Clippings:1861

From Protoball
Jump to navigation Jump to search
The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.
19C Clippings
Scroll.png
Clippings in 1853
Clippings in 1854
Clippings in 1855
Clippings in 1856
Clippings in 1857
Clippings in 1858
Clippings in 1859
Clippings in 1860
Clippings in 1861
Clippings in 1862
Clippings in 1863
Clippings in 1864
Clippings in 1865
Clippings in 1866
Clippings in 1867
Clippings in 1868
Clippings in 1869
Clippings in 1870
Clippings in 1871
Clippings in 1872
Clippings in 1873
Clippings in 1874
Clippings in 1875
Clippings in 1876
Clippings in 1877
Clippings in 1878
Clippings in 1879
Clippings in 1880
Clippings in 1881
Clippings in 1882
Clippings in 1883
Clippings in 1884
Clippings in 1885
Clippings in 1886
Clippings in 1887
Clippings in 1888
Clippings in 1889
Clippings in 1890
Add a Clipping
1861Clippings in 1861

Clippings in 1861 (27 entries)

a 'point' of the game illustrated

Date Saturday, August 31, 1861
Text

[Enterprise vs. Gotham 8/20/1861] [Smith of the Enterprise at second base:] Ibbetson was the [next] striker, and began with a high foul ball over the catcher’s head. Cohen the catcher returned the ball to McKeever the pitcher, who purposely allowed it to slip through his hands towards right field, seeing which, Smith forgetting that it was a returned foul ball, and that he could not make his base until the ball had been settled in the hands of the pitcher, ran for his 3d base, when McKeever immediately picked up the ball and stood on 2d base, thus putting out Smith, it not being requisite to touch the player in such cases. This was an imperfect error, especially for a player who has been practiced in the Atlantic school. New York Clipper August 31, 1861 [see also Philadelphia picked nine vs. Newark picked nine 6/2/1862]

Source New York Clipper
Submitted by Richard Hershberger

a baseball battalion is proposed

Date Sunday, August 18, 1861
Text

A BASE BALL BATTALION.–We are informed by a correspondent that several gentlemen, well known in base ball circles, have a project under consideration for the formation of a battalion or regiment, exclusively of base ball players; and it is seriously contemplated to recommend a call for a special meeting of the National Association of Base Ball Players, for the purpose of bringing this matter more immediately before representatives of all the clubs. There are now eighty clubs belonging to the Association; and there are upwards of a hundred others located throughout this State, which it is thought would gladly join in such a movement. An average of five men from each club would form a regiment; and better material for soldiers than could be gathered together could not be found.

Of course, the whole idea is as yet mere suggestion. From the fact that a large number of base ball players have already been carried off to the war in different regiments, we do not know that the project under consideration is practicable. We have no doubt, however, that hundreds would flock to the standard of such an organization, if it were put in proper hands. In order to test the matter, we are wiling to receive answers and suggestions from officers of different clubs, for the purpose of ascertaining the practicability of the project prior to any decided movement being made. Let us hear what would be the chances for a Base Ball Battalion.

Source New York Sunday Mercury
Submitted by Richard Hershberger

a baseball club in Cincinnati

Date Thursday, March 14, 1861
Text

The Use of the orphan Asylum Lot was granted to the Buckeye Base ball Club, on Mondays, Wednesdays and Saturdays, for their usual play.

Source Cincinnati Daily Enquirer
Submitted by Richard Hershberger

a donkey match

Date Saturday, November 16, 1861
Text

Yesterday afternoon a very amusing, and perhaps the most novel match ever played, took place upon the grounds of the Star Club, South Brooklyn. It being on the plan of a “Donkey Race,” and but for the cold and chilly weather, the affair passed off pleasantly. The conditions of the game were, the nine making the LEAST runs should gain the victory and the player scoring the MOST runs to get the ball. … Each player was numbered, and the runs made by one player was scored to the one on the other nine of the same number. The contest was a well played game, int novelty making it quite activity. Brooklyn Eagle November 16, 1861 [See also BE 11/26/61 and 12/06/61]

