large and steady profits at the expense of the player. Side by side with the reserve rule went the percentage system of dividing the gate receipts. This percentage was never more than 33 1/3, in 1887 it was abolished altogether, and now is, 40. Both the reserve rule and small percentage plan favored the larger cities, and by a combine they have been able to make steady profits and keep the game going by means of new recruits from the smaller towns attracted by ambition, hope, promises, and base-ball “fanism.” There was a natural way to operate base ball. It required no reserve rule, but would have meant smaller profits for the big clubs, an open labor market, and an equal division of the gate receipts. As it is, the big clubs have had all the benefits and none of the hardships of base-ball. They have set the financial pace on salaries and, by drawing the lion's share of the profits, forced the smaller clubs to extra expense with far less than even chances to make extra earnings. This is a succinct history of the inception and operation of the reserve rule, which as late as three years ago was never held to be binding outside of a league. The national agreement could not change the meaning of the term, though it did increase the number of people bound by it. |
| Source | Chicago Tribune |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Nat Hudson insubordinate because he has outside money
| Date | Thursday, July 18, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | ...[Nat Hudson] has given the Browns a great deal of trouble by insubordination. He has been away from the St. Louis team for some time resting at his home in Chicago and under suspension. His is a capable young player, and the change to Louisville may be beneficial to him. The chief trouble with him seems to be that he has some money, and is independent of ball playing. |
| Source | Philadelphia Item |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
National League umpire retention:
| Date | Sunday, January 6, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [quoting Nick Young] To remove an umpire at the demand of any single club would be not only grossly unfair to the official thus suffering, but spread demoralization, timidity and time serving among the rest of the staff, where fearlessness and impartiality should rule. My policy will be in the future, as it has been in the past, to assure the members of the corps of umpires that they are fixtures in their positions, to be disturbed only on the most convincing evidence of dishonesty or incompetency and proof of really poor work, attested not by one, but by several clubs. |
| Source | Brooklyn Eagle |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
nearly the modern position scoring numbering
| Date | Wednesday, May 29, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from Chadwick's column] A writer in the New York Mail and Express advocates a new way of numbering the players on the score sheets. He says: “The pitcher is numbered 1 in all cases, catcher 2, first base 3, second base 4, short stop 5, third base 6, right field 7, centre field 8, and left field 9. For example, if a ball is hit to third base and the runner is thrown out at first base, without looking at the score card it is known that the numbers to be recorded are 6-3, the former getting the assist, and the first baseman the put-out. If from short stop to first, it is 5-3. If from the second baseman, it is 4=3. If a dropped third strike, and the runner is thrown out a first, it is K 1-2-3-K, indicating the strike out.” This is a faulty method, and in no respect is it an improvement on the plan which has been in vogue since the National League was organized, and that is the method used in Beadle's Dime Book of Base Ball in 1860. This plan numbers the players in their striking order, and not by their positions, for instance, take the New York order of striking Gore Tiernan and Richardson 1, 2, 3. No matter what position these players take in the field the figures always indicate them. But if you name the players by their positions, and these happen to be changed in a game, then you are all in a fog on how to change them. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Ned Hanlon on the Brotherhood and the Rowe and White case
| Date | Monday, October 14, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | “The case of Rowe and White,” said Mr. Hanlon, “has been really what has spurred the players to take a stand. They were most unjustly dealt with, and when the Brotherhood took Rowe's case in hand it received a very severe snub from the League magnates. Now let me explain this, because it is important that the public should now know the features of that case. When President Stearns, of Detroit, resolved to sell Rowe and White to Pittsburg against their will, Rowe went to him and respectfully asked that he receive a portion of the purchase money, and he added that, if that was done, he would willingly go to Pittsburg. “However, Stearns replied that the deal was entirely between him, Mr. Stearns and President Nimick, of Pittsburg, and that Rowe had nothing whatever to do with it. This touched the player's manhood and he went home and commenced business for himself. But he wasn't even allowed to do that, and then the Brotherhood requested the League to have representatives of the two organizations meet and discuss the matter. As a result, the League replied that the case was not of sufficient importance to convene a special meeting to discuss it. This was an insult. Why, when a dispute arose about a game between the Detroit and New York clubs a special meeting was called at Asbury Park within a very short time. That case was certainly of no more importance than one that concerned the bread and butter of two of the most respectable and two of the ablest players in the country. But the disputed game concerned the magnates and the other case in question concerned the players. Well, that case stirred up the Brotherhood, and I may say it made the players resolve to take a stand. That stand will be taken.” Pittsburgh Dispatch October 14, 1889 Jack Rowe, of Pittsburgh, was asked if it was the Brotherhood movement that culminated to-day [11/5] that induced White and himself to go to Pittsburg when they did and play the season out. “Yes, that it was,” he said. “We got a long letter from John Ward, and upon consideration determined to go to Pittsburg. After I had been there a few days a reporter asked me how I liked the place. I think I told him I liked it as well as Oshkosh, Kalamazoo or some place of that sort. We played against our will, and told Nimick so. We wanted to get a release, but all the satisfaction we could get from Stearns, of Detroit, was 'play in Pittsburg or get off the earth.' The League has brought this action upon itself. Imagine a case like my own. We were not permitted, on account of a rule distorted to suit the purposes of the magnates, to act like free men and play where we chose. I feel like a manumitted slave.” Pittsburgh Dispatch November 6, 1889 |
| Source | Pittsburgh Dispatch |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
negotiating the Players League contract
| Date | Wednesday, November 13, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [reporting the Players League meeting 11/6/1889] The whole business of the morning session was a discussion of the form of contract to be signed by the players. The capitalists seemed to want some guarantee that they would be able to keep their players longer than a year, and it was finally decided to make a contract for three years. … ...the old National League contract was read over and its most objectionable features, notably the salary limit clause and the reserve rules stricken out. With these omissions and one or two minor additions the new contract will be drafted after the general form of the old one. The Sporting Life November 13, 1889 [reporting the Players League meeting 11/8/1889] The Committee on Contract reported a paper which was thoroughly satisfactory to the delegates. It abolishes the technical word “reserve,” and provides for a three years’ service. In other words, each player will sign a three years’ contract outright. In the place of the “ten days notice” clause in the National League contract, there is a provision which allows a club to dispense with a player only at the end of the season, and only after five of the eight directors of the club with which he is under contract have decided that his services are no longer required. No classification will be allowed. The Philadelphia Item November 8, 1889 |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
negotiating with holdouts
| Date | Wednesday, April 3, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The little office at Sportsman's Park was the scene of a couple of heated interviews yesterday in which the boss president and his “hold-out” players were the principals. Tommy McCarthy put in an appearance yesterday morning and submitted his figures. The boss president gasped for breath when his eye rested on them. Then and there ensued a sulphurous dialogue, which terminated by the withdrawal of McCarthy. Silver King then tried his hand and said he was willing to pitch this season for $3,500, or $600 a month or $150 a week, which equals $50 a game. The boss president looked as if he needed stimulants when King finished. He said he was thinking of offering the big pitcher $2500, but would not cut down on that figure. After the séance he issued an order barring the “hold-outs” from the park. Robinson, Devlin, King, Chamberlin and McCarthy have not signed. St. |
| Source | St. Louis Republic |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
negotiations opened for the New Polo Grounds
| Date | Wednesday, February 20, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | While rumor has been busy with the plans and intentions of the New York Club, the officials of that organization have begun negotiations to acquire a leasehold of property at the upper terminus of the West Side Elevated road. The property in regard to which negotiations have begun is certainly quite as desirable as were the Polo Grounds. It is much more accessible, and it affords infinitely better opportunities for gathering and dispersing crowds of people. It is situated across the Harlem River, at One Hundred and Fifty-fifth street, within about two blocks of the elevated station at that point. It is quite as easily reached by boats on the Harlem River, by trains on the new York and Northern road, and by trains on the New York Central and Harlem roads, the Central Company having promised to run a side track directly to the grounds. Boats by way of the Harlem River can, of course, come from down town, affording quick and easy opportunity for the contingent of base ball enthusiasts in the business centres to reach the grounds with very little trouble. The property is owned by the Astor estate, and those who propose to lease it will take about 10 of the 20 acres in the plot, if the negotiations succeed, as seems now likely. The Sporting Life February 20, 1889 [from an interview of an unidentified director of the New York Club] It looks as if our grounds were gone, and we will have to do the best we can under the circumstance. We will probably play for a month or two at St. George, S.I., and by that time we may have our new grounds ready. They belong to the Lynch estate, but are not on the west side of Eighth avenue. We have not got the pro0perty yet, but I may be able to say something definite in a day or two. The property we want runs from Eighth avenue to the Harlem River at One-hundred-and-fifty-fifth street. If we secure that property, which runs to the river, we will be able to run boats to and from the grounds. The Sporting Life February 27, 1889 [an item from George Stackhouse] While the Giants are satisfied to rally around their pennant flags at St. George this summer, the players don't see to like the idea of making St. George their permanent home. I don't think the team will stay there, in spite of Mr. Day's assertion that in case he likes the place that he “may conclude to make Staten Island the permanent home grounds of the Giants.” I am informed on good authority that the future home grounds of the New York Club will be embraced in the territory bounded by One Hundred and Forty-fifth and One Hundred and Forty-seventh streets and Seventh and Lenox avenues. The grounds are now being filled in, and will be ready for next season's game, I think. Much of the place is marshy, and not only has to be filled in, but innumerable pile drivers will be kept at work for several weeks yet. Standing at the corner of One Hundred and Forty-seventh street and Seventh avenue yesterday, I noticed the work going on, and wondered what it was all about. The contractor approached, and I asked him. “Why, that is the future home ground of the giants,” said he. “The grand stand will be guilt in that corner where the men are sinking so many piles into the soft earth. They propose to put up a monster grand stand there, and they want a sold foundation for it. You don't believe it, do you? Well, I will bet you $100 to $25 that the Giants play right here next year.” I did not take the bet. The man seemed to know what he was talking about. The contractor also told me the reason why the New York Club did not purchase the Lynch property at One Hundred and Fifty-seventh street and Eighth avenue. “That is low, marshy ground,” said he, “and in case the company wanted to sell it for building purposes in a few years they would find they had a white elephant on their hands. That is the reason that a few weeks ago Mr. Day advertised for some persons to purchase that property, agreeing to pay $6000 a year rental for a five or ten years' lease.” The Sporting Life May 1, 1889 the California League on the National Agreement and the reserve [from a letter from Jas. L. Gillis of the Sacramento Club] [regarding California League clubs making offers to reserved players] ...such a course is not only not