Clipping:The Arbitration on personal contracts; jurisdiction over minor leagues

From Protoball
Revision as of 19:11, 29 February 2020 by Dave (talk | contribs) (Hershberger Clippings Import)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
19C Clippings
Scroll.png


Add a Clipping
Date Wednesday, December 22, 1886
Text

[reporting on the Arbitration Committee meeting of 12/13/1886] ...the Board took up the charges of the Hartford Club against William Barnie, of the Baltimore club, for making personal contracts during the past season with two of their players and advancing $100 to each of them. No damage having been done to the Hartford Club, the only allegation being that Mr. Barnie had “nearly” prevented a sale of the said players to the Washington Club, the Board on motion of Mr. Rogers dismissed the case on the ground that no penalty for personal contracts excep5t invalidity had been heretofore imposed. The Sporting Life December 22, 1886

[reporting on the Arbitration Committee meeting of 12/13/1886] [from a legal opinion by Rogers and Phelps on the Thomas Burns matter] ...Was Mr. Burns' personal agreement to play with the New York Club during the ensuing season of 1887 a violation o f his contract with the Newark Club or of the rules of the Eastern League?

That contract was to terminate on Oct. 15, 1886, and Mr. Burns asserts that he fulfilled all duties and obligations as a player thereunder, and this is not denied. But it alleged in reply that the fact of his having signed at a high salary with the New York Club caused dissatisfaction among the other players of the Newark Club and caused them to also refuse to sign with the Newark Club for 1887.

with consequence of a lawful act we have nothing to do and we certainly think that Mr. Burns' contract ending with the season did not prevent his promising to sign elsewhere for a subsequent season. Of course such a persona contract executed before October 20 was, under our rules, premature, and therefore invalid, and is to be treated as if it had never been made.

As under exiting laws there is no other penalty—than invalidity—for such personal contract we do not think the ex post facto punishment of “blacklisting” could be legally imposed. The Sporting Life December 22, 1886 [The Newark Club's blacklisting of Burns was overturned.]

[reporting on the Arbitration Committee meeting of 12/13/1886] Article II was amended so as to prohibit personal contracts in future. The making of such will suspend the player for the ensuing season and fine the club in whose “interest the contract was made” $500. The Sporting Life December 22, 1886

Source Sporting Life
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" />