Source Brooklyn Eagle
Submitted by Richard Hershberger

a planned benefit match for Pierce and Creighton; enclosed grounds

Date Friday, November 1, 1861
Text

The gentlemen for whom the benefit is gotten up, are well known to the Base Ball Fraternity,--the names of Pierce and Creighton, being names of players not to be forgotted [sic], the latter noted for his superior pitching. The large circle of friends of Mr. Pierce, conceived the idea and arranged the match for his benefit, but he generously desired Mr. Creighton to be included, and thus the two are to share the proceeds, and to judge from the large circle of their acquaintances the proceeds will amount to something handsome. We are requested to state that tickets for this match can be purchased at the store of Dick & Haynes, corner of Fulton avenue and St. Felix street, Brooklyn. Price 10 cents. Match to come off November 7th, on the St. George Cricket grounds, Hoboken. Brooklyn Eagle November 1, 1861

A contest between two picked nines from the leading Base Ball Clubs of Brooklyn, will take place to-day, Thursday, Nov. 7th, on the St. George's enclosed grounds at Hoboken. Brooklyn Eagle November 7, 1861

The assemblage amounted to about from two to three thousand persons, a fair proportion of whom were of the fair sex. Brooklyn Eagle November 8, 1861

Source Brooklyn Eagle
Submitted by Richard Hershberger

an Atlantic mistaken for John Heenan

Date Saturday, August 17, 1861
Text

[Atlantic vs. Newark 8/5/1861] When the Atlantics arrived on the ground, they were the “observed of all observers,” especially the juveniles, among whom a report gathered ground that John C. Heenan was among them, and some one pointed out Mr. A. Babcock, of the Atlantic club, as the noted pugilistic champion, whereupon that modest volunteer had to seek shelter faster than he did at Bull Run, and that, they say, was done in 2:00 time.

Source New York Clipper
Submitted by Richard Hershberger

an attempt to introduce a ringer

Date Saturday, August 3, 1861
Text

[Free and Easy of Brooklyn vs. Mystic of Yorkville 7/19/1861] ...somehow or other there was a lack of spirit in their [the Free and Easy] play that was evidently unusual, and we know not how to account for it, otherwise than by attributing it to an uneasy conscience resulting from the effort to smuggle in Start, the noted 1st baseman of the Enterprise Club, under the name of Brown. His free batting and fielding would have exposed him, had not a member of his club disclosed the fact. A victory obtained under such circumstances is never creditable, and a defeat, as a matter of course, is doubly the reverse.

Source New York Clipper
Submitted by Richard Hershberger

an early slide? and a call for judgment

Date Sunday, September 15, 1861
Text

[Eckford vs. Eureka of Newark, 9/13/1861] [Northup of the Eurekas at second base]. Anxious to avail himself of all the chances, Northup seized the first favorable opportunity to run for the third base, and started for it. The ball was there, however, as soon as he–notwithstanding he adopted the sliding scale motive to avoid it. By accident, he raised his foot from the base while the ball was yet in the hands of Grum, who, of course, immediately touched him, and demanded judgment, which the umpire promptly pronounced in favor of the ball, and the second hand (Northup) was declared out. This decision, though manifestly just, was in direct antagonism to the feelings of the “outer circle,” and was responded to by a general hiss, which, however, had not effect upon the invincible “Peter,”[Pete O’Brien] who knew he was right.

Source New York Sunday Mercury
Submitted by Richard Hershberger

another game twelve on a side

Date Sunday, June 2, 1861
Text

The play-grounds of the several clubs begin to present a more lively appearance on practice days. On Tuesday last, the Hoboken grounds were very well attended. The Eagle Club had a practice-game with twelve men on a side; and the Gotham Club had full sides in a very well played game on their ground.

Source New York Sunday Mercury
Submitted by Richard Hershberger

baseball in skates ruins the ice

Date Thursday, February 7, 1861
Text

I noticed in the Eagle of yesterday that the ball match on skates of the Atlantic and Pastime Ball Clubs would not take place this afternoon (6th) on the skating pond, nearly 5th ave., on account of the ice being terribly cut up from the previous match.