dishonorable or in the least indicative of a sneak, but on the contrary simply the exercise of a business right which every employer has the right to exercise in his endeavors to employ competent men to render him service. This practice is recognized by every known rule governing the relationship of employer and employee, in the absence of a special agreement to the contrary, and is well settled by precedents established and followed by the very men who now claim that such a course is not only unbusiness-like but dishonorable. In 1887, when Mr. A. G. Spalding, in the exercise of the very privilege that we of the California League now claim, engaged George Van Haltren to play with the Chicago Club, thereby crippling the Oakland Cub to such an extent as to jeopardize its existence, did Mr. Ovens or an other person affirm either publicly or privately that Mr. Spalding was a sneak, or dishonorable, or that he had been guilty of conduct which should cause him to be held up to the contumely and contempt of his fellow-men? Equally is this true in 1888, when Mr. Spalding took from the California League players George Borchers, and also is the same thing true when W. A. Nimick, of Pittsburg, took Mr. Knell from the same League in the middle of the season. Not a protestation, not even a word from anyone that either of these gentlemen had been guilty of anything that was dishonorable, on the contrary, their efforts in this direction were cited as evidence of their untiring zeal to secure the best talent available for their respective nines. Certainly the example of such men so well and favorably known in connection with the National game is worthy of emulation by us who are as yet but infants in the business, and when we do follow in their footsteps our acts should not be the subject of such reckless and uncalled-for attacks as the one already referred to. As to the merits of the National Agreement, with its reserve rule, and whether it is for the best interests of the California League to become a party to that agreement, I have at this time nothing to say, but I do insist that I shall not be the subject of attack and abuse by those who, when the same thing is done by others, have only words of praise. The Sporting Life February 20, 1889 |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
New York Club attendance
| Date | Wednesday, May 8, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The Giants have made a start in their new home at St. George, and considering the strong attraction offered by the magnificent Centennial procession,s have done fairly well in the way of attendance. The three games played on Centennial days, drew 9181 spectators. There was a steady increase each day, as the figures 2795, 2967 and 3419 show. This would indicate an attendance for the season at Staten Island of 200,000, about 80,000 less than the number that visited the Polo Grounds last year. The Sporting Life May 8, 1889 [from W. I. Harris's column] There is no doubt that the New York Club's tenancy of the ST. George grounds will, in any event, end with the present season. The Chicago series satisfied me of that. There was 2585 people at the first game, but the weather was bad. There were 1926 at the second game; weather fair. Friday was a base ball day—as perfect as it is possible to get—yet only 2009 people were in attendance. This afternoon was also a good day. Being Saturday, the attendance was about doubled, say 3500. say 10,000 people for the four games, and the Chicago Club is one of the greatest attractions we have. This is just about one-half of what the four games would have drawn if played somewhere up town. It is obvious, therefore, that the New York Club will get out of Staten Island as soon as it is possible for them to do so. The Sporting Life May 29, 1889 |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
New York Club finances
| Date | Wednesday, December 25, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | A paper was read at the Players' League meeting estimating the profits of the New York Club in 1889 at home at $30,300. While the traveling expenses were included in the expenditures not a cent was allowed for the club's share of the gate receipts while playing abroad, and in Boston along it played before more than 70,000 people. The table follows: Income 250,000 admissions, at 50 cents............................ $125,000 100,000 admissions to grand stand, at 25 cents.... 25,000 Total receipts............................................. $150,000 Expenditures Last Season Salaries................................................................. $ 50,000 Traveling expenses................................................ 15,000 Ground rent........................................................... 5,000 Help at the grounds................................................ 4,000 Advertisements in daily papers, 70 days, at $60 per day....................................................... 4,200 For supplies, such as uniforms and necessaries at the grounds............................................ 4,000 Percentages paid to visiting clubs on 250,000 admissions, at 15 cents.............................. 37,600 Total output............................................... $119,700 Recapitulation 250,000 admissions, at 50 cents............................ $125,000 100,000 admissions to grand stand, at 25 cents.... 25,000 Total receipts........................................................ $150,000 Expenses............................................................... 119,700 Balance in favor of club............................ $ 30,300 This is quite an interesting statement in view of the fact that the New York Club was declared to have made no money last season. Director Appleton, of the New York Base Ball Club, supplements the above with a statement that the club's expenses last year were about $125,000 and the receipts $170,000, leaving a net profit of $45,000. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
New York Club finances; treatment of players
| Date | Wednesday, November 27, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from W. I. Harris's column] The New York Club officials are feeling pretty sore over their treatment by their players. They paid to players in salaries and “divies” in the two World's series during the past two seasons over $100,000, and against it they got about $75,000 in profits. Out of this they paid something like $20,000 for the losses of the Jersey City team and $25,000 for their grand stand. It will be seen therefore that the players really received more money out of the business than the magnates. All the men admit that they were treated splendidly, and yet the New York team will be the worst sufferer by the players' movements, if the law does not protect them, of any of the League clubs. Not a man has signified his intention of standing by John B. Day so far, and as far as I can learn there are not more than three of the Giants who are likely to do so, except under compulsion, and only one of the three is a star. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
New York Club ownership
| Date | Friday, January 11, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Walter Appleton says that he has not sold and will not sell his stock in the New York Club. |
| Source | New York Sun |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Nick Young affirms the two umpire system
| Date | Wednesday, September 11, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from an interview of Young] There is no doubt in my mind that the patrons of the game would be better pleased with two umpires than one, and the experience of this season has demonstrated this fact to my entire satisfaction. Not that there is any objection to the staff of League umpires as it exists to-day, so far as the officials of the League are concerned, for we think our selections for these trying places have all endeavored to do their duty conscientiously and without favor to home or visiting clubs, as often alleged. But there is a demand for two umpires which cannot be ignored, and for my part I shall favor eight good men being chosen for these places next year. It will not do to have home umpires. That experiment has been tried too often and invariably resulted in more evil than good. What is required is to have an octette of umpires who shall be subject to orders as at present, and thus all talk of favoritism will be reduced to a minimum. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Nick Young comes out in favor of the strike on a caught foul tip
| Date | Wednesday, September 4, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from an interview of Young] There is just one change I think out to be made before the beginning of another season. Under the present rule a foul tip taken by the catcher standing within ten feet of the home plate is not out. This is as it should be, but I would not have this very pretty play go for nothing. A hot foul tip neatly taken from the bat is one of the prettiest plays to be seen in the game. I remember well when Doug Allison introduced the play. He was the first catcher to successfully hold these foul tips, and the play made a great sensation. I would amend the present rule so that a foul tip if caught should count as a strike. There is reason in this. Nine times in ten a ball that is fouled would have been s strike if the batsman had missed it. If it is a foul and can not be caught out neither pitcher nor catche4r gets credit for it. Certainly the pitcher should profit in some small degree by every ball that goes over the plate that is not fairly hit. On long foul flies the catcher and fielders have a chance, and on hot foul tips at least a third as much credit should go to the pitcher as for striking a man out. Let a foul tip caught count as a strike and I am satisfied the change will be accepted by the profession and public alike as an improvement. The Sporting Life September 4, 1889 a protested game, premonition of Merkle's boner; trophy ball; two umpire failure; when the game ends [Boston vs. Philadelphia 8/26/1889] The row at the Philadelphia ground last Monday is to be exceedingly regretted, because it is the first time such a thing happened at the Philadelphia ball park, and also because it brought the game to an unsatisfactory conclusion and necessitated a protest from the Philadelphia Club, which was drawn up by Colonel Rogers and forwarded to President Young on the following day. A good deal of undeserved censure was heaped upon Mike Kelly, whereas only the umpires and the crowd were to blame—the former for failing to remain at their places to watch the play and see that the game was brought to a proper conclusion, and the people for not remaining in their seats. Kelly was not to be blamed for holding on to the ball, which action started the row, as he was entirely ignorant of Johnston's failure tot ouch first bas, and according to custom was entitled to the ball last in use. Farrar has been censured for attempting to take the ball from Kelly, it being held that he did not need the ball in order to make a claim, but he did. According to the rules Johnston was out for not running to first base, but the umpirew had to decide whether he was or not, and even if they did not see the play, by admitting that much they would have given a decision which would have ended the game properly. … … [from the Phillies' protest] “The Philadelphia Club had completed its twelfth inning with a score of four runs. The Boston Club, with a similar score, had two men out and two players, Kelly and Brouthers, occupying respectively second and first bases, with Johnston at the bat. The latter made a base hit to centre field, upon which Kelly ran home. Johnston, who made the hit, ran about two-thirds of the way towards first base, then turned to the right, walked outside of the 'three feet line' and over to the players' bench and did not afterwards touch first base or make any attempt to do so. “In the meantime the ball was thrown in from the field, but not to the Philadelphia pitcher. It was picked up by a Boston player and given to Mr. Kelly, captain of the Boston team. “Captain Farrar, of the Philadelphia team, demanded the surrender of the ball from Captain Kelly, but the latter refused to give it up, claiming that the game was over and the ball belonged to the victors. “The game not being legally completed this refusal to surrender the ball was an obstruction to its fielding, and under the rules put Mr. Johnston out. “Unfortunately, neither of the two umpires was on the field to decide the point, they having run under the pavilion to avoid the crowd which had occupied the infield immediately upon Mr. Kelly's refusal to surrender the ball. “Although their powers as umpires ceased the momement they left the field, sill, in justice to Messrs. Curry and McQuaid, they now maintain that they were so interested in watching the ball when hit safely to centre field that neither saw what Johnston did nor where he ran. In other words, they did not obey the plain mandate of rule 52, which makes them remain 'masters of the field from the commencement to the termination of the game,' and the game could not terminate, under rule 22, section 2, paragraph B, until 'the return of the ball to the pitcher.' In point of fact, the game never legally terminated, because the ball was never so returned to the pitcher, and for that reason along must be set aside as irregular....” The Sporting Life September 4, 1889 The protested Philadelphia-Boston game of Aug. 26 has been decided adversely to the Philadelphia Club by the League board of directors, Messrs. Day, Brush and Hewitt voting to count the game for Boston and Mr. Nimick for a draw. Such a result was to have been expected; but if the Philadelphia Club's protest served no other purpose it at least called attention to the fact that the law which provides for the legal termination of game is virtually a dead letter and that the rule ordering the return of the ball to the pitcher in his position after the winning run has been scored in the last inning before the third man is out is not observed at all. In fact, the rule seems superfluous, it being almost impossible to enforce it, as the moment the winning run is made the crowd surges upon the field and surrounds the players without waiting to see what becomes of the ball. The Sporting Life September 25, 1889 |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
