Semantic search

The opponents of Sunday ball playing have been more than usually active and aggressive this season, probably because the area of Sunday playing territory is widening the high pressure speed at which professional base ball is being conducted making such remunerative games absolutely necessary to the clubs which had hitherto abstained from playing on the first day of the week, at home, at least. [Goes on the discuss Washington, Baltimore, Easton, Pa., Rochester, and Wilmington.]

In order to increase the attendance at Sportsman's Park, the management has practically cut the admission to twenty cents. This is how it is done. At every game coupon score-books will be sold for a quarter and the coupon will entitle the purchaser to one admission. The regular score-book will also be on sale for the usual nickel. The Philadelphia Times June 8, 1890

Brooklyn AA Club to home games on the Polo Grounds

Manager Kennedy of the Brooklyn Association team has made arrangements whereby, in the absence of the National League team, his club will play at the Polo grounds. The first game will be played there to-morrow afternoon with the Syracuse Stars.

“Yes,” said Manager Kennedy to a Sun reporters yesterday. “I think we ought to draw pretty good crowds. The National and Players' League clubs of both this city and Brooklyn will be away, and I will have the field all to myself. My team is now playing first-class ball, which is shown by the fact that it defeated the strong Rochesters two out of three games last week, and one game was a tie.

“The admission being only twenty-five cents will bring out a goodly number of people who many times stay away from the other games. Is hall continue to play Sunday games at Ridgewoood. There need be no fear that Brooklyn will get out of the American Association, as I consider that I have now the strongest team in the Association. There was a great deal of hard luck for us at the beginning of the season, and that gave th4e croakers a chance to circulate all manner of stories concerning Brooklyn's weakness, in none of which there was any truth. You can rest assured that we will make the other teams hustle from now on.” New York Sun June 8, 1890 [N.B. Future games were in fact played on the Polo Grounds.]

[from Chadwick's column] So “Long John” Reilly does not believe in place hitting, eh? Really, John, I thought you had more judgment. While a batsman may not be able to hit all balls in any direction he chooses, he certainly can stand at the bat in such a manner as to hit a majority of the balls to the right or the left if he chooses. Place hitting needs the keenest sight and clearest judgment, besides lots of practice, but as yet I have to see the first team do any practice looking to place hitting. They all keep in the old, old rut of fungo hitting in their practice, and hence little improvement is to be seen. Ewing was formerly of your opinion, John, but now he is a place hitter.

The Press base ball department is at last in competent hands, Frank Hough having resigned from the North American to accept the base ball editorship of the Press. The North American's loss is the Press' decided gain, as a first-class paper will at last have a first-class man in one of the most important special departments. The Sporting Life November 29, 1890

When The Sporting Life congratulated the Press upon having at last secured a thoroughly competent base ball editor, in the person of Frank Hough, no reflection upon his predecessors, Messrs. Fogel and Voltz, was intended, quite an interim elapsed between Mr. Voltz's retirement and Mr. Hough's appointment, and in that interim the base ball department of the Press went to the dogs. For that reason, more than any other, The Sporting Life congratulated the Press upon securing a man capable of putting the department back to the high place it occupied under the guidance of those capable base ball men, Fogel and Voltz. The Sporting Life December 6, 1890

The Boston Herald and Globe between them have four men on the road with the two Boston teams. The Herald has Stevens and Morse with the League and Players' team, while the Globe has Tim Murnane and Kenny. What other daily papers in the country would do so much for base ball?

[from J. F. Donnally's column] The Brooklyn League Club officials have adopted the policy of giving the exact number of paid admissions, together with the free passes. This is fair and square all through and must prompt the applause of all the honest-minded. Up to date the Players here have not fallen into line. Why don't they?

At a meeting of the Philadelphia Scorers' Association last Tuesday.... was the appointment of a committee, composed of Messrs. Fogel, Diddlebock and Voltz, to confer with the managers of the three local clubs to see what arrangements could be made for getting the exact attendance at all of the games.

The Cincinnati Times -Star wonders why the New York World has no love for Buck Ewing. Ask George Dickinson. The latter last June was on to the beginning of the scheme which finally led to the consolidation trap, but was prevailed upon to let up on Ewing although he accused the latter to his face of being a traitor to the Players' League. Dickinson now regrets keenly he did not then publish all the facts in his possession. Had he done so, instead of listening to the pleadings of Talcott, et al., things might have turned out different.

[from Albert Mott's column] ...the empty benches are filled with an excited, if not an exultant, mass of humanity which at times overflows into the field. What a change from the Atlantic to the American Association. … Here it was, in the latter part of a season, when the club never would draw flies, that a change comes after the people have hungered all the season for base ball, and they tumble over each other in their efforts to get to the grounds and occupy good seats. All is again activity and life—a resurrection in a graveyard of base ball hopes.