Will you be kind enough to notice in your paper that this ball playing on the pond is very much against the wishes of the skaters visiting there, as it ruins the skating and spoils the amusements of many persons, especially children, in enjoying themselves in this favorite exercise, and oblige. A SKATER

Source Brooklyn Eagle
Submitted by Richard Hershberger

Chadwick at the Clipper, not yet at the Sunday Mercury

Date Thursday, October 10, 1861
Text

[reporting on the upcoming Silver Ball match] Mr. Queen, the proprietor of the New York Clipper, desiring of closing the season with a grand match, could see of no better way than a contest between new York and Brooklyn, and he generously offered to donate a silver ball to the nine which the Umpire shall decide as victorious, and placing the matter in the hands of the Clipper base ball reporter, Mr. Henry Chadwick, which gentleman has succeeded in completing the necessary arrangements, and making a judicious selection of the two nines, which is equal if not the best nines that could be chosen in either city. Like every other undertaking it has obstacles to surmount, and the Sunday Mercury, (who by the way was an advocator of such matches, once upon a time,) has changed its view, and has given place to several articles in its columns, which, if we had not seen without own eyes, we should certainly have doubted their emanating from that source.

Source Brooklyn Eagle
Submitted by Richard Hershberger

confusion over whether a ball is fair or foul

Date Saturday, August 31, 1861
Text

[Enterprise vs. Gotham 8/20/1861] [Earl of the Enterprise at first base:] Ibbetson made a splendid hit to right field, and ran for a home run, and before the ball could be fielded he was at his third and ready to run home, which he could have done, we think. Earl, however, who had preceded him, and had nearly reached his home base, was induced to turn back, under the supposition that Ibbetson’s hit was a foul ball, and also mistaking the notion of Chapman [of the Enterprise], who, with cap in hand, was calling to Ibbetson to “hurry up, hurry up,” which Earl thought was “go back, go back; consequently, he did go back, but being rightly informed, once more tried to get home, but was too late, and was put out by Cohen [the catcher] just as he reached the home base.

Source New York Clipper
Submitted by Richard Hershberger

crowd control and chalk lines

Date Sunday, June 9, 1861
Text

We regret to say that the members of the Enterprise Club were not very active in keeping the crowd of spectators back from the scorer’s table or from the bases, as should always be the case. It was almost impossible for the scorers to see either the third base or the catcher’s position, owing to neglect in this particular. But it was the first game of the season and the members of the club were doubtless themselves too much interested in the game to think of the duties which necessarily devolve upon a challenging club. We might also add that the chalk lines between the home and first and third bases, provided for in the rules, were non est on this occasion. [Note: the game was played on neutral ground, of the Atlantic Club.]

Source New York Sunday Mercury
Submitted by Richard Hershberger

foul ball confusion among the runners

Date 1861
Text

[Enterprise vs. Gotham 8/20/1861] The Enterprise by good batting had added one run to the their score, and had two men on their bases, when their 4 th striker, Ibbottson, made a very fine hit to the right field, which merited a home run. This would have brought home two men, thereby winning the game, but unluckily, in the midst of the noise and excitement, the players running home were induced to turn back under the supposition that the ball had been struck foul, in which case the players running the bases have to return to those they have left. In consequence of this error the runs were not made, and the last striker being put out, the game was lost. It was a great disappointment to the Enterprise club, as the victory would have been a very creditable one indeed...

Source Brooklyn Eagle
Tags Fouls
Submitted by Richard Hershberger

getting the Atlantic first nine to practice

Date Saturday, June 22, 1861
Text

[The Atlantics] generally open the season’s play with a game between their first and second nines, and when the former make their appearance, a game of the kind is played. But it is difficult to get the first nine to turn out in strength, except on occasions when matches are played with other clubs. This should not be so, as it is requisite that every first class club should keep their first nine well practiced together.

Source New York Clipper
Submitted by Richard Hershberger

ground control

Date Saturday, July 13, 1861
Text

[Resolute vs. Active 7/6/1861] The arrangements were decidedly an improvement on those of the previous match, for on this occasion policemen were in attendance to preserve order among any disposed to be unruly, and a rope, encircling the ground around the catcher, kept the crowd at a proper distance.