no alcohol sales in Columbus
| Date | Wednesday, January 16, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from F. W. Arnold's column] [reporting on the meeting of the Columbus Club] A resolution was adopted that no intoxicating drinks would be sold or allowed on the grounds next season. The directors are determined that Recreation Park shall be a place where gentlemen can take their wives and families with no danger of seeing any brawling or disorder. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
no alcohol sold on Sunday in Cincinnati
| Date | Wednesday, July 3, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The best behaved crowds at the Cincinnati park are the Sunday crowds, for the reason that not a drop of liquor is sold on that day. The reform is a good one to work seven days in seven. The thirsty can find relief in “pop,” lemonade and ginger ale at least two hours out of twenty-four. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
no base coaches 2
| Date | Sunday, June 23, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The Cleveland club could have stood a little coaching on Wednesday with advantage. A game is never lost until the twenty-seventh man has been retired, and until he is it is a duty ball players owe to the public which supports them to make the game as interesting as possible, and that can only be done by the players themselves manifesting some interest in the proceedings. On two occasions when Cleveland runners were on third there was no one on the coaching line. That’s not the way to play wining ball., quoting the Philadelphia North American |
| Source | Cleveland Plain Dealer |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
no screen at the Staten Island grounds
| Date | Wednesday, May 8, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Staten Island's grand stand has no wire screen, which makes foul balls dangerous for ladies. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
notifications on game day in Philly
| Date | Wednesday, April 3, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The managers of the Philadelphia Club have effected arrangements with the Postal Telegraph Company, and through them with the American District Telegraph Company, by which the patrons of the club can be notified on cloudy days and after a morning's storm as to whether the ground will permit a game or not, thus avoiding a long journey to the ball park at the risk of finding a wet field. Cards announcing either “game” or “no game” will be displayed on such days between the hours of 2:30 and 4 o'clock P.J., at the following places:--Pennsylvania Railroad, Broad Street Station; Philadelphia and Reading Railroad, Columbia Avenue Station, and the following American District Telegraph offices... |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
offers for the Indianapolis franchise
| Date | Thursday, January 24, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Messrs. Dickson & Talbott called at The News office this afternoon and authorized the statement hta tthey will make this offer for the ball club. They will pay all debts, dollar for dollar, amounting in all to over $20,000 providing the franchise, players, lease of the grounds and bill of sale of the grand stand are turned over to them, and they will agree to maintain the club here and strengthen it wherever possible. This is the most liberal proposition made yet and should be accepted, unless a better one should be made. If accepted, it will wipe out all the debts of the club, by paying them off, and place it in the hands of men who will have a great int3resttt in seeing that it is managed properly. The proposition that was sent on to President Young this afternoon, proposes to pay the $10,000 due to the directors and in bank, and $9,250, due the guarantors, and the $1,000, which is Mr. McCutcheon's claim, and any other debts. Mr. Brush said this afternoon that he and others had formed a stock company to-day and that they would send on to President Young this evening a formal application for the franchise. They have a capital stock of $30,000, and the company is composed of the following gentlemen: Fred Mayer, R. K. Sylers, George Branham, William Schmidt, A. B. Meyer, C. F. Meyer, John T. Brush, Tom Taggart and Ford woods. Mr. Brush says that they stand in exactly the same position as other applicants for the franchise. The company will be formally incorporated this evening. |
| Source | Indianapolis News |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
official attendance record
| Date | Wednesday, May 15, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Secretary Young's official League score blanks contain in the summary, besides the usual items, “attendance” and “umpire hit by thrown ball.” The second item was suggested by Secretary Hawley, of Cleveland. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
opposition to double headers
| Date | Wednesday, September 4, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [editorial matter] The practice of playing two games in one afternoon for one admission fee has been run into the ground this season and should receive the attention of the law makers next winter. Double games are excusable late in the season, when it is impossible to play off postponed games in any other way, but this year the practice was started early in the season and has been going on here and there ever since. The chief objection to double games is that the public is given far more than its money's worth and will gradually come to look upon a single game as either worth only half the present admission fee or to demand longer games or double games as a regular thing, even to the extend of playing these games by schedule. At any rate, by occasional double games for one admission the regularly scheduled games are cheapened by comparison, and this should not be encouraged by club owners. Far better to play postponed games in the forenoons, even to the smallest number of paying spectators, or else not play them at all. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
opposition to the minor league classification system; draft
| Date | Tuesday, November 12, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [reporting on the Arbitration Committee meeting of 11/11] It was expected that the new classification scheme of Mr. Spalding would be introduced, and it was. This scheme was to classify all minor league cities according to their population, and have a definite salary limit. Then, if a major league club desired a player he must be released at a week's notice and at a stipulated amount already agreed upon. The different minor leagues were to be apportioned into four classes, with a separate salary limit for each. After the scheme was presented the representatives of the Western and Atlantic Associations attacked it so fiercely that the International delegates had no opportunity to express their views before Mr. Spalding came forward and said he would withdraw it. |
| Source | New York Sun |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
options on minor league players
| Date | Thursday, October 31, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | It was learned yesterday from a good source that the National League is working on the “still-hunt” plan and signing minor league players, or securing options on their services in case the brotherhood revolt goes as per program, as fast as possible. Fifty young players are said to be secured already. Chicago has four or five on its list, among them Cooney and Nagle of this year's Omaha team. The latter pair were secured through Frank Selee, the new manager of the Bostons, for $3,000. Omaha kicks on the deal and threatens to take it to the Arbitration Board. There is no doubt that all the league clubs are gathering for the purpose of filling up their teams when the brotherhood declares itself. The league men still doubt the actual end of the brotherhood's move. President Reach of the Philadelphia club recently wrote to Secretary Morton of the Western Association asking for a list of the promising young players in his association. Philadelphia has bought First Baseman Virtue of Detroit and Field Burke and Pitcher Vickery of Toronto. It has also signed Catcher Decker, a non-brotherhood man belonging to this year's team. Boston has as good as secured Pitcher Nichols of Omaha, and is after Pitchers Dooms of Newark, Clark of Omaha, and Calihan of Buffalo. |
| Source | Chicago Tribune |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
organization of the Chicago Commercial League
| Date | Wednesday, February 6, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from a letter from Jno. T. Pope to Chadwick] Last season we rented three of the amateur parks, which are enclosed, charging a small fee, 10 cents, for expenses of umpire and scorer. There were no restrictions placed upon clubs securing players, save that no remuneration must be given in any way for services rendered. A list of 12 players was sent in before the playing season, and only players on that list could play with the club which sent in their names. This brought in our ranks many professional and semi-professional players, who spent most of their time playing through Illinois, Iowa, Wisconsin, Indiana, Michigan, etc., but returned Saturday and Sunday to play in our and the City league. This was, I think, unfair to the mercantile boys, who had no time for practice, only just before the game, and gave some clubs an advantage over others. Almost one-half of our players, too, belonged to the City League, which plays every Sunday afternoon. They received from $2 to #6 per game, according to the crowd. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
ownership of the Philadelphia Players League club
| Date | Wednesday, November 13, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The men who will back the new Brotherhood club of this city are now definitely known... viz.:--Henry M. Love, John Vanderslice, H. L. Taggart, W. H. Whitall, J. W. Allen, G. W. Autoe, J. E. Wagner, B. F. Hilt and E. T. Elliott. Hild was a fast friend of Al Reach's and the financial manager of the Philadelphia Club during the past season, a position which he has resigned. It is said that when his connection with the new movement became known, he and Col. John I. Rogers had quite a lively interview, in which the Colonel censured Hilt for stating that the Philadelphia Club had cleared over $30,000 in the past season, and accused him of using data of the Philadelphia Club's business in securing subscribers to the stock of the local Brotherhood club. It is said that Messrs. Harry M. Disston and John Forepaugh are also interested in the new club, but the former denies the report. The new club will probably play its games at Forepaugh's Park, Broad and Diamond streets, which ground may be leased for ten years at an annual rental of about $5000. The officers of the club will be:--President, Henry M. Love; secretary, James W. Allen, and treasurer and manager, Benjamin Hilt. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
PL moves the pitcher back a foot and a half
| Date | Wednesday, December 25, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [reporting on the PL meeting 12/16-12/17/1889] [reporting on the rules committee] Rule 5. Amended to make the pitcher's box six feet long instead of five and a half, with its forward line distant fifty-one feet from the centre of the home base. This puts the pitcher back one foot and a half. The words “shall not raise either foot” are stricken out. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
PL player signings
| Date | Wednesday, December 25, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [reporting on the PL meeting 12/16-12/17/1889] During the meeting the first official bulletin of engagements was promulgated by John M. Ward. He reported 97 men signed, whose names are given in our “official list” in another column. Of these 6, Clements, Delehanty, Miller, Beckly, McKean, and Mulvey have also signed with the National League. This left 91 men as the total list. Four are minor league players, sixteen American Association men, and 71 were employed by the National League in 1889. since the list was issued Arthur Irwin, Con Daly, and M. Griffin have also signed with the new League. Those who signed a Brotherhood agreement alone and deserted, are Glasscock, Denny, Boyle, Clarkson, Smith, Rusie, Buckley, Schriver and Gleason. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
PL refuses to sign a contract breaker
| Date | Thursday, December 5, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Al Johnson says:--”At the meeting at Philadelphia Mr. Hill of the Philadelphia brotherhood club read a letter that he had received from Schriver, the Philadelphia catcher, who had deserted us, asking to be reinstated in the brotherhood. Though Schriver is a good ball player and a valuable man, we thought best to keep the fight clean, at least on our side, and have nothing to do with contract breakers. His request for reinstatement was of course refused. St. |
| Source | St. Louis Republic |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
paired batteries
| Date | Monday, March 25, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Manager Sharzig [sic] says that he will not pair his batteries this season, but have his catchers play alternately with his pitchers. So much the better for Brooklyn. Brooklyn Eagle March 25, 1889 The Cincinnati management will pair the batteries as follows: Smith and Keenan, Duryea and Earle, Mullane and Baldwin, Viau and Earle. Brooklyn Eagle March 27, 1889 |
