Clipping:Unions vs. Atlantics in the judiciary committee
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
 |
| Add a Clipping |
| Date | Sunday, October 27, 1867 |
|---|---|
| Text | On this occasion the business of the evening was opened at 8 ½ o’clock by the Chairman of the Committee, who called the assemblage to order, and at the same time stated that the examination of the case, Atlantic vs. Union, would be resumed. The Atlantic Club was then called upon to produce the evidence of Mr. Shelley’s election as a member of the Eclectic Club, whereupon Mr. Wrights was called up to testify in regard to said election, and the minutes of the club were presented and read, from which it appeared that Mr. Shelley was duly elected a member of the Eclectic Club on the 20th of April, 1867, the by-laws of the club having been suspended for the purpose of an election at the date named. Mr. Glover also testified to the fact of Shelley, as a member of the Eclectic Club, having notified him to attend a match on the 26th of September with the [illegible] Club, a probationary member of the National Association, thereby showing that Shelley acted as a regular member of the club. Considerable discussion here ensued in regard to the admission of an affidavit of Dr. Bell as evidence; but it was finally agreed to admit the document, which was to the effect that Shelley acted as a regular member of the Eclectic Club, and therefore had no right to play in any match as a member of any other association club. This temporarily closed the testimony on behalf of the Atlantic; and on the part of the defence, Mr. Gifford submitted a point of objection to the evidence, on the ground that no protest had been entered by the Atlantic Club, at the time of the match, against Shelley’s playing in the Union nine, and that therefore the Atlantic Club could not legally bring the charge before the committee. This point the Committee refused to consider as objectionable, and the Union Club were again thrown upon some other sources of defence; and their counsel then claimed a dismissal of the case, on the grounds that, As Shelley had never been notified of his election, and had not paid dues to the Club, he was not, therefore, a member. In reply to this, a previous decision of the committee was quoted, wherein it appeared that in the case of the Americus and Neptune Clubs they had decided that inasmuch as the player referred to had played in the club after his election, and thereby had publicly announced his membership, that that alone was sufficient to make him such. Evidence was then adduced to the effect that Shelley was duly elected member of the Union Club on the 20th of July, 1867, as an exempt member of the Union Club, and a cross-examination elicited the fact that this class of members of the Union Club neither vote or hold office, nor pay initiation fees or dues, but can play in match games. The most important testimony given was that of Shelley, who stated that he was elected a member of the Union Club, and responded to the notification of election, and henceforth considered himself as such, and when solicited to “take a hand in” with the Eclectics in their games, did so as a member of the Union Club, and not as an Eclectic player. Some more testimony in regard to the case was then presented, after which the Committee decided that they would conclude the case next week. New York Sunday Mercury October 27, 1867 [see also Ball Players Chronicle 10/31/1867] The Atlantic and Union case was resumed, and Dr. Bell was the first witness called by the defence, his testimony being to the effect that Shelley was elected a member of the Eclectic, in April, and as such member took part in the September games. He admitted the important fact, however, that Shelley had been proposed and elected without his having first consented to the same, but Shelley certainly consented to play after being informed that he had been so elected into the club; but this the Committee did not regard as important. After some further testimony in relation to the matter, the Committee went into secret session, and on a reopening of the doors rendered a decision in favor of the Union Club. The decision signed by Messrs. Bache, chairman, pro tem; Yates, Kelly, Colonel Moore, Herring, and Tassie, was as follows: “That the Committee decide, upon the evidence submitted by Dr. Bell and others, after due deliberation, that Mr. Shelley is a member of the Union Club, and the charges against the Union Club are not sustained. That the Committee censure the officers of the Eclectic Club for loose management of their club affairs. They also censure Mr. Shelley for conduct unbecoming a member of any club of this Association, he having the knowledge of his membership in the Union Club, and playing as a member of the nine of the Eclectic Club.” New York Sunday Mercury November 3, 1867 Dr. Bell, of the Eclectic Club, testified in behalf of the Atlantics that Shelley was elected a member of the Eclectics on the 20th of April, 1867, and played in match games with them in September. The Doctor also said that he saw Shelley after the Active and Union game, and previous to the Atlantic match, and showed him a letter from Mr. Page, of the Actives, inquiring if Mr. Shelley was not a member of the Eclectics, and if he had not played in Eclectic games. Shelley replied that he would make it all right, and said: “I am the only one to blame in this matter, and will call upon Mr. Page and fix it up.” The Doctor also testified that Shelley asked him to put him in his nine on the day of the Fulton match, the 3d of September, under an assumed name, so that he would not be known. On cross-examination by Mr. Gifford, the Doctor stated that he proposed Mr. Shelley without his consent or knowledge, and in fact never saw him until about the 1st of September. Mr. Gifford also elicited the fact that the Eclectics were in the habit of electing members without their consent and without notifying them. Mr. Sterry, Secretary of the Union Club, testified that Shelley was regularly elected a member of his club on the 20th of July, and that he first played in a match game as a member of the Union nine on the 25th of the same month. On motion of Mr. Page, the Committee decided to strike out the testimony of Mr. Shelley, in consequence of his absence. The room was then cleared, and after a brief consultation, the doors were reopened, and Mr. Herring, the Chairman of the Committee, read their decision, which was as follows... New York Dispatch November 3, 1867 |
| Source | New York Sunday Mercury |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | Edit with form to add a comment |
| Query | Edit with form to add a query |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
| Origin | Initial Hershberger Clippings |
Comments
<comments voting="Plus" />