Source New York Clipper
Submitted by Richard Hershberger

no backstop on the Harlem grounds

Date Sunday, August 18, 1861
Text

[Eckford vs. Harlem 8/15/1861] The peculiarities of the Harlem ground, on which there is no stop-fence back of the catcher’s position, and which afford unbounded limit to a ball that happens to pass the catcher, tended to much loss of time, particularly during the early part of the game, while McKellar and Beach acted as catchers. Almost every third or fourth ball pitched went past the catcher, when the bases were unoccupied, and not a few were pitched over and beyond the reach of the catchers. Nothing is gained by permitting the ball to have so much scope behind the catcher, and much time is unnecessarily lost.

Source New York Sunday Mercury
Submitted by Richard Hershberger

Pratt's delivery

Date Saturday, July 6, 1861
Text

Pratt, the pitcher of the Athletic, gives a very swift, but regular ball, somewhat in the Creighton style.

Source New York Clipper
Submitted by Richard Hershberger

preparing for a grand match

Date Thursday, October 17, 1861
Text

[Mutual vs. Atlantic 10/16/1861] The Atlantic really merit praise for the admirable condition which they had their ground in. benches were erected, affording ample accommodation for the ladies, and those of the sterner sex who were so fortunate as to obtain them. Ropes and stakes were used liberally in keeping the crowd from encroaching upon the field. A detachment of police were upon the ground to preserve order, and not a single fight, row or disturbance of any kind occurred during the game, within our knowledge. Tents were erected,--the national ensign, the stars and stripes, floating from over them in several parts of the field, where refreshments, &c., could be obtained. The crowd was not only on the ground, but also several house tops in the vicinity were crowded with spectators. Outside the ring formed by the spectators, were numerous carriages and states and equipages of various kinds from the St. Nicholas and other hotels.

Source Brooklyn Eagle
Submitted by Richard Hershberger

Richmond paper advocates baseball

Date Friday, April 12, 1861
Text

The season for out-door sports begins this month, and in Washington and Baltimore the base-ball clubs have commenced play for the season. This game of base-ball is a fine, healthy exercise, and a manly and exciting pastime. Thousands of the mercantile and business community of the large cities north of us relieve the monotony of their daily pursuits by devoting a portion of their leisure time to the practice of either base-ball of cricket, and they not only derive considerable pleasure from the excitement of the game itself, but also great benefit from the exercise and physical development consequent upon the practice of these out-door sports. We rank ourselves with those who are desirous of encouraging these invigorating games among our too-little-exercised citizens. The fact is, we all, more or less, devote too much of our time and energies to our offices, desks and counters, and pay far too little attention to the recreation of body and mind, that nature absolutely requires to preserve health. Especially do educated men make a terrible mistake in this respect; they make recreation purely mental; they give a little play to their minds after their day's pursuits, but none to their bodies, and therefore they grow weak and dyspeptic, and ultimately all the train of evils that follow a neglect of the proper recreation for the physical nature come, miserably to affect their spirits and distort their views of men and things around them. Exercise, to be beneficial, should be attractive, and, to a certain extent, exciting, and we know of no other sports, as free from objectionable features, and at the same time as attractive and exciting, as these manly games of ball; and we think it would be an additton to our schools, that would lead to beneficial results, morally and physically, if each had a ball club attached to it. How many admirable practical lessons on discipline and good behavior — both very requisite among the majority of our boys — might be imparted by the teachers of our academies every Saturday afternoon, if they were to organize a ball club among their scholars and accompany the players to the field, and there guide and admonish them as occasion might require! It would be recreation alike to teachers and scholars, and beneficial to both.

Source Richmond Daily Dispatch
Submitted by Bill Hicklin

stalling for darkness

Date Sunday, September 22, 1861
Text

THE DUTIES OF UMPIRES.–“DRAWN GAMES”

The following communication has been address to us

“The Editors of the Sunday Mercury:

“Has an umpire the right to call a game drawn, contrary to the rules of the Base Ball Association?