| Source | Brooklyn Eagle |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
paying the players to beat a contender
| Date | Friday, October 18, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | There is a big kick among the members of the Cincinnati team before Duryea and Keenan received all the “Brooklyn boodle” for winning the game on Tuesday from St. Louis. “Doc” Bushong arrived in the city on the same day that St. Louis reached here, and it was understood that he had offered certain Cincinnati players money, which was legitimate, in case they should win a game from the Browns. As soon as Manager Schmelz announced that Duryea and Keenan would be the battery against St. Louis in the first game on Tuesday, Bushong went to Duryea and Keenan and informed them that he was prepared to pay them $100 in case they won the game. Before Bushong left for Brooklyn he paid to Duryea and Keenan the money he had promised them for winning the game. It is true Duryea’s fine pitching largely contributed to Cincinnati’s victory, but the remainder of the team who figured in the game also aided materially by their good work in downing the Browns. The other members of the Club do not begrudge Duryea and Keenan the money they received, but do think that President Byrne ought to remember them. |
| Source | New York World |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
paying the umpire of an exhibition game
| Date | Friday, April 19, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [Toronto vs. Pittsburgh 4/18/1889] The decisions of Umpire Aborgast gave much offense to the visitors, so much so that they refused to contribute their share of his fee. Manager Phillips and Secretary Scandrett each tried to induce the manager of the Torontos to pay, but he claimed that he had not been consulted about his engagement and, therefore, didn't think he was compelled to pay. The debt, for such it is, remains unpaid and its existence is not creditable to the Canadians. |
| Source | Pittsburgh Dispatch |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Pete Browning falls off the wagon
| Date | Sunday, June 23, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Pete Browning fell by the wayside in Kansas City this week and was left there by the club when it went to Cincinnati. When Francis Murphy was here [Louisville] last spring Pete signed the pledge. He has kept it very well all the season, but last Monday night, at Kansas City, he became very drunk. On Tuesday morning he drank even more, and was soon hopelessly full. It has rained that night and there were large puddles of water in the street. It afforded a golden opportunity for the gladiator to make a spectacle of himself. He went to a store near by and purchased two fishing poles and lines. Armed with these he planted himself in front of the hotel where the club was stopping and proceeded to fish in the water which flowed through the gutters. Tiring of this diversion he went into the hotel and soon had a crowd collected around him. He finally grew so boisterous that he had to be put out and narrowly escaped being arrested. When the club left for Cincinnati Tuesday night he refused to accompany the other players and was left in Kansas City, where he now is. Since then nothing has been heard of him. Cleveland Plain Dealer June 23, 1889 Peter Browning returned Friday night from Kansas City. He reported yesterday morning to President Davidson and was fined $100. Pete pleaded that it was his first backsliding this year, but Mr. Davidson says the fine will have to go. Cleveland Plain Dealer June 26, 1889 |
| Source | Cleveland Plain Dealer |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Phenomenal Smith sues for unpaid wages; defense is he was incompetent
| Date | Wednesday, February 6, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | John F. Smith sued the Baltimore Base Ball Club for wages some time ago, and on Thursday Henry R. Vonderhorst, the president and owner of the club last year, filed his defence. Smith was suspended on the 12 th of last August until the 1 st of october, because “he couldn't play ball,” and it is for the salary for this time that he sued. The defence sets for th that Smith was engaged for the most important position on the base ball team, and that upon his skill and ability depends more than upon anything else the keeping down of the opponents' score, and the consequent opportunity for victory. Smith, from April 1 to August 12, 1888, failed to pitch skillfully, and was totally unfit to fill his position satisfactorily, and the defendant also claims that by virtue of his contract he had a right to suspend him. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Philadelphia PL ownership
| Date | Thursday, November 7, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The capitalists of the organization include Henry M. Love, manufacturer of knit goods, No. 1418 Diamond street; Mr. William Whitall, button manufacturer, No. 2153 North Thirteen street; Mr. Benjamin F. Hilt, of the Hotel Hilton, on Filbert street above Eleventh; Taggarts’ Sunday Times; ex-Councilman J. W. Allen, of No. 1565 North Thirteen street, and J. Earle Wagner, beef dealer, who resides in Germantown. |
| Source | Philadelphia Item |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Philadelphia Scorers' Association; reporters
| Date | Wednesday, April 3, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The Philadelphia Base Ball Scorers' Association held a meeting last Saturday afternoon at the Inquirer office. A uniform score sheet was adopted and sacrifice hits will be credited in the summary. … The scorers met again on Thursday for the election of officers for 1889 and the following were chosen:--President, Frank Hough, North American; vice president, J. Schriver Murphy, News; secretary, J. P. Campbell, Item; treasurer, S. H. Jones, Associated Press. Directors, A. M. gillam, Record; Phil Nash, News; H. Niles, Bulletin; Edward Cole, Call, and Horace S. Fogel, The Sporting Life and Ledger. The Association has 28 members, and is in a flourishing condition. Three additional names were proposed for membership, viz.:--Daniel Mills, Times; Luther E. Price, Record,and George F. Turner, Item. The board of directors will act on these nominations at its next meeting. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Phillies attendance
| Date | Monday, November 11, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Just 287,495 people paid admission to the Huntingdon street grounds during the past season to see the “Phillies” play ball. |
| Source | Philadelphia Item |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Phillies official scorer
| Date | Wednesday, July 24, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Ever since his connection with the Philadelphia Club Harry Wright has acted as official scorer of the club, but pennant winning is no easy task, and Harry has his hands so full in handling the “coming champions” that he has determined to confine himself altogether when on the bench to directing the team's field work and leave the scoring to Horace S. Fogel, of The Sporting Life and Public Ledger. Fogel accepted the position and entered upon his duties on Thursday last. A better man could not have been selected, as he is not only expert and well posted on the rules but thoroughly impartial—a most important requisite for an official scorer. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Phillies signing minor leaguers
| Date | Tuesday, October 22, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The Philadelphia management...began to sign minor league players yesterday, and by night had the contracts of burke, outfielder; Vickery, pitcher, and Virtue, first baseman. |
| Source | Philadelphia Item |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
pitcher covering first on a ground ball to the right side
| Date | Sunday, August 25, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Among the prettiest plays in a contest are the grounders to first where the pitcher covers the base. They are also the hardest plays, for the stop must be well made, the throw must be accurate, and the pitcher must time himself so as to capture the ball and touch the base. |
| Source | Chicago Tribune |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
pitching records
| Date | Wednesday, September 4, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | John Clarkson, of the Boston Club, who is this season easily the star pitcher of the National League, says he shall by the end of the season have broken League in four particulars, namely: – Number of games pitched,number of games won, number of men struck out and number of bases on balls. Now let the cranks overhaul their records and keep note of the great twirler's work for the rest of the season. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
pitching rotation 8
| Date | Friday, May 17, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [Cleveland vs. New York 5/16/1889] Manager Loftus continued his plan of putting in his pitchers in turn. It was Gruber's day, and he went in and did his work like a veteran. |
| Source | New York Sun |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
pitching the ball while the batter is unprepared; quick pitch
| Date | Wednesday, September 4, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [Indianapolis vs. Boston 9/3/1889] Singles by Denny and Hines filled the bases, with two men out, when Daily came to the bat. Two strikes were called on him in short order,w hen the errors referred to occurred. Seeing the necessity for a great strike, the latter left the plate and stepping about a yard away stooped down to get some dust to rub on his hands to keep the bat from slipping. This was wrong, and Bennett called to Madden to send the ball over the plate. This he did, and there being no man there, of course the ball was safely caught, and Kelly demanded that the umpire call it a third strike and out. This McQuaid refused to do, saying he was not sure of the correctness of such a judgment, as he never heard of such a case before. The home club should here have refused to play, but Kelly said he would appeal if they lost the game, and, despite the murmurs of the players, the game proceeded, with the result of Daily knocking the ball for a good two-bagger. The ball few flew over Richardson's head, and before he could get his hand on it two men scored, and the game was won and lost. After it was over McQuaid came in for a lot of personal advice, and everybody is demanding that the Bostons protest the game. |
| Source | Indianapolis Journal |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Pittsburgh Club finances 5
| Date | Wednesday, January 9, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [reporting the Pittsburgh Club annual meeting] The financial statement was such that the three or four present thought it could not have been better. There were already telegraphic messages from the absent directors stating that the “annual report was first class.” The report went on to show that the club was on the wrong side of the ledger for a few thousands of dollars in cash. New players in the way of stock were placed on the other side, and taking everything into consideration the directors were satisfied. |
| Source | Pittsburgh Dispatch |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Pittsburgh players don't sign contracts
| Date | Tuesday, October 22, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Yesterday was quite an interesting day among the local baseball people. President Nimick's anticipations were not realized, as none of the old players would sign. According to the president, Sunday was the only player asked to sign and he refused to do so until after the Brotherhood meeting, which will be held on the 3 th of next month. Mr. Nimick reminded Sunday of his promise to sign a contract without hesitation and Sunday replied to the effect that his promise would just be as good after November 4 as now. He added that he will not sign a contract until the Brotherhood difficulty is settled. He is a member of that organization and he means to stick to it, regardless of all consequences. Beckley did not sign, but after leaving Nimick's office he said that he will certainly play in the Pittburg League club next season; that there will be no Brotherhood club and that the entire business is a big bluff. Hanlon also withheld his signature from a contract, as he also wishes to see what results from the Brotherhood and League meeting. |
| Source | Pittsburgh Dispatch |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
placement of the umpire
| Date | Wednesday, May 8, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | A St. Louis exchange says that “Umpire Lynch positively refuses to go behind the pitcher when man are on bases, and insists on umpiring from behind the plate. This is contrary to the written law. Other umpires follow the rules in this respect.” It is entirely optional with the umpire. The rules say not a word on the subject of his umpiring from behind the pitcher or behind the bat. The former is the safest and likely, therefore, to be the most correct as regards judging the ball. |
| Source | Brooklyn Eagle |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
player advocacy by the Brotherhood