[reporting on the meeting of the conference committee 12/12] Feeling the necessity of advice upon the important matter of admitting the Western Association to the National Agreement as well as upon a necessary reconstruction of that famous compact, a task quite beyond the capabilities of Spalding, that gentleman decided to doff his cap to the ablest man base ball ever knew—A. G. Mills, the original author of the National Agreement—and secure the benefit of his advice and perhaps active assistance. Accordingly, Spalding invited Mr. Mills to meet him at dinner at the Manhattan Club with Messrs. Byrne, Day, Krauthoff and Thurman.

After dinner the situation was freely discussed, among other things considered being the relations of the humble Association to Mr. Mills' old pet, the League, and the reconstruction of the National Agreement, Spalding being desirous that some of the objectionable features of the reserve rule and sales system should be modified. In this connection Mr. Krauthoff's proposition for the admission of the Western Association to equal rights under the National Agreement was also brought up and fully considered. What conclusion was arrived at regarding all these important matters was not given out to the reporters, probably because nothing definite had been arrived at, and perhaps also because the learned gentlemen feared to give the reporters the task of writing something beyond their grasp and capacity to do justice to.

The idea of a young man playing ball for money is not nearly as abhorrent now as it was some years ago, when a ball tosser and a loafer were synonymous terms to many minds. There is nothing at all derogatory now-a-days in a young man playing base ball for the return it brings him. In fact, it must be considered in the highest degree commendable if a young man has the requisite skill to play ball so that it will command a financial return, and he is thus enabled to defray, in whole or in part, his expenses.

The American Association is making a commendable effort to re-establish itself. Rochester and Toledo have been admitted, thus bringing its membership up to six, and the chances are that two more available cities will be found ere the flowers bloom in the spring. Baltimore is said to have applied for reinstatement, and Providence, R.I.; New Haven, Ct.; Toronto, Newark, and a number of other towns are seeking admission. Washington may yet also be admitted to the circuit.

[reporting on the oral argument in Philadelphia Ball Club v. Hallman 3/7/1890] [Col. Rogers arguing for his fool of a client] “I want to admit that this is a one-sided contract,” continued Colonel Rogers, but he claimed that professional base ball could not exist without such restrictions being put upon the players and such rights accorded the clubs. What the Philadelphia Club, therefore, asked for was for the Court not to make Hallman play ball with them, but to restrain him from giving his services to the Philadelphia Players' Club.

“I don't think a club should carry more than fourteen players,” said McPhee, of the Cincinnati club, the other day. “In order to get first-class playing out of the men they should be worked very regularly, and the only way to do this is to carry a small team. Two catchers, if they are first-class, are enough for any club, and not more than three pitchers can be worked to good advantage. One of the drawbacks to the Cincinnati club in seasons past was the fact that too many men were carried, and naturally some of them were forced to remain idle. A catcher should be worked every other day and a pitcher should be required to go in at least twice a week. Keenan caught splendid ball last year, and why/ for the very reason that he was given plenty to do and was not allowed to get rusty from lack of work. Earle is a fine catcher, but he must be constantly used in order to show to advantage his playing ability. If I was handling a team I would not use more than three pitcher, and two of them would do the bulk of the work.

The chief topic in base ball circles during the week was the proposed amalgamation of the Players' League and American Association, the ball for which was started rolling last week. Everywhere but in League circles, of course, the scheme is regarded with more or less favor, and either amalgamation of, or at least an alliance between, the two organizations is generally conceded to be entirely practicable and calculated to simplify the situation. At any rate, the matter has been made the subject of much comment, and now that it has been broached it will go on bringing out new ideas in connection with the movement and making new friends for it.

The Brotherhood people feel very confident about Ewing, but at the same time they take the caution to send some one to shadow him. They evidently think in their hearts that this “sturdy oak” is susceptible to sufficient inducements.

[reporting the meeting of the joint rules committee 11/12] Rule 48, Sec. 6, pertaining to base-running, was modified to allow a man to overstep the three-foot limit in running to first base on a fair hit. The previous ruling confined him to the space between the two lines, which ran parallel half way between the plate and first base. The object of the change is to allow the runner a good, wide swing in running on a long hit. The advantage will be readily understood.

A few seasons back such a thing as beating out an infield hit was unheard of. It was rare, indeed, that you heard of a player making a base hit on an infield grounder that had been cleanly handled. Now it is a common occurrence. The reason for this change is, according to the Cincinnati Enquirer's notion, this:-- “Simply because the men 'p0lay ball' now, when they used to only make a bluff at it. Now every man in a team, whether fast or slow, is compelled to run out every hit. He is expected to start for first on a hit to the short stop with the same energy and determination he would use if it were a clean drive to the outfield for three bases. In older days, when a grounder was hit to any of the infielders, the batsman used to start as if he had lead in his shoes. It was taken as a matter of course that such a hit meant a sure out, and there was no need of exertion. Now the reverse is the case. A man is never out until he is actually out. He is expected to run out everything. The players in the League who do the best work in this respect are the Chicagos and Philadelphias. Anson has a standing fine of $5 for any player who does not run out his h9t. This little fine keeps the gang full of ginger.