“For instance, seven innings of a game are played; one club is two runs ahead when the eighth inning is commenced, and the other club scores three runs, putting them one ahead, with two men out. It then became too dark to continue the game, and the umpire decided it a drawn game.

“Should not the umpire, in such a case, go back to the seventh inning, and declare the club having the most runs the winner?

“By answering you would much oblige ARAGAIN.”

The above queries doubtless refer to the match played at Brooklyn on the 14th inst., between the Niagara and Resolute Clubs, the score of which will be found in another column.

The facts in the case appear to be as follows: At the terminus of the seventh inning in that match, the shades of night were rapidly approaching; still, an attempt was made to play another inning. The Niagara nine had the first bat, Rogers leading off, and was caught out on a foul bound. Forker, the next striker, was caught on the fly; and his successor, Hicks, was put out on the second base, closing the inning for the Niagaras without a run being added to their previous score of 21. The Resolutes, who were two runs behind their adversaries, then took the bat, commencing with Creagh, who, with Rogers, his successor, scored a r un each. Allen, the next striker, was then caught out on the fly. It was now becoming so dark that was very difficult for any one to see the movements of the ball. Taylor and Canfield each managed to hit it, and secured runs. Cowperthwait, their successor, struck out. The pitcher and catcher of the Niagara side now declared that they could not see the ball; but the Resolutes were desirous to have the inning completed, and the umpire permitted it to proceed. Beard, the next batsman stood wating at the bat for some moments, the pitcher and catcher of the Niagara allowing a good many balls to pass them-whether intentionally or not, we cannot say; for we did not witness the game. Much excitement prevailed; and the spectators, each moment crowding nearer and nearer to the striker, began to be noisy and demonstrative. Beard finally struck at the ball, and hit fout; but it was aso very dark that it was impossible for the fielders to see it; and then, we are informed, the umpire decided the contest to be a “drawn game,” as the inning could not be concluded – the score, at the time, standing 21 for the Niagara, and 23 for the Resolutes.

The above are the facts in the case, as we have received them from an eye-witness.

Our correspondent asks, “Has an umpire the right to call a game ‘drawn,’ contrary to the rules of the National Association?” There can be but one reply to this question, and that in the negative. There is no such thing as a “drawn game” recognized in the rules, if five innings have been played. One side or the other must be the conqueror, unless the score is a tie, at the close of active operations–as was the case in several games, last season, between the Gotham and other clubs, which , perhaps, might very properly be classed as “drawn games,” both parties agreeing to suspend play at a time when neither side had any advantage over the other. There can be no other “drawn game.” Section 31 of the Rules gives the umpire authority to determine when play shall be suspended at a match (in order to cover this very point of approaching darkness), and it is expressly stipulated in that rule, that “if the game cannot be concluded, it shall be decided by the last even innings, provided five innings have been played, and the party having the most number of runs shall be declared the winner.” Nothing can be plainer, simpler, or fairer than the vision of the Thirty-first Rule. It was especially designed to set al rest all disputes growing out of circumstances similar to the case in question; and as the eighth inning was not concluded, the umpire had no discretionary power, but must abide by the law, and decide the game in favor of that club which had the greatest number of runs as the close of the seventh inning.

It may have been that the Niagaras, finding the game passing out of their hands by the unexpected success of the Resolutes in the ighth inning, endeavored to “Play off,” and so prolong the inning, that it could be completed, and must necessarily have to be decided by the result of the seven previous innings. This unhandsome conduct on the part of the Niagaras is very pointedly hinted at in the following communication from a member of the Resolute Club:

NEW YORK, Sept. 20, 1861.

“To the Editors of the Sunday Mercury:

As there is considerable dissatisfaction at the manner in which the match between these clubs was terminated last Saturday, a statement of a few facts of the case may not be amiss. At the end of the seventh inning the Niagaras were two ahead, and being first at the bat, began the eighth inning with an 0, when the Resolute went in and scored four runs, with two men out. The third hand had struck twice, when the Umpire, by the refusal (not in word but in deed) of the pitcher of the Niagara to deliver the ball within reach of the bat, was compelled to stop the game and declare it a draw; Although this decision is not in accordance with the law of the game, yet what else could he do; it would certainly be unjust to give the victory to the Niagaras, when they could but would not end the game; and I believe the Resolutes were not entitled to it until they had three men out.

