Clipping:Dispute within the AA over the reserve clause
|Add a Clipping|
|Date||Sunday, March 18, 1883|
The Cincinnati Enquirer is particularly severe on the American Association for adopting the Conference Committee report, especially that clause referring to the “reserving of players,” and claims that it is a complete back down on the part of the American Association, and that the only clubs benefited are those in New York And Philadelphia.
Mr. Wright, the versatile young man of the Enquirer, has a very clear head, and it is not often that we are compelled to differ from him in his conclusions. In this case, however, we feel satisfied that his reasonings are false. In the first place he claims that the reservation rule prevents the American from ever securing any of the League's present players. Granted. At the same time, it prevents the League from stealing any of the American men. Honors are thus even. Gain, experience has taught us that whenever an attempt has been made to corral a League player his salary has shot up to a figure that makes it suicidal for a club to attempt to pay it. It was this bedding evil that called out the passage of the reservation clause. Again, each year new players are being developed and taking the places of old ones, and one organization can secure them as readily as the other, as there is no restriction on them, and when once engaged they cannot be spirited away by the rival organization.
We can, therefore, see no reason why the American should be charged with backing down or falling a victim to the League, as the Inquirer [sic] would have us to believe. On the contrary, we think it is the most sensible and business-like thing the American has ever done, and will prove to be such before the season is over.
|Source||Philadelphia All-Day City Item|
|Submitted by||Richard Hershberger|
|Origin||Initial Hershberger Clippings|