| Date | Wednesday, September 4, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | In speaking of the League Brotherhood the other day a prominent member of the order and noted player said:-- “I notice they are talking about classification and many other schemes, but you can rest assured that the Brotherhood will demand their rights at all times. The Brotherhood has done an immense amount of good. There is less drinking in the ranks than ever before, and this encourages President Ward more than anything else. See what we have accomplished. Detroit had to pay Thompson, and how they did squeal. And perhaps big Sam doesn't love the Brotherhood? We also went to the front for Hardie Richardson and Dunlap when their ankles were broken. But this is not all by a long shot. Did you hear of Casey's case with the Phillies? You didn't, eh? Well, Casey was practicing one morning on the Philadelphia grounds, and himself and Hallman collided, which injured Casey's arm so much that he was laid up for a couple of weeks without pay. Casey appealed to the Brotherhood and Al Reach will have to pay Casey, as he was injured while in the employ of the club and on the ball field. There has been a great deal of lying about Sutcliffe, who originally received $2250 from the Detroit Club. The contract said $2000 and the magnates claimed that Sutcliffe was receiving what his literal contract called for when he was obliged to take a reduction from Cleveland. This is not so, for Sutcliffe received but $1750 from the Cleveland Club. It has been given out that the Brotherhood would fight the Pittsburg Club for Pete Conway's salary when the season is ended, but such a fight will never occur, and Conway knows the reason why. The Brotherhood is not a beneficial association, but will help anybody in need who has been a member of the organization. Our aim is to have all men treated alike, and I am happy to say that we have been very successful in our undertaking. |
| Source | The Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
player movement in the Players League
| Date | Wednesday, November 13, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [reporting the Players League meeting 11/6/1889] Regarding the transfer of players, it was decided that the central board shall have full control, and that during the playing season no changes whatever shall be made. In case a player at the end of the season is dissatisfied with the club with which he has been playing he shall file an application with the central board, citing the cause for his wish to be transferred. This they will then act upon, and if they think it worthy of notice will agree to the change. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
player sales and the Brotherhood contract; the $2,000 limit
| Date | Sunday, June 2, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from an open letter by John Ward] [discussing the contract negotiated by the NL and Brotherhood 11/87] One of the principal grievances presented was that in several instances clubs had used the power of the reserve rule to force the consent of players to be sold, regardless of any preferences the latter might otherwise have had. For example, the Boston club said to Buffinton and Gunning, whom it held on its reserve list: “We have sold you to Philadelphia.” But,” they replied, “we don’t want to go to Philadelphia. Our homes are here and we prefer to remain, or, if we must leave, we expect to have a voice in the choice of a new home.” To which the club answered: “You will go to Philadelphia a we direct, or, if you refuse, we will hold you at the minimum of $1,000.” And so, with the prospect of being held at a big reduction of salary and at $1,000 to $1,500 less than Philadelphia would pay, the players were forced to consent, and the Boston club pocketed a price for two players it did not itself care to keep. Realizing the danger of allowing such an arbitrary power to remain in the hands of the clubs the players’ committee insisted that the new contract provide that no player be reserved at a reduction of salary. ... ... At the meeting of the committees the obsolete $2,000 limit rule was not mentioned, because as it never had had an existence except on paper, and was violated openly by every league club from the time of its adoption, no one of the players’ committee ever dreamed that such a thing could be offered by the league as an excuse for not keeping its entire agreement. Before the joint meeting of the league and American association, held several months later, at a time when the players had gone to their homes, it seems to have occurred to the league magnates that the limit rule would prevent writing more than that amount in the contract and upon the refusal of the association to agree to strike the lie out of the national agreement the league decided to repudiate its agreement with the players. That is, in order to keep up the pretense of observing a rule which everyone knew never had been observed, whose continuance had been a disgrace to its makers and a standing evidence of their own bad faith, the league violated an important agreement, deliberately entered into with its players.... The brotherhood committee, having notified all players that the new contract was satisfactory, many went ahead and signed, and, relying upon the assurance of their committee and the faith of the league, they accepted side contracts for any amount in excess of the limit. Not until many players had already signed and when it was too late to do anything, did the brotherhood committee learn the true state of affairs. |
| Source | Cleveland Plain Dealer |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Player's League grounds in Cleveland
| Date | Wednesday, October 30, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | It is the purpose of the people who have leased the ground to build a model ball park. A large double-decked grand stand will be built facing the infield. It will easily accommodate 6000 people. The fields will be of turf and sod and will be a level as a billiard table. The ground is plenty large enough for all purposes and has been leased for two years with the privilege of renewal for five years. The price is $2000 a year. The accommodations for the patrons of the game will be of the best and there will be every facility to reach the ground. The Brooklyn road will run special electric trains to the park. These trains will take on their loads on Superior street, and as they will be specially for the use of the park's patrons will not stop for passengers after leaving the square. The time to the park will be seventeen minutes. Mr. Albert Johnson, who is interested in the new park, says that it is being built for the purpose of having games played in it next season. It depends upon which way matters go as to who will play in the park. The Brotherhood will meet in New York, Nov. 4, and then something definite will be known. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Player's League players signed
| Date | Tuesday, December 31, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Frank Brunell, as Secretary of the Players' National League, has issued his first official bulletin, promulgating approved contracts for the season of 1890. It gives a list of 113 men who have signed contracts. Of these nine are classed as deserters, leaving 104 who are still claimed as loyal to the organization. Chicago Tribune December 31, 1889 |
| Source | Chicago Tribune |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Players League may force Washington out of the League
| Date | Wednesday, October 23, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | “He [Hewitt] won't get out at present,” said Mr. Day, “and I doubt very much if he does at all. Hewitt hasn't the money necessary to run the club. During the past season he interested several men of wealth in Washington in the club, and they had all but consented to take hold of it with him when this Brotherhood story was sprung. Naturally this sensation frightened them and they refused to put their money in what appeared to them to be a most uncertain venture. This, of course, was somewhat of a disappointment to Hewitt. I dare say that in case the players do break from the League and he fails to get monetary aid, Hewitt will withdraw. But if the League and Brotherhood have a satisfactory meeting, as I hope and believe will be the case, Washington's president will doubtless have no difficulty in obtaining what backing he wants and will say in the League. |
| Source | The Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
| Date | Wednesday, September 25, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | “With all the star players,” said A Boston gentleman who has promised to put big money into the scheme, “I can't see why it will not be a success. The people go to see the actors and not the theatre. What do the public care who runs the sport so long as it is honestly carried on. I am sure that the base ball public of Boston would rather like to see the players get some of the immense profits made by the triumvirs and would support them. The players will all be guaranteed good salaries, with a part of the profits. “Mr. Ward is positive that the game is on the increase, and most of the men figure that they can make considerable more money. Men are working quietly in each of the League cities, and the League can rest assured that they have a fight before them of immense proportions. “The old stockholders of the Boston Club are working hard to bring around the rupture, as it will give them a chance to settle old grievances. Several of the best men in the Boston team have already promised to work hard for the new deal. |
| Source | The Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Players League solidarity; NL inducing players to break contracts
| Date | Wednesday, December 18, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [editorial matter] Defections have not been so numerous or so important as the League counted upon, and with the exception of Clarkson, the men whom it has induced to violate their Brotherhood pledges, and in some instances regular contracts, have not been either in character, playing reputation, or intelligence of such calibre as to make their defection a serious loss to the Brotherhood, nor a material gain to the League. The latter seems to be getting at the purchasable men very quickly, and it now only remains to be seen how many more of this kind there are in the players' ranks. But no matter how great the number of deserters, the development of the new league will not be hindered very materially thereby, as the mistake of the League in permanently crippling the Association affords a means of making good defections, without which it is quite certain that the Brotherhood scheme would have collapsed ere this. The Sporting Life December 18, 1889 [editorial matter] The Players' League, to its credit be it said, has so far refrained from approaching any contracted players whatever, and this policy will, if maintained, gain for it the approbation of the general public, which does not as a mass sympathize to any marked degree with the reserve rule, nor bother itself about the details of its application. With this public the side which is continually figuring th e newspapers as having induced this, that and the other player to break his contract must certainly lose caste, and the other side, which just now happens to be the Players' League, gain accordingly. What is to be apprehended, however, is that the new league may be also driven by unwise counsel into the contract-breaking business with a view to retaliation. If that should happen a carnival for contract breakers will doubtless set in, and base ball receive a set-back in the estimation of the decent and honest lovers and patrons of the game from which it may take years to recover. The Sporting Life December 18, 1889 |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
players betting on their own teams
| Date | Wednesday, October 2, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | There has been too much betting by players on the success of their club team in match games this season to make success possible. It is in direct violation of the constitutional law of the association. But that fact that has been apparently ignored by the club players interested. No player should be allowed to be interested in any bet on a game in which he is a participant. And yet hundreds of dollars have been invested in this way this season, causing the loss of many a game from their anxiety to win. |
| Source | Brooklyn Eagle |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
| Date | Wednesday, November 6, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from W. I Harris's column] Mr. Byrne was as generous to his players as John B. Day was to the Giants. Indeed, more so. Mr. Day's men were not under contract after Oct. 15, and he was in a measure obliged to give them a good thing to get them to play, and as I happen to know, the men would not have played for less than 40 per cent. Mr. Day gave them 50 per cent--$380.13 for each man. Mr. Byrne's players were bound to play until Oct. 31, under their contracts. Byrne wasn't obliged to give them anything. He did though. He divided equally, and each of the Grooms got $389.29—or $9.16 each more than the Giants received. The reason for this discrepancy was due to the fact that Mr. Bryne's expense bill for carriages was not so heavy. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
playing points
| Date | Sunday, April 28, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | This is the way Comiskey sizes up a winning ball club: “There is little difference in the actual playing strength of teams nowadays. Nearly all professional ball players can catch a ball when it is thrown to them, and he is a poor one, incd3eed, who cannot make a safe hit once in a while. When I size up a team I do not look at the players' batting or fielding records. A winning team is made up of men who will 'turn tricks' when they see a chance—men who study points, and work every advantage to win. All is fair in love and war, and the same may be said of baseball. |
| Source | Chicago Tribune |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
position of the third baseman; catcher signals