Their pitcher, however, is not the only one in fault; for all the nine, with a few honorable exceptions, did a great deal to delay the game; sometimes throwing the ball clear beyond the ones to whom they were playing; at others, currying it to the pitcher when it should have been passed, or, at least rolled to him, who then, instead of delivering it for the bat as required by Section 5 of the Rules, several times passed it clear over the heads of both striker and catcher. The Niagaras assertion that it was too dark to play the eighth inning, is all bosh. At the end of the seventh, nothing was said on either side about stopping, and as the N’s were put out with an 0 on the eighth in a very short time, it is hardly in reason to suppose the Resolute could not have made three runs before it became too dark, had their opponents play as fair a game as in the beginning.

My object in taking so much of your valuable space is not only to do justice to a club that may be barred from claiming the victory by an arbitrary rule of the game, but to call the attention of both the Senior and Junior Associations to the necessity of so amending the rules, that hereafter any club that delays a game, shall be declared defeated. Yours, respectfully, FAIR PLAY

If the facts presented by “Fair Play” are true in every particular, they go to prove that the umpire did not do his whole duty. He should have compelled the pitcher and the players generally on the Niagara side to act squarely up to the Rules. If after properly cautioning and remonstrating with them, they persisted in squandering time “for a purpose,” the umpire would have been justified in assuming the responsibility of deciding the inning closed in consequence of the refusal of the out-hands to play, and deciding the game in favor of the Resolutes. Failing to do this, the eight inning not having been concluded, it was his duty, under the Rules, to decide the result of the game in accordance with the score of the last complete inning.

The suggestion advanced by “Fair Play” to amend the Rules so as to declare as defeated any club which purposely delays a game–is a good one. A little better judgment on the part of umpires as to the time required to play an inning, would, in the meantime, avoid all difficulty.

Source New York Sunday Mercury
Submitted by Richard Hershberger

the 'playing off' problem discussed in council

Date Sunday, December 15, 1861
Text

[at the December 1861 NABBP convention] The Committee of Rules, through their chairman, Dr. Adams, reported that they had no changes in the rules to recommend which they deemed advisable. Only one proposition had been submitted to them, and that was to obviate in some way the unfair practice indulged in by certain clubs of prolonging the inning at the conclusion of a game, in order to prevent its completion, and so deciding the contest by the results of the last even inning. The Committee felt that this was a most reprehensible practice, and one which no club which had any regard for its reputation, character, and standing should permit among its players; still, they were not prepared to say exactly how it should be obviated. The Committee would therefore make no recommendation, but submit the proposition presented to them to the Association, in order that it might be discussed, and if deemed advisable, adopted. The proposition was to amend Section 31, by adding to it as follows:

“If an inning is entered upon, and both parties have been at the bat, and the party last at bat have the greatest number of runs when play is suspended, they shall be declared the winner.”

The report was, on motion, received, and laid upon the table till after the election of officers.

...

The report of the Committee on Rules was then taken from the table, and Judge Van Cott, of the Gotham Club, moved the adoption of the proposed amendment to Section 31.

This motion gave rise to a somewhat lengthy discussion. Judge Van Cott thought the proposed amendment was the best remedy to the evil complained of, and it was just, for the reason that the club having the greatest number of runs, after their opponents have had the opportunity to make all they could, is entitled to the game. Mr. Vanderhoff, of the Charter Oak Club, thought the only proper way was to amend the rules so as to make the game consist of nine innings, and when nine innings are not played, it shall be considered no game. This would induce clubs to begin playing earlier and hurry the game to completion. A delegate from Newark thought it would be better to instruct umpires, in all cases, to suspend the game at a certain hour, say sunset–it being discretionary with him whether an inning shall be commenced which probably cannot be completed before that time. Dr. Adams stated that he liked the proposition of Mr. Vanderhoff better than any other, and moved to amend the proposed amendment by striking out the whole of Section 31–which would leave the game confined to nine innings, no less. Mr. Cauldwell (of the Union), while he favored any effort which would have a tendency to remedy the evil sought to be reached, believed that the umpires in no matches, if they would do their duty fully, had the power, under Section 28, to correct the matter. The umpire is the judge of fair and unfair play; since any attempt on the part of the club at the bat, or the club in the field, to “play off” a game is manifestly unfair, the umpire has the power to warn the guilty party, that if they persist in the matter, he will call the game and decide it in favor of the opposing party. A few examples of this kind would have a good effect, and perhaps remedy the evil. Dr. Jones, of the Excelsior, and Mr. E. H. Brown, of the Metropolitan, favored the same view in the matter.