[Cleveland vs. New York (NL) 5/17/1890] [byline O. P. Caylor] There is a pretty generally acknowledged agreement abroad among baseball patrons, and ball players too, that the young man is the greatest pitching living, or dead either, for all that. Yesterday when the game ended by Davis striking out for the third time and Pitcher Rusie started across the field toward the club house the crowd jumped down from the stands and followed him. Whenever the spectators follow a player or a team from the diamond to the club house it may safely be said that the player or the team has been installed a favorite in the public heart.

[from W. I. Harris's column] ... There are several things to be borne in mind when considering when a sacrifice hit will count or whether there will be a chance for it to count. The average player seldom gets about .250 in the averages. This means that he makes a base hit about once in four times at bat. The very best men, whose figures ran from .300 and upward,w ill not hit safe once in three times at bat, while a large majority of the player will not average much better than one in five times at bat. Now, there are some players that seldom ever fail in an attempt to sacrifice, and the majority of them can do so four times out of five.

If these statements are correct, and I do not think that any one will deny them, it is obvious then that the chances of a successful sacrifice are about four times as good as the chances of making a base hit. In a close game—by which I mean a pitchers' contest—one run will sometimes win, and three or four are pretty sure to do so. It is therefore of the greatest importance that the ice should be broken, for a team with one run to the good finds it much easier to score than the team which has no runs at all. If there is a man on first and no one out, it often happens that a skillful sacrifice hit will send the runner to third. If the batsman hits the ball toward right field, a slow one, just as the runner on first starts to steal second, the runner nearly always reaches third, if the team has the proper signs and every man is working “one for all and all for one.” Then all that is necessary is a fly to the outfield or a slow hit to the infield to score a run or a base hit.

Team work pays and sacrifice hitting is the acme of team work. There are times, however, when sacrificing is the height of absurdity. For instance, in a game where the other fellows are four or five runs ahead in the seventh inning about the only way to win is to bat out some runs. Of course, if the other side is five ahead and your side bats out a couple of runs and the weak hitters are up and it is possible to get a third run in the inning by sacrificing, why the attempt should be made. If a batsman makes a two-base hit two sacrifices will score the run and they should always be made, no matter who is at the bat, unless it is during the latter part of a game,w hen one run is of no value. With one out a runner on second and a good hitter at the plate let him hit it out if he can. I do not believe in ever sacrificing a man to third base when there is one man out unless the base-runner is notoriously slow and it is a fact that he cannot score from second base on anything less than a two-base hit. In such a case it is sometimes advisable to sacrifice, but even then it depends very much upon who the batter may be.

A man named Max Meyers was arrested last Saturday and held for trial by Magistrate Neal for selling rain checks for the [Philadelphia] Players' League game of that day. It is alleged that the defendant bought the checks at a discount, when the game of Friday was declared off on account of the rain. He sold the checks for less than the price of admission. Suit was brought by Manager Benjamin F. Hilt, of the Brotherhood League, under the act relating to ticket scalping. It is also alleged that some of the rain checks received at the gate were counterfeits.

[from Chadwick's column] Why do not official scorers when they send reports to the press give the number if inning s each pitcher pitches in when more than one pitcher is employed on the team? Looking at a score in the papers, one finds the names of two pitchers on each team, without any figures on the score to show how many innings each pitched in. the summary score of a game should include the following pitching record...

[from Chadwick's column] An important and valuable amendment to the scoring rules has been made which bears with telling effect on the recording of effective team work at the bat. … While the revised rules still offer a premium to the batsman to bat for a record by giving undue prominence to two and three-base hits and home runs, the team batsman now has somewhat of a show given him by the introduction of the new record of “runs batted in by base hits.

[from Chadwick's column] A correspondent from the West wants to know whether I charge an error to an outfielder who throws the ball in home from deep outfield on the bound, the same as is down on a bound throw to a base player in the infield. The answer is, that it depends upon the nature of the play. In some cases I do, in others I do not. A bound throw to a base player in the infield is unquestionably an error, and if a failure to hold the bounding ball does not follow such a throw it is all the more to the base player's credit in handling the badly thrown ball. But in the case of a throw in from deep outfield the position is different, and the bound throw in a majority of instances does not excuse a failure to stop the ball as it does from an infield bound throw. An accurate throw in from the outfield to home base—except from short outfield—is a very difficult play, and when made successfully redounds to the credit of the outfielder just as much as a brilliant running catch does. But it must be borne in mind that a throw in from deep outfield is safer when the ball comes in on the first bound than when the risk is run of an overthrow in trying to send it in on the fly. Of course, if the ground is dry and hard and the ball rebounds very lively, the infielder is excused from an error in receiving the ball. But in cases of all throwing in from the outfield there should be plenty of backing up from the infield when the catcher strives to take the ball on the bound. If then a failure to stop the ball occurs down goes an error to the infield player who fails to back up properly.