| Date | Sunday, January 6, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [quoting George Pinkney] In playing the base, or rather when I take my position on the field, I stand from ten to twelve feet from the base–down the line toward the short stop and about three to five feet behind the line. Of course I vary my position according to the batsman. I take my signs from the catcher, who has signaled the pitcher the kind of a ball he wants delivered to this or that particular batsman. A live third baseman will make many good points during the game which will add to the interest of it. He has many chances for covering second base, which a number of third basemen fail to do. Time and again that base is left vacant by the baseman and short stop, both going after a high fly back of the base. This leaves it unprotected and gives the base runner, who is always ready to take advantage of any points, an opportunity to make an extra base in case the ball should be dropped. A good third baseman should be an accurate throwing, both overhand and underhand, and a sure catch, on account of the peculiar twist on the high balls hit up around third base. These balls must be grabbed and held firmly until they have settled in your hands or they are apt to twist out and shoot away from you in such a manner that you cannot recover them before they reach the ground. A good third baseman should be a wideawake and lively man, because he has little time to consider after a ball is hit to him, for they are of the hot and sharp kind. |
| Source | Brooklyn Eagle |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
praise for the double umpire system
| Date | Sunday, May 26, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Those who witnessed the games of base ball last week, on the Boston grounds, can hardly fail to have been struck with the great success of the double-umpire system as there practiced. There has been no improvement in the regulations of the games of a long time that equaled it in importance. It was made evident to the eyes of the observing spectator that here must have been constantly wrong decisions upon the bases under the old system, scarcely a game occurring without them, and balls and strikes were far better decided under the new arrangement than under that of inspecting them from behind the pitcher, which has lately been practised. Umpire Lynch, who is acting alone this week, is one of the most satisfactory men in the business, but he ought to have an aid; indeed, he is reported to have said himself that the double-umpire system was a necessity. |
| Source | Indianapolis Journal |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
prescience about the Players League
| Date | Wednesday, November 6, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from W. I Harris] “The Players' National League,” and that is what Ward tells me it will be called, sounds very pretty, doesn't it? How long will it live? Well, that depends. One year at any rate, and what then if the capitalists, who are behind it, don't receive fat dividends? I asked a capitalist to-day how long he thought it would take the League to fill the places of the men who are preparing to desert their employers. He though, perhaps, two years, certainly three at most. When pressed, he admitted that when the moment arrived there wouldn't be a great deal of money for either players' league or national League. What is to become of the players when the capitalists got enough and draw out? “Oh,”was the reply, “There'll be money made for a couple of years anyhow, and then, well, that's too far off to speculate about now.” There you have it. The men who are going into this venture are not philanthropists. Very few of them have any sympathy with the poor, abused base ball “slaves.” They are in it for the money and when it ceases to be profitable the players may shift for themselves. I wish the boys success with all my heart, but somehow I cannot bring myself to believe that they will get there. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
profit-sharing among PL clubs eliminated
| Date | Friday, November 8, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [reporting on the Players’ League meeting 11/7/1889] Before the players’ and stockholders’ delegates to the Players’ National League preliminary convention adjourned Thursday, they made a radical change in the financial plan of the organization. In all other particulars the articles of agreement, printed Wednesday, were closely followed. This change was brought about in deference to public opinion. As the scheme was first presented it could have been considered as a base ball “Trust.” Now the co-operative idea has been wholly eliminated, except that the profits which are to go to the players will be shared equally among all the men who play for the new League. Originally it was intended to pool the net profits of all the clubs and make an equal division among the stockholders as well as the players. The action on Thursday places the stockholders upon an individual club basis in each of the eight cities, and the players alone will pool their profits. |
| Source | Philadelphia Item |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
proportion of grandstand to general admission tickets
| Date | Sunday, July 7, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | When the receipts for the Thursday [7/4] games [Boston vs. Cleveland] it was found that the attendance was 19,600 and the receipts about $11,600. |
| Source | Chicago Tribune |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
proportion of ladies at the New Polo Grounds
| Date | Wednesday, September 11, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from Caylor's column] There is no game played at the New York grounds which does not have from 100 to 200 ladies in attendance. I mean all that the word implies; ladies from the best class of people many of them high up in the world of society. It is not necessary to make “ladies' days” to get them out. They are of that class who call it a pleasure to go or be taken by husband, brother and friend, and pay fifty cents for the privilege. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
proposal for foul tip strike
| Date | Wednesday, November 6, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [reporting on the PL meeting of 11/5/1889] It is thought that the rules of playing will suffer very little change. There was some talk of calling a foul tip a strike when held, but it was strenuously objected that nothing should be done that would tend to affect the batting. |
| Source | Philadelphia Item |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
proposals for umpire signals
| Date | Sunday, April 14, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [a letter to the editor from John J. Rooney, Captain R. F. Downing & Co. B.B. Club.] … Every one who attends professional games, when the crowds are large and noisy, and the umpire is not blessed with a strong voice, understands this difficulty. Frequently three-fourths of the spectators in distant parts of the field, and even the more fortunate holders and grand-stand tickets, do not know until the close of the inning, or at least after a provoking delay, whether a man is “safe” or “out,” or whether a strike or a ball has been called on the batter. … …I would respectfully suggest a simple expedient—a code of bell signals. Place a man or boy in charge of a pleasantly sounding gong within plain hearing of the umpire's decision. It is evident, first, that the code should be extremely simple; a second, that all professional and crack amateur teams should adopt the same code; otherwise the plan would be worse than useless. May I again presume to make a few suggestions that have privately met the approval of base ball experts and lovers of the game? First—For all “strikes, “actual or called, one bell. No bell after a pitched ball necessarily means a “ball,” unless otherwise announced. Second--”Safe” in running bases, one ball: “out,” two bells. No more is needed. The “one” bell for a strike and the “one” bell for “safe” need not conflict, as the two points of play covered cannot be made at the same time. A quick bell would meet any possible objection. These signals I offer merely as a suggestion, but I feel certain that many ball players and devotees of the national sport will support me in the claim that in view of the great and fast increasing crowds attending ball games, and the extent of many of the grounds, there is an urgent necessity for a change that will bring every one, even in the remotest back seat, within immediate and distinct reach of the umpire's decision. Let the managers try it, and the base ball public will gratefully respond. New York Sun April 14, 1889 [from a letter to the editor from James Sullivan of New Haven, Conn.] I think a have a little code of base ball signals superior to those advanced by Mr. Rooney in The Sun of yesterday. The use of a gong is beset with difficulties for it would have to be a loud-sounding gong to reach the ears of 10,000 excited spectators, many of whom have imperfect hearing, or the boy in charge may misunderstand the umpire or make a mistake in his excitement. Why not have the umpire himself instantly telegraph his decisions to the anxious spectators? Here is my little code: For every strike the umpire shall raise one hand straight over his head; for a ball he shall make no significant motion. Whenever a man is out he shall raise both hands over his head; and if a man is safe, whether at the bat or running bases, he need make no significant motion. What could be more simple? A deaf mute could almost umpire under these rules, and players and spectators would understand him. New York Sun April 16, 1889 [from an anonymous “twenty years' reader of the Sun] As suggestions seem to be in order, permit the undersigned to offer the following signals calculated to benefit the patrons of the national game: First, regulation of balls and strikes—Let each umpire provide himself with a red handkerchief, and wave same when calling a strike on the batter. Second, outs—Wave a rag when man is out between the bases. New York Sun April 17, 1889 [from the reply from John Rooney] ...First of all, the umpire has enough to do in watching a game. He would object or fail to make himself a “jack-in-the-box.” His attention must be centred on the play, and any distraction or unnecessary increase of duties weakens and burdens him. The umpire would be compelled to shout, throw up his hands, and work the hand register at the same time. Secondly, the arm signals are not sufficient emphatic to reach all spectators. The arm could be elevated only for an instant, and would not compel an knowledge of the decision, such as a sharp bell would. The spectators don't want to watch the umpire all the time. A bell would reach them whether they watched or not. Moreover, the signal proposed is not sufficiently distinctive,and would consequently soon fall into disuse. It is not strong enough. A bell demands attention, speaks unmistakably, and at once stamps the decision with authority. Admirers of the game are admitting the necessity for some code of signals, although they may differ on the form. Let the managers give the scheme a trial. New York Sun April 18, 1889 |
| Source | New York Sun |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
prospects for an AA-PL or AA-NL alliance; is the AA a major league
| Date | Friday, August 23, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from W. I. Harris's column] Whether there will be an alliance between the two organizations [AA and PL] is an entirely different question. What the Association has to gain by such an alliance is not perfectly plain. If the object of it is to get protection from raids on their players, an alliance would be simply jumping out of the frying pan into the fire. They would stop forays by the Players' League, but expose themselves to the sallies of the National League. This would not be a gain, because the League would probably take more players away from them than the Brotherhood. The Sporting Life August 23, 1889 [editorial matter] The problem that confronts the Association is not that of amalgamation, but of alliance, and here the Association is between the devil and the deep sea, because, no matter with which side it cats its fortunes, the other will be sure to war upon it. There is, however, a good deal more concern expressed over this phase of the situation than is called for. The only way in which either of the two big leagues can make war upon the Association is by raiding it for players, since it has no cities left which would prove advantageous additions to either of the big leagues, and there is, besides, no city whose loss could not be made good at short notice, provided neither of the big leagues increase their circuits, which, it can be taken for granted, neither will be foolish enough to do. But if the desertions shall stop there the existence of the Association is by no means endangered from outward agencies, as least, because Washington, New Haven and Newark are open to it in the East, and Milwaukee or Minneapolis, with good teams ready to hand, in the West. So there is no reason to altogether despair of the future of the Association with so many possibilities before it, if it can but regulate its internal affairs, and shape its circuit satisfactorily, and especially cut the base ball coat according to the financial cloth, always keeping in view the limited capacity of its small cities to successfully compete with the wealth and resources of the National League and Players' League. So, about the only effective method of reprisal left for any warring power is to help itself to such of the players of the Association as it may want, and that is not such a dreadful thing, after all. The number of men either the League or Players' League could take from the Association would be limited; because comparatively few of them would be up to the playing standard of the major leagues, to say nothing of exceeding it, which alone would warrant the big clubs in making changes, as they are pretty well loaded up now with good playing material. And for every man captured from the Association another player, perhaps almost as good, would be available because of release from the big clubs, which after all, cannot afford to carry more men than they can find use for. So any raid upon the Association would, perhaps, amount, in effect, to nothing more than an exchange of players with this marked advantage to the Association: The men whom the big clubs would take would swell their salary lists and relieve the Association of higher priced material than it can really afford to carry, while the released major league players it can get in return for its stolen stars would cost it far less in the aggregate, and thus expenses would be materially reduced. So good would come out of fancied evil, and none of the Association clubs be affected by the change of players, except, perhaps, the Athletic Club, which being the only club which is brought into direct competition with the big major leagues would probably suffer, with a weakened team, by contrast. So with the fact assured that no matter which side the Association allies itself with it must expect to receive no quarter from the other, and with all the possible damage discounted in advance, it only remains for the Association to consider the advantages and disadvantages of alliance with one party or the other, since there can be no neutrality so long as the battle between the National League and Players League [illegible] Now this is an important matter for the Association because of the bearing it will have upon its own future, and deserves very careful consideration. A conclusion should not be hastily arrived at. There is still more than a month left before active hostilities can be begun, which will give the Association ample time to size up the situation in all its bearings and shape its course accordingly. The first and most important thing would doubtless be to learn just what advantages and conditions an alliance with the Players' League would confer and what the intentions of that League are toward itself, and for this purpose a conference would be in order. The relations of the League with and sentiment towards its old ally are too well known to need any particular attention, and it only remains to discover just what advantages would accrue from alliance with the Players' League. A crisis for the Association is approaching and it will require skillful handling. In the disposition of the problems confronting the organization sentiment should form no factor. This is important. The Sporting Life August 23, 1890 |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
prospects for professionals in Australia
| Date | Wednesday, December 4, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from the Melbourne correspondent] I have received several letters from players in the United States who want to come out here and play. They offer to sign for sums varying from $250 to $400 per month. Now, the people here are purely amateur, and I want to tell the boys, through your paper, that they are better off where they are. There is no money yet in playing the game here, and I would not advise any of them to come here on the chance of getting a place to work. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
prospects for the League and Association
| Date | Wednesday, October 23, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [editorial matter] According to latest reports, the League will, in addition to its trouble with its players, have a threatened breach in its circuit to repair, as the reports from Washington are anything but reassuring, and it is becoming a question whether the Capital will be represented in the National League next season. Ordinarily this would cause the League little concern, as the American Association always affords a fair field for spoliation and the League, true to its instincts and traditions, would have little hesitation in helping itself to whatever it wanted. But with the controversy with its players unsettled and a possible revolt staring it in the face, the League would, of course, consider long and consider well before invoking the open or secret hostility of the Association, whose moral influence, at least, will be needed if the threatened rupture with the Brotherhood should come. … For the Association the situation is also made precarious by the uncertain attitude of two of its principal clubs, Cincinnati and Brooklyn. Otherwise it is, however, in much better shape than the League, by reason of the absence of any entangling and irritating legislation, such as the classification, rule, the non-existence within its ranks of an exacting and threatening players' organization, and the exemption from a repressive contract like the Brotherhood contract; and if it had but the wisdom, craft, business sense and, above all, the faculty of sinking personal animosities for the common good in a pinch, that the League possesses, and had withal a forceful executive, like Mr. Krauthoff, for instance, it could, from the present situation of the League and the Brotherhood, and the base ball profession generally, evolve such a system and wring such concessions as to make it the chief factor in base ball, and, in time, the leading organization. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
purported offers for Comiskey
| Date | Monday, July 22, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | At the conclusion of to-day's [7/21] game President Stern wired President Von der Ahe of the Browns, offering $10,000 for Comiskey. It is the intention, if secured, to make him manager of the Cincinnati team, playing him occasionally. Comiskey said he would be glad to come. Several members of the club say they have good reason to believe that Von der Ahe will accept Stern's offer. St. Louis Republic July 22, 1889 President Von der Ahe says that he received no telegram from President Stern of the Cincinnati club, making him an offer of $10,000 for Comiskey's release. He also states that he would not accept the offer if made. St. Louis Republic July 22, 1889 “Is it true, Mr. Byrne, that you offered and St. Louis refused $12,000 for Comiskey?” The St. Louis Republic reported asked the president of the Brooklyn base ball club to-day [8/3] “Not quite true. The price we finally offered was $15,000 for Comiskey and Mr. Von der Ahe refused that.” “Is that not the biggest price ever offered for a ball player?” “Yes, far the biggest.” “What makes Comiskey so mighty valuable?” “Oh, everybody knows why Comiskey is valuable. It is his ability to handle men and make them play ball. If a man has got base ball in him at all Comiskey gets it out of him. He handles his men as a good officer handles a body of soldiers. He is a wonderfully good judge of the capabilities of players, and he has them playing up to the top not every time. Milligan was rejected by Philadelphia, and Comiskey took him and made him a magnificent catcher. Boyle was an unknown when Comiskey picked him up and put him in Bushong's place. His phenomenal record last year shows how good the judgment of the St. Louis captain is. Duffee, the centre fielder, is a boy who did not cost the club a cent. see what a player Comiskey has made of him. McCarthy is another man whom Comiskey has made in the same way, and his spirit is the motive power of the team. He is worth $15,000 to us. You see he is not only a captain, he is also the finest kind of a manager on and off the field.” St. Louis Republic August 4, 1889 W.H. Voltz of Philadelphia is still in town. He is not here for the purpose of hustling votes for the association presidency. He is here on a bigger mission. He is after Capt. Comiskey for the Philadelphias. He made an offer of $15,000 to President Von der Ahe for Comiskey's release. His offer was refused and Voltz was informed that under no circumstances would Comiskey be released from the St. Louis club. This is the biggest sum ever offered for a player in the history of the national game. Pittsburg made a big bluff to “borrow” Anson for a season for $15,000 several years ago, but when it came to a show down the Pittsburg club wilted. The Philadelphia club wanted the Browns' famous general to captain the team and play first base. Harry Wright would still be manager, but Comiskey would have supreme control over the players. St. Louis Republic October 3, 1889[John Rogers admitted to trying to buy Comiskey, but not for that much. SLR 10/8/1889] |
| Source | St. Louis Republic |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
quick pitching 2
| Date | Wednesday, April 10, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from Chadwick's column] I notice that in the American Association Guide, on pate 139, the “official construction of the playing rules” is given, and on referring to Rule 18 the clause reads: – “No quick delivery will be allowed.” Where did President Wikoff find authority for this construction of the rule? A quick delivery of the ball is a very strong point in strategic pitching, and in no portion of Rule 18 is it prohibited. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
rail access to the Brooklyn Players park
| Date | Wednesday, December 25, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Work on the ground secured by the Brooklyn Players' Club is to be pushed at once. According to General Jourdan, president of the Kings County Elevated Railroad, work will also be immediately commenced on the construction of the branch extension of the upper part of the road in the Twenty-sixth ward, Brooklyn, to the Van Sicklen avenue grounds of the new club. The extension will run direct to the grand stand, and every effort will be made to have it completed by the beginning of the base ball season next year, when it is expected the new Brotherhood League will do a rushing business. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Reach dismisses the Brotherhood's grievances
| Date | Wednesday, November 6, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from an interview of Reach] “There is not a man with any common sense, outside of the Brotherhood, who will say that the players are underpaid, or not being well treated by club owners. They have absolutely no grievances, and are being led by a number of old players who have seen their best days, and, knowing that they will very soon have to retire and make room for younger men, are endeavoring to get up a scheme like this for self-protection and to keep them in the service. |
| Source | The Philadelphia Item |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
recruiting a player
| Date | Wednesday, May 29, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from the Pittsburgh correspondent] Al Scandrett isn't through smiling yet over the way he captured young Beam. … ...there weren't so many clubs after Beam, but the base ball people of the town brought a terrible pressure to bear on the young man with side whiskers. Al, however, after winning over his father by asserting that Billy Sunday was an Evangelist, and would take good care of his boy, gave his terms and left. The next day he gave it out that he wanted Milbee, of Scottdale, a better man than Beam, and had it printed afar and wide that he had gone to Scottdale for this phenomenon. Beam was in town the next day and attached his John Hancock to the contract. The bluff worked. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
reduced minor league salaries
| Date | Wednesday, February 13, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | The testimony of minor league managers everywhere is that many players are singing for from 15 to 25 per cent. less than they signed for last season. This is a most satisfactory and encouraging sign, showing, as it does, that there is really a disposition to live up to salary limit rules. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
regulating the purchase of minor leaguers
| Date | Wednesday, November 20, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [reporting the NL meeting of 11/13-15/1889] ...Mr. Spalding introduced resolutions calculated to make the minor league people very tired, as it upset their schemes of quick sales and liberal profits. The purport of these resolutions is for the League not to sign players other than their reserved men prior to Feb. 1, and not then, except through President Young, which will stop all competition: Resolved, That no League club shall from this day enter into negotiations or contract with players not under League reservation, or enter into negotiations with any club for the transfer of any of its players until February 1, 1890. Resolved, That a committee of three be appointed, to be designated as the Negotiation Committee, of which the president of the League shall be chairman, to which shall be referred all applications from players desiring position on League teams, as well as applications from club members of the National Agreement wishing to dispose of the release of their players. Resolved, That the chairman of the committee shall be the exclusive channel through which such applications and negotiations can be conducted by the National League or any of its clubs, and said committee shall ascertain the terms upon which any such release can be procured or such contracts executed. Resolved, That all League clubs, in order to secure the services of such players, will indicate to the chairman the positions to be filled and the names of the players wanted, and, upon the unanimous vote of said committee, a contract may be executed between a club and any player so approved and promulgated in the usual manner. Resolved, that the committee, by its unanimous vote, be authorized to draw from the guarantee fund of the League such funds as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of this resolution, to be repaid to said fund by the clubs benefitted thereby. These resolutions were adopted and Messrs. Young, Byrne and Reach were appointed as members of the negotiations committee. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
reporter at the Plain Dealer
| Date | Wednesday, October 23, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | ... Mr. Frank R. Dean, sporting editor of the Cleveland Plain Dealer and correspondent of The Sporting Times. Mr. Dean succeeded Mr. Brunell on the Plain Dealer and was a hard worker. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
reporter for the Chicago Tribune