It was then resolved, by Mr. Mott, of the Eagle Club, to lay the proposition and amendment on the table, which was carried.

Source New York Sunday Mercury
Submitted by Richard Hershberger

the membership of the Bowdoin Club

Date Saturday, January 12, 1861
Text

The Bowdoin Base Ball Club now numbers in their fine organization some fifty or more members, all of whom are influential and gentlemanly young men...

Source Wilkes Spirit of the Times
Submitted by Richard Hershberger

the outbreak of war, and a game twelve on each side:

Date Sunday, May 12, 1861
Text

BASE BALL: There is really nothing of interest to record under this heading. All desire for popular pastimes seems to have been entirely prostrated by the war movements. Six weeks ago, we looked forward to one of the most spirited base ball seasons ever witnessed; ever club had made preparations for a glorious succession of interesting matches, and a number of spirited contests for the championship of senior and junior clubs was contemplated. But the attack by traitors of the South on Fort Sumter, which sent a thrill of indignation through every patriot bosom in the land, and induced so many thousands to offer their services for the defense of the Government and the punishment of traitors has so completely overshadowed all minor matters, that popular amusements have received little or no attention from their most enthusiastic advocates and admirers. Hundreds of the best base ball players in the United States are now within or on their way to Washington, ready to prove to the world, that while in times of peace they are enthusiastic devotees of the National Game, they are no less ready, in time of war, to make any sacrifice to sustain the honor and dignity of the nation, in a conflict of arms.

...

Although we anticipate seeing very few interesting matches this season–unless there should be a much more speedy termination of the war than can at present be expected–there will not be a total suspension of playing. The regular practice-days of each club will no doubt be kept up, and some interest will be maintained by occasional matches during the season. The Excelsior Club of South Brooklyn, assisted by members of the Charter Oak, Independent, and Atlantic Clubs, held a game on their ground on Thursday last, in which there were twelve players on each side. It was gratifying to see those well-known players–Creighton, Russell, and Pearsall–once more on the field; but the presence of Joe Leggett, who is with his regiment in Annapolis, was much missed.

Source New York Sunday Mercury
Submitted by Richard Hershberger

the runner thrown out on a foul ball

Date Friday, November 8, 1861
Text

[picked nines of Brooklyn 11/7/1861] A. Brainard on a hit to the right secured his first base, and Cornwell batting a foul ball, he imprudently, rather thoughtlessly, left the base, and the ball being thrown to Creighton, he promptly passed the ball to Galvin, heading him off...

Source Brooklyn Eagle
Submitted by Richard Hershberger

twist pitching 2

Date Sunday, October 20, 1861
Text

On the Eagle side, the pitching of Salisbury was in his best style, and tended greatly to the success of his nine; he gave the ball a “big twist,” and the Gothams found great difficulty in hitting a fair ball–tips or sky rockets being most in fashion.

Source New York Sunday Mercury
Submitted by Richard Hershberger

upcoming fly game discussion

Date Sunday, November 17, 1861
Text

At the ensuing [NABBP] meeting there will doubtless be the same strife between the advocates of the fly game and the friends of the bound game. We see no necessity for altering the rules on this subject. The privilege of playing either style of game is now recognized, and the fact that very few fly games have been played during the past season is satisfactory evidence that no change in this matter is generally deemed desirable.

Source New York Sunday Mercury
Submitted by Richard Hershberger
Retrieved from "https://beta.protoball.org/index.php?title=Clippings:1861&oldid=1377041"