On account of the way clubs are going in for sacrifice hitting, batting averages will mean little this year. If the players tried for hits every time they went to the bat, base hits thus computed might mean something, but the intelligent player of to-day plays ball for his side, and does not care for a batting average as long as he can help his club to win a game. If the readers of the papers that print batting averages were to examine also the sacrifice record, and put the two together, the true value of the player as a batsman will be ascertained.

[from a letter to the editor by “Enthusiast”] By the way, while talking of averages here is a suggestion anent the sacrifice hit and its place in determining the standing of a batter. In place or, or in addition to the columns of A.B., B.H. and Ave., have these:-- C.A.R. (chances to advance runners), C.A. (chances accepted) and Ave. In the column of C.A.R. include the times a man comes to the bat with men on the bases, of course, omitting when he is hit by the pitcher, as well as bases on balls, unless there is a runner on first. Under C.A. place all base hits made with men on bases, all sacrifices and bases on balls with first base occupied. In case of a fielding error being made the chance should be scored against the batter as not accepted, as, although the runner is in fact advanced, this is not due to the skill of the batter, but the want of it in the fielder. The only exception to this would be when the first baseman, with less than two hands out, drops the ball when thrown directly to him by the fielder who stopped it, as this must, from the fact of no attempt being made to catch the runner, be a sacrifice. Now, divide the C.A. by the C.A.R., and you will have the real value of the man as an aid to run-getting, and let this be the determining against as to his standard as a batter. Such a system, especially if given prominence over the old system of averaging, would encourage that much-desired-end, team work in batting.

[reviewing the new rules] A change was made in the rule governing the completion of a game. Last years, when the side last at the bat made the winning run, the game was not ended until the hit which sent in the run had been completed and the runner had made all the bases he could by it. This year the revised rule on the point of play ends the game the moment the winner's run is scored. This puts a stop to all such disputes as that in the Boston and Philadelphia game in Philadelphia last season. Consequently the batsman making the hit which brings in the runner from third can now only be credited with a single hit. Last year he could have scored a home run.

Thirty-five out of the one hundred season tickets to be sold by the Cincinnati Club have been disposed of. There yet remain sixty-five, which must be sold by the close of this month, when they will be withdrawn. The tickets are worth $35 and entitle the purchaser to admission to every game during the season and all the privileges of the park. As there will be ninety games during the season regular patrons will make money by purchasing such tickets, as they will get a 75 cent seat for 35 cents.

Season tickets will be placed on sale during the week. The Cincinnati Club will send Treasurer Hettes to a few of its patrons to arrange for season tickets and choice seats for $35. There are 100 tickets in each book. They are transferrable on the day of the game.

For a consideration of $1,000 the lease of the ground at the northeast corner of Broad and Dauphin streets was transferred to the Brotherhood base ball club yesterday. George McKay & Company, the lessees, had an unexpired term of three years to run, but all claims were relinquished on the payment of the above mentioned sum and the moving expenses, amounting to about $500. The firm will locate at Twenty-seventh and Diamond streets and erect an office and a number of sheds.

[from the Pittsburgh correspondent] [from an interview of W. B. Howell, formerly a stockholder in the Wheeling club] When I was with the Wheeling Club that was our entire aim—to develop some good man and realize on him. I don't think I am going too far when I say that some minor league clubs took pride in turning out promising men for the big leagues. I sold Delehanty to Philadelphia for $1800, and you can bet this sum of money came in very handy. There wasn't a club in the Tri-State that didn't dispose of one or two men to fast company. The Sporting Life July 12, 1890

[from R. M. Larner's column] President Young says the financial distress prevailing in so many of the minor leagues is due to the falling off in the sale of players. In former years a minor league could develop two or three good players and dispose of them to the League for a sum sufficient to tide them over many difficulties. There has been a decided stagnation in the base ball market and but few profitable deals have been made. There was a great howl made about buying and selling players, and there was much talk about the League growing fat off of the minor leagues. As a matter of fact the League pays from five to ten times as much to the minor leagues for desirable players as the minor leagues pay to the National League for certain privileges and protection under the National Agreement. The Sporting Life July 19, 1890

[from Tim Murnane's column] The train with the Boston men on held up when they got to Wilmington to wait for the way train and take the car containing the Phillies on as far as Petersburg. As the way train came rolling into the depot and it was given out that the Philadelphia League team was on board and would get off for dinner, it was suggested that all the men get in line where the passengers would have to pass within a few feet. Harry Stovey came out of the car in the middle of a shave and carried a razor. Dan Brouthers said he would not miss seeing Sam Thompson for a farm.

“Let us hiss them,” suggested one of the boys.

“Not for a thousand dollars,” sang out Mike Kelly.

“Every one a gentleman,” said Billy Nash.

“Look into their very souls and see them flinch,” was Jim O'Rourke's advice. “Here they come.”

Sure enough, with big Sam Thompson in the lead. As he caught sight of the Boston men his cheeks turned crimson and his chin went up. He looked over the heads of the men in line, after first looking for recognition and finding nothing but a cold stare.

Myers passed, but never turned his head or lifted his eyes from the platform. The color seemed to leave his face and his step was uncertain. The young players of the party looked bewildered, but the Boston men had only eyes for the deserters, as they said, and paid no attention to the inoffensive players. Clements came along with his head bobbing up and down and his face turned in the opposite direction. Schriver was an object of pity; his face changed color, and he went by with bowed head. Gleason came last, looking straight at the Boston men and a smile on his face, but the cold stare he got in return made the smile look like a ghastly bluff, and he turned color. Not one of the deserters looked back. Harry Wright and his wife came along soon after and was cordially greeted by all his old acquaintances, who had a pleasant word for the old veteran.

After that the Boston men paid no more attention to the men who had sold their honor. Several of the young players of the Phillies came back and had a pleasant talk with the Boston men, and were assured that there was nothing but the kindest feeling entertained for them. This seemed to please the boys, and they were not backward in expressing their good will for the Players' League.

From what I saw I am sure that the young men now going into the League ranks will soon detest the players who sold out their fellow players just as much as the regular Brotherhood men do now. The Sporting Life April 2, 1890

After a ten-minutes’ lunch the Phillies marched back, the Brotherhood men turning their backs as the deserters went by. This caused the crimson to rush to the cheeks of the ladies of the party. Phenomenal Smith, Burke, Allen and some others of the young players of the Quaker team mingled in with the Brotherhood men, saying they hoped they were not looked on as against the Players’ League. Hardie Richardson, Nash, Kelly, O’Rourke and some others assured the boys that it was the men who sold them out that they were down on, and not on the young men who were doing perfectly right in signing wherever they could do the best. The Evening Item Philadelphia March 24, 1890

Manager Sharsig, in reply to a question as to whether he was making any effort to get Stovey, Bierbauer, Larkin, Cross and Weyhing back, said:

“No, sir. These men, I understand, have signed Players’ League contracts, and as men of principle, I expect them to stick to their agreement. A contract is a contract, according to my way of looking at it, and I would not have a contract jumper on my team. A man who will jump a contract is not honest, and I want nothing to do with him. I would not think of such a thing as bribing a player to jump a contract, and certain League clubs who are in that business just now will be sorry for their actions before they are much older. I do think Stovey, Bierbauer, Larkin, Cross and Weyhing treated me very shabbily by deserting the Athletic Club, but since they have signed contracts to play elsewhere they shall live up to thiir contracts so far as I am concerned. If either of these men would offer to come back I would not take them unless they first obtained an honorable release from the Players’ League clubs with whom they have signed for next year. It would not be honorable on my part to sign a man knowing that he had previously signed another contract, and I propose to do nothing of the kind. The public will have very little use for clubs or players who are in the bribing or contract-breaking business. I went into base ball with clean hands, and mean to leave it some time in the distant future with a good record.

“Ever since my connection with the club the Athletics have played honest ball and employed honest players, and so long as I am connected with them they will follow in that line of business. When the time comes that we must bribe players to jump contracts and employ contract-jumpers, then I will quit the business forever.

The decision by Umpire Peoples in declaring the Brooklyn-Columbus game played at the Long Island grounds yesterday forfeited to Columbus was based upon a mere technicality which the umpire himself afterward could not explain. The Columbus team had just started the last half of the eighth inning. Sneed, who was at the bat, knocked a foul, the ball going out of sight. Immediately a ball was thrown into the diamond from the grand stand, and somebody yelled to the umpire that a ball lay on the ground near him. But he called for a new ball, and as there had been a limited supply, there were none on hand. Capt. Gerhardt claimed that the ball that lay within ten feet of Peoples was in play. He picked it up and was about to throw it out when Capt. McTammany of the visiting team very emphatically said he would not play unless a new ball was forthcoming. This settled it in the mind of Umpire Peoples, and he then thought the same way. The ball just batted foul was thrown in, and with three balls in his hand it was supposed he gave the game to Columbus, for those players began to pack their bats. He had no watch in his hand not even allowing the Brooklyns five minutes in which to get a new ball. It did not take him two minutes to give the game to Columbus. The score at that time was 13 to 8 in favor of the Brooklyns.

[from TTT's column] Is the Association so foolish as to believe the League will ever permit a competitor of equal merit in the personnel of the game and territory to become an actual rival for its business? If so, how foolish is the trust. If territory is conceded, then must the clubs be so inferior in playing strength as to be shorn of equal prestige and therefore patronage. And with it must be conditions that have always been vital to Association clubs—such as internal lubricants and restrictions from exhibiting every day in the week. With weaker clubs and the same prices inferior games would result and absolutely starvation patronage. Will the League permit teams of equal strength find non-conflicting dates? The Association would be subaqueous fools to believe it. The League could have had the same result in 1891 with the Players' League. The first was for advantages, and the League will have vastly superior advantages to the Association or concede nothing. This is the only logical result, and the Association people are a flock of trusting lambs if they cannot see it, and may God bless their fleecy innocence. The proposer thing for them to do is to at once and without delay negotiate with those people who have now strong clubs in remunerative cities and complete a circuit and an equitable business arrangement, and then, after becoming a powerful business concern of equal prestige with the League negotiate with that body for a protective business arrangement. Every day's delay is fatal to the prospects of the Association, inasmuch as the clubs and cities which are now available will become less so. Players will lose hope, and while not openly contracting will so commit themselves as to unintentionally play into the hands of the great monopoly. Delays are always dangerous, but never more dangerous than in the present situation of the Association. If the Association must wait until January it will be put off to February, and then to March, and then find itself, whenever the time comes, an organization of unbalanced cities supporting unbalanced villages, a state of affairs that neither guarantees nor liberal divisions of gate money will give life to, or a minor league except in name in the larger cities unproductively filling in the vacant time of the one and only great base ball monopoly to half-filled benches of the hoodlum element. The Association may trust in “assurances” from League people or from its own president, but the result will be just as here outlined just as sure as the law of cause and effect. The Sporting Life December 20, 1890

[quoting the Philadelphia Press] From semi-official utterances in New York papers it is evident that the League is not so much in love with the idea of permitting the Association to locate clubs in Boston and Chicago as it was when the cry was “Let us have Peace.” If Mr. Spalding, as the representative of the League, gave the Association and the Boston Players' League people to understand that the League would offer no opposition to the location of a club in those cities, it is the duty of the League to make good that promise, despite the rights of Conant, Soden and Billings under the territorial clause of the National Agreement. The triumvirs will not voluntarily consent to a rival club in their city. They're not built that way. But they should be forced to, and no false sense of duty to the Agreement should prevent the other League magnates from carrying out a promise, equally sacred, made to another set of men. The Sporting Life December 20, 1890

[from an interview of Von der Ahe] The American Association is in good shape at present—in fact in better condition than for years past—and the club owners will not sit idly by and allow the League to dictate to them. The League people know well that the Association would not hesitate one moment to join hands with the remnant of the Brotherhood that is left, in case any dirty work was done, and they also know that one of the best circuits that was ever organized could be arranged for 1891. this fact alone insures harmony, and I feel no uneasiness as to the treatment we are to receive at the hands of the National League people. The Sporting Life December 20, 1890

[New York vs. Boston (PL) 4/28/1890] In the sixth inning a run was made by a safe hit by Kelly and Richardson and a remarkable slide to the home plate by Kelly. Ewing had the ball, but Kelly slid sideways and touched the base without being touched by Ewing.

President A. G. Spalding, of Chicago, put at rest all doubt as to the future of his immediate rival by closing a deal yesterday morning [11/13] for the purchase of the Chicago Players' League Club. The negotiations were begun in Pittsburg by ex-President McAlpin and Mr. Addison, and were concluded yesterday morning by wire, F. G. Robinson, of the New York Club, acting as intermediary. The minor details of the deal are, of course, to be settled later, but the price has been accepted. It is said to be $20,000. The Sporting Life November 15, 1890

President Addison, of the local [Chicago] Players' League, got home from Pittsburg yesterday [11/13] . He said that he had sold the club to the National League people for $25,000 in cash and $15,000 in stock, the negotiations having been conducted through J. Palmer O'Neill and ex-President McAlpin, of the New York Players' Club. The Sporting Life November 15, 1890

[reporting the PL meeting 11/12] Addison, of Chicago, claimed to be a much-disgusted man over the turn affairs had taken and stated that he would now look out for himself and have nothing more to do with the Players' League, whose capitalists could be turned from a well-defined and settled purpose in an hour and lured into another conference with the enemy, which could only result in more “throw-downs” for somebody. He declined to go East and left for Chicago in the afternoon with a view to accepting the terms Spalding had offered him through Col. McAlpin. The Sporting Life November 15, 1890

[reporting the NL meeting of 11/12] While the League was in session a dispatch from Col. McAlpin at Pittsburg, it is said, was received by A. G. Spalding stating that the Chicago Players' League Club could be bought outright for $25,000. Mr. Spalding informed the meeting that he would give $15,000 toward such a purchase. The Boston people agreed to pay their share of the balance if the other League clubs did likewise. It was stated after the meeting that the League had decided to break up the Players' League, to buy out Chicago and Cleveland, force Philadelphia into the American Association and strand the Boston Club. The Sporting Life November 15, 1890

The Chicago deal was completed last Saturday and the club will be turned over to Mr. Spalding by Mr. Addison. For some reason no injunction was issued by Secretary Brunell, of the Players' League, although he had been ordered so to do by President Prince. Recourse to the law is, however, still open to the Players' League, it is claimed, should the latter decide to go on, an most improbable contingency. … Twenty-five thousand dollars in cash is the amount to be handed over to Addison and his partners for everything in sight and for their withdrawal from the base ball business. He was also given, it is authentically stated, $15,000 worth of stock in the new club at New York. The gift of the New York stock to Addison is practically a settlement with Spalding, for Spalding and his brother own all the League end of the New York reconstructed club. The Sporting Life November 29, 1890

[an interview of Spalding] Nothing but an unconditional surrender on the part of the Players' League people will be listened to by the National League. The potency and power of the National Agreement must be maintained and reaffirmed in order to make base ball profitable again to players and clubs, and it is the only way it can be done.

To recognize any of the Brotherhood revolutionists by making a compromise would forever do harm to the game I can assure you that the League is perfectly able and ready to stand this fight for a long time yet. It is a business we have established, and we have not been in it fifteen years to surrender when we have the victory won. We are not fighting with out eyes shut, for we know how many people pay to see every Brotherhood game and how many sit in the grand stand. Ever since the season started an actual count has been taken and regularly forwarded to President Young. In this way we know just how much money the Brotherhood has taken in to fill up its treasuries, and as we have never been deceived as to their actual strength. Now the League is losing money. That we have not denied once this season. But our losses are not so much as the Brotherhood's. The difference between the League and the Brotherhood is this:--The League acknowledges that it is losing money. The Brotherhood denies that it is losing, and yet the public knows better.

The League is friendly disposed toward the players who revolted, and when the surrender does come we will prove our friendliness to them to their satisfaction. Of course the Brotherhood will surrender in time, but it will not humiliate or dishonor their leaders. It is folly pure and simple, this Brotherhood sentiment of sticking together. It is always manliness to acknowledge it when you have done a wrong and are convinced of it. These players, in order to be more manly and honorable, should go to the men whom they induced to put up their money and say in a straightforward way that they will not ask for another dollar to be spent o them in a venture that is already lost.

[reporting the AA meeting 11/22] [from an interview of Thurman] “Will the Association get a foothold in Chicago?” Mr. Thurman laughingly replied:-- “Well, Mr. Spalding is kicking pretty hard against it, but he is just as desirous as we are that the Association should be a great and powerful organization next season, and I hardly think he will throw any impediments in the way. Out of the chaos of this disastrous base ball war will spring two of the finest organizations ever known in the history of the game.” The Sporting Life November 29, 1890

[from an interview of Allan Thurman] “Have you asked permission to put a club here [Chicago]?” “No; I have not gone far enough yet to know whether we want Chicago in our circuit. You can say this, however, that if there is a club put in here it must be distinct from the League Club in every way, and the officers of the latter must not have a a dollar in our club. I shall insist on the same thing in all our other cities, because if we don't it will again come back to syndicate ball, which wrecked the Players' League. We may or may not want Chicago in our circuit.” The Sporting Life December 6, 1890

[from an interview of Spalding] In this city the lying that has been going on as to the attendance at the Brotherhood games is simply outrageous. We have done some lying ourselves, but nowhere near as strong as the other fellows.

Spalding left on the midnight train for Boston, to whip the Boston triumvirs into line. He found Mr. Soden tractable enough, but Conant and Billings were obstinately set, and, according to reports, were in the same frame of mind when Spalding left Boston Tuesday night. That won't matter much, however, as the boss of the League has given it out that nothing and nobody will be permitted to interfere with or block his readjustment scheme. “Those who stand in the way,” he declared in New York before he left for Boston, “will be promptly brushed aside and trampled upon.” Of course, the boss must have had the Boston men in mind, as no other League men have so far dared to oppose the scheme, publicly at least.

[quoting the New York World, purported quoting Spalding] Mr. Spalding has done his work well. “When I entered that first conference,” he said recently to a friend, “and saw all those elegant looking gentlemen, each clad in evening dress, while I had on the tweed suit I wore while crossing the Atlantic Ocean, I said to myself, 'These gentlemen intend to frighten us;' but after having talked with them thirty minutes I made up my mind I would drive a coach and four through the Players' League within six weeks.” And that is exactly what Mr. Spalding has done. If four horses are not enough there is plenty of room for fourteen—or forty. The Sporting Life December 27, 1890

[from an interview of Bid McPhee] In old days, when batsmen had a choice of a high or low ball, it was far easier to tell the way he would hit. Of course, he would call for the ball he could bat the hardest, and such hits most always go in one direction. Now, however, anything within the shoulder and the knee goes; he does not know where it is going, and a baseman or fielder is all at sea in trying to size them up.

[from Joe Pritchard's column] The Browns' new secretary is none other than Mr. Edward Sheridan, who served as the sporting editor of the Republic of this city several years ago. Mr. Sheridan left his position here and joined forces with the Daily Base Ball Gazette or New York, which died a bornin'. After coming West again he obtained a position in Indianapolis on one of the daily papers there, and he also acted as official scorer of the Indianapolis Club. Last year he wound up in his old town, Greencastle, Ind., where he was since been editing a weekly paper. Ed is well known in St. Louis, and his large circles of friends will be glad to see him here again.

The Players' League people now regret having been wheedled by their New York “friends” into another conference with the National League. They claim that the latter has shown no disposition to do the square thing by all of the clubs, and that, having secured Chicago with the aid of the New York Players' League people, they are now only playing their cards to secure the controlling interest in the Cincinnati Club, and then the rest of the Players' League clubs will not be considered at all and no settlement made with them, despite the assurances of the New York people to that effect.

The Brooklyn League people are said to have endeavored to squeeze the Brooklyn Players' League men, in the belief that they had the Players' League where they wanted it. This has drawn the Brooklyn Club into line against consolidation. Philadelphia and Cleveland also claim to have little prospect of fair treatment. Several meetings of these club representatives have been held and the result is that they have come to the conclusion to maintain the Players' League at all hazards.

A Players' magnate stated this morning that he and his fellow delegates had come to the conclusion that they could not expect decent treatment from the League, and that the Players' League would be maintained as a six-club league, made up of the best players—Boston, Brooklyn, Philadelphia, Cleveland, Washington and Cincinnati, the control of the latter club resting with the four clubs first named. In conclusion Mr. Wagner said:-- “No more business with the National League for us. My only regret is that we did not stick to that resolution at Pittsburg and save Chicago.” The Sporting Life November 15, 1890

The National League has its rival, the Players' League, badly beaten. To effect the complete demolition of the younger base ball organization it is only necessary for the old magnates to secure a controlling interest in the stock of the Cincinnati Club now held by the Players' League syndicate. The capital stock of this club is $40,000. The National League has practically absorbed the New York and Chicago Players League clubs, each of which owns $7500 in the Cincinnati Club. To attain its end there are two ways open to the National League. The first is to make terms with the Brooklyn Players' League Club, which also holds $7500 of Cincinnati stock, and the second is to satiate A. L. Johnson, of Cleveland, who possesses a similar amount. The only hope of the Boston and Philadelphia Players' clubs is that neither of the deal can be made. The Sporting Life November 15, 1890

In these degenerate days of base ball, if a player has a fine bat he had better put an iron anchor and a padlock to it. “Bat swiping” is considered legitimate, and nearly everybody in the profession is ready to nail a good bat every time there is a chance.

[from an interview of an unidentified Reds player] The old stereotypes rule, which prevails in most clubs, that when two men are out and a man on second, under no circumstances must a base runner attempt to steal third. They argue that a sacrifice hit is no good at such a time, and that the runner can score from second on a base hit just about as well as he can from third, and that there is no sense in taking a long chance. Here’s where I think they are wrong. A base runner ought to steal third every time he has a chance. There is no use to handicap a fast man like Nicol or Earle with rules. With two men out and a man on second there is always a good chance. A pitcher pays very little attention to a runner then, as he thinks he will not go, consequently he can get a good lead, and a good start for a fast runner is equivalent to giving him the base. I would never make such a rule. It is good enough for slow runners, but in a pinch let a fast man exercise his own judgment.

It is scarcely probable that the reports are true that President Byrne, of Brooklyn, and Stern, of Cincinnati, advocate the dropping of Indianapolis and Washington from the League, for the reason that those gentlemen personally pledged themselves, at the ball meeting, to oppose any such move if Indianapolis and Washington withdrew their objection to the admission of the two Association clubs. Aside from this, it would certainly be in poor taste for clubs, whose League existence numbers but a few weeks, to talk about dropping cities which have been represented in the great organization for years.

President Stern yesterday received a telegram from the Indianapolis Journal asking him if he intended to vote in favor of reducing the League circuit and freezing Indianapolis out of the League. President Stern at once replied that Cincinnati owed its position in the League to the Indianapolis Club, and that he was not ungrateful enough to treat Mr. Brush so shabbily. President Stern also added that he was in favor of retaining Indianapolis in order to have Mr. Brush’s wise counsels and hustling ability. He believes that he is one of the brightest of League magnates. If the League had six more men of the caliber of Messrs. Stern and Brush there would be no Brotherhood.

[from an interview of Harry Sterne] “The League has won the battle,” said he, “and I am honestly glad of it. The purchase of the Cincinnati Club actually broke the Brotherhood. They had to rake and scrape to raise the money, and if it had not been used here might have formed a fund to keep up the fight. I hope the League intends to do nothing rash. It looks as if the plan was to expel Cincinnati. We did not resign, for the simple reason that we had nothing to resign. To all intents and purposes Cincinnati's League franchise is in other hands, and if the purchasers of our stock violated League law they are responsible. Mr. Byrne advised me to grab at the chance to sell if the money was really offered, and I think a majority of either League or Brotherhood managers would have done the same thing had the opportunity presented itself. We have been called traitors. It is an unfair attack. With the same reason the charge could be made today against the sensible men in the Players' League who are now being applauded by all who love the game.