View source for Clipping:A criticism of the League and the League Alliance plan concentrating power too much

{{Clipping
|Type of Date=Day
|Date=2/4/1877
|Title=a criticism of the League and the League Alliance plan concentrating power too much
|Text=<p>The great objection we have to the proposition of the League, and it covers all others... is this:  The plan, if adopted, gives the entire control of the base ball interests of the country into the hands of a few men, who can almost be counted on one’s fingers.  All respect to the gentlemen to whom this may seem persona..  They may be assured that nothing personal is intended.  Players have no powers of legislation.  This now lies, and is left by the proposed form of agreement, with the management of six clubs, or better, the delegates of those clubs who may be sent to the League conventions.  These gentlemen may always legislate wisely;  but if they should not, where, by the proposed plan, is the redress?  As a matter of fact, what has past legislation been?  What rule was adopted at Cleveland for the especial benefit of players, and what for the benefit of non-league clubs?  The convention passed acts, assessing a burdensome tax upon players, and affixed a penalty such that, if they would not submit, they could never thereafter secure engagements with League clubs.  About how long would it be, if the non-league clubs were brought under control of the League, before this law would be so altered that players who would not submit to any requirements of the League in the direction would be prohibited from playing in non-league clubs as well?  Again, this convention passed a resolve that after such a date in March the League would respect the contracts of non-league clubs.  Has it occurred to anything that this is a “resolve,” not a constitution amendment, and that there is no penalty affixed for its violation?  This may seem like a trifling affair, but generally it will be observed that the League has affixed severe penalties for any infringement of rules and regulations.  If the League really respected the rights of non-league clubs and was solicitous for their welfare, it should have incorporated that resolve in the fundamental principles of its body, and provided that it take effect at once, instead of at a remote time, when it should have filled its quote of players.  Such legislation looks narrow and partisan, and if the non-league clubs are prepared to submit their destinies to the authorship of legislation of that character–well, they have a perfect right to do so, but let them do so with eyes wide open to the probabilities and possibilities of the future.  We should say, wait; wait until the League becomes more liberal; wait until it gives you a voice in its legislative councils and says, by admitting you to membership in its body, that “all men are born free and equal.”  We do not side with the League, nor with the “internationals,” but do think that the best interests of the game will be subserved by the non-league clubs letting the League alone (so far as joining it is concerned) until it opens its doors.  Mr. Spalding considers the League “no longer an experiment,” and probably it may be, so far as the Chicago Club is concerned, because it picked all the plums last year and divided them on the shores of Lake Michigan.  But, for the other clubs remaining in the League, it were better to wait and see how they appear Nov. 15, 1877, after having attempted to play a series of twelve games, before concluding upon the success of the institution.  To us, is seems a great pity that the League did not admit semi-professionals to membership in its association last December.  Probably the experience of the clubs with the old association was the cause, and as man in quest of reform usually goes to extremes before setting down to solid principles, so may it happen that the close corporation system of the League will be exchanged in time for some thing, which from this standpoint seems more reasonable and enduring.  Let time furnish the proof.</p>
|Source=Boston Herald
|Submitted by=Richard Hershberger
|Origin=Initial Hershberger Clippings
}}