| Date | Wednesday, May 8, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Harry Palmer, The Sporting Life's Chicago correspondent and special commissioner upon the recent Spalding tour of the world, has accepted the position of base ball editor of the Chicago Tribune. Tom Gallagher, who, as sporting editor of the paper, has looked after base ball as well as the other branches of sport in the Tribune's columns, will in future look after the turf column of the paper exclusively, while Mr. Palmer will handle the base ball news exclusively. He will accompany the Chicago team upon its trips to other League cities and will in fact write up every championship game played by Anson's gentlemen from this time forth. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
reporters touring with the club
| Date | Tuesday, June 25, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | Tim Murnane, of the Boston Globe, and Edward Stevens, of the Herald, are with the Boston club, and will make the tour through the West. |
| Source | Indianapolis Journal |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
reserved players in the California League
| Date | Wednesday, March 27, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from Waller Wallace's column] It is a matter of profound regret to me, and so I am sure it is to the several managers, that there are so many players in the above list [of California League teams] under the reserve rule of Eastern organizations, but the rivalry existing between the four cities is so intense and bitter that each manager has been forced to sign the very best material available, with which to cope successfully against opposing teams. Quite a number of these men were at hand within the confines of our State, and once in California they have found it impossible to “break away” from its genial climate and people. Result--”they've come to stay. |
| Source | The Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
resistance to Sunday games in Queens; single admission double header
| Date | Saturday, August 31, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | There will be no Sunday games at the Queens County ball grounds to-morrow, not even at Ridgewood, and to-day’s games with the Kansas City team will be the last appearance of that well managed team in Brooklyn this season. At the close of yesterday’s game Sheriff Goldner, of Queens County, had an interview with Messrs. Byrne and Doyle and informed them that the law against Sunday ball playing in that county would hereafter be strictly enforced, beginning with to-morrow, and he suggested the withdrawal of the Brooklyn Club’s games, which Mr. Byrne promptly acceded to. There has been no desire on the part of the Brooklyn Club’s management to work in opposition to the proper enforcement of the law against all the clubs in Queens County: but as long as other grounds were allowed to be used they wanted to play at Ridgewood. This sudden change of base obliged the hurried arrangement of two games at Washington Park to-day, the first beginning at 2 P.M. promptly and the second within ten minutes after the close of the first contest, to allow time to remark the position lines. Only one admission will be charged for the two games. |
| Source | Brooklyn Eagle |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
revising the AA constitution
| Date | Wednesday, March 6, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | It is well known that Jimmy Williams is doing the heavy work on revising the constitution. He finds in President Wikoff and Manager Schmelz assistants of no mean type, and between the three, the new constitution will come up for adoption with no technical points to bother the delegates. There will be no errors, either, it might be well to add, and it is probable, that for the first time, the constitution of the American Association will go to the market with no excuses of aggravating mistakes. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Richter on the Players League, player sales
| Date | Wednesday, October 2, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [editorial matter] There can be but little doubt that the movement of the Ball Players' Brotherhood to form an organization independent of and rival to the National League has assumed practical form and has been definitely decided upon, and the National League may as well prepare itself to reap the fruits of the miserable coddling policy it has pursued for years towards its stars, for whom it has sacrificed much in money, comfort, and sometimes principle, with the usual return of ever-increasing exaction, coupled with base ingratitude, and prepare itself for the greatest battle for supremacy, nay, for existence, base ball has ever witnessed. … ...The fact, however, is that all the stated grievances of the Brotherhood are summarized in alleged breach of faith by the League, the adoption of the classification rule, and the perpetuation of the sales system. These are all the weighty causes for such supreme universal dissatisfaction as is stated to exist in the Brotherhood ranks. Now, why not be frank and admit that the chief basis for the revolt is in plain, unvarnished words—greed; a desire to absorb the supposed enormous profits of the business along with the salaries. There can be no other more potent ground for the rebellion, as the given reasons are not sufficiently weighty to induce such a radical step as the Brotherhood contemplates. First—the alleged breach of faith consists simply in a failure to write the full amount of salary in the contract, and that failure has been explained time and again. Second—The classification rule, which had become necessary for the preservation of the League, inflicted no hardships and did not conflict with the Brotherhood contracts, inasmuch as every star player was taken care of, not a single salary was shaved down except in the case of Sutcliffe, which case would have been, or will be, righted upon appeal, and the law was only designed for the future to put a check on the exactions of incoming new players. Surely this rule cannot be so very bad when the Brotherhood proposes to pay its players under their present classification figures, for the first season, at least, under the new order. Third—The sales “evil,” of which the players complain is no evil at all, but is a necessary part of the business which cannot be eliminated.... A club's chief assets are its players; outside of these it has really nothing to represent the money invested and the risks assumed except a ground and a lot of useless lumber. Under the sales system that club which has or secures the best players has the best assets, and is therefore strong financially, as it can show something of market value. The sales system is a necessary concomitant of the reserve rule and both are essential to the professional game. They add stability to the business and give clubs a financial standing and value that it was impossible to attain under the old wild-cat system, when at the end of a season a club not only had nothing to show in the way of assets except a lot of expired contracts and a grand stand, but had no certainty that it would be able to put any sort of team in the field in the following season. … take it as you will, the sales system is not an unmitigated evil (except inasmuch as it leads clubs into extravagance in purchasing and remunerating players), and the Brotherhood recognizes this fact in that it does not demand the abolition of the system, but simply a share in the proceeds of it; it merely insist upon a slice of the purchase money, thus showing conclusively that it is not a question of principle so much as a matter of personal gain. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
Ridgewood Park finances
| Date | Wednesday, May 29, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [from W. I. Harris's column] Chris Von der Ahe is said to be the luckiest man in base ball, and in some respects he is, but there are others quite as lucky, if not more so, so far as money-making is concerned, than the German magnate of the St. Louis Club. Among them may be counted four young men in this locality. They are William W. Wallace, W. A. Mayer, H. F. Rueger and J. G. O'Keefe, respectively, president, treasurer, secretary and stockholders in the Ridgewood Park Exhibition Company. These gentlemen way back in '85 conceived the idea that a ball park at Ridgewood would prove a paying investment. Wallace was a ball crank, and so was O'Keefe, and they talked the other two into the scheme, and the company was formed. Wallace was the prime mover. None of them had over $300 apiece when they leased some building lots at Ridgewood, just across the Kings county line. The grounds were small, but they did a good business, and when the first season was over it was found to have amounted to something like $25,000. The company then increased its capital stock to $15,000, two-thirds of it being retained by the originators of the scheme. The excess of profits and additional stock was used to buy land and to build proper stands and bleachers. Up to this time the Brooklyn Club had not used the Ridgewood grounds, although other professional and semi-professional clubs were playing there and drawing good crowds, particularly on Sunday, no matter what the attraction was. The privileges of the grounds also brought a handsome return. Little by little the company added to its holding, and finally when the Kings county officials stopped Sunday base ball at Washington Park the Brooklyns went to Ridgewood. At first they did not play at the Ridgewood Park, but finally made an arrangement with Wallace and his partner, which has proved a bonanza for all parties. The exhibition company is now endeavoring to purchase that part of the property they hold by lease. They already own three-fifths of the park, and good judges say that the entire property is worth at least $100,000. If this is true, the men who commenced four years ago on less than $1200, have now $60,000 worth of property that is paying them handsome dividends. There are games at Ridgewood nearly every day, and on Sundays always. The Ridgewood people have made a contract by which the Newark Club is the home club on all Sundays, on which the Brooklyns are away from home. The Newarks are paid $200 a game, and play against whatever club the management produces. There is seldom less than 2500 people at these Sunday games, and generally more. President Wallace is a hard working compositor in the office of the Press, and Mr. O'Keefe is in the same line. Mr. Mayer is a Brooklyn baker, and Mr. Rueger is an engraver. |
| Source | Sporting Life |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
riot and revelry of Sunday baseball
| Date | Monday, May 20, 1889 |
|---|---|
| Text | [reporting a meeting of the Sunday Observance Association of Kings County] Very careful attention has been given to the subject of Sunday base ball games. No regular games of base ball are played in Kings County on Sunday, but at Ridgewood Park, just over the line, in Queens County, games are played regularly. However, all the demoralizing effects and influences of this fact are visited upon our people as well. The law and order societies of Queens county and the New York Sabbath Committee joined forces with this association and visited the law officers of that county. Some redress was promised but none has as yet come. Sunday, in the neighborhood of Ridgewood Park, has become a day of riot and revelry. The persistence with which the local base ball club managers continue to defy the laws of the State, public sentiment and the moral and religious rights of the people, and interests of the community, reflects great discredit upon them. The neglect of the officials of Queens County to arrest these law breakers and punish them ought to be sufficient to rouse the law and order elements of that county to support only such candidates for district attorney and sheriff as will stamp out this defiance of law. Efforts will be made to rouse such public sentiment in that direction. Public meetings will be held throughout that county on this subject. ... While expressing no opinion upon base ball as a sport, we desire in all candor to ask the patrons of this sport in this city whether they should continue their patronage of a club the managers of which so wantonly and openly continue to knowingly violate the laws of the commonwealth. Your patronage of the sport on week days the managers doubtless consider an indorsement of the general management of club interests. Those who believe in maintaining Sunday and have respect for law should refuse their patronage to the local club until the management rectify this public abuse. Brooklyn Eagle May 20, 1889 By the way, the Mail and Express recently stated that “Sunday in the neighborhood of Ridgewood Park has become a day of riot and revelry.” There never was a greater falsehood uttered by that paper. During the past two seasons the immense base ball gatherings at Ridgewood Park have been as orderly as any seen either at the Polo Grounds or Washington Park. The patrons of Ridgewood know well enough that any disorder there by the crowd would cause the Brooklyn Club to stop their games there, and in self protection and to insure the continuance of their Sunday recreation in watching these contests they form themselves into a sort of committee of the whole on police and keep excellent order. Not even under the exciting conditions of the Athletic row last month at the park was there either rioting or disorder, the vast assemblage being a model one in the good humor they preserved under the circumstances. ... In its rabid partisanship the Mail and Express goes beyond the bounds of truth. Whatever may be the opinion of Sunday ball playing in general, there is neither truth nor justice in the Mail’s charge about riot and disorder, as the Brooklyn Club would not countenance it for a moment. Brooklyn Eagle June 1, 1889 |
| Source | Brooklyn Eagle |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | |
| Query | |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |