Spalding's Baseball Guide and Official League Book for 1895

by Unknown

THE FIELDING OF 1894.

Season after season finds the fielding in base ball better attended to than any other department of the game; and it is fortunate for the business end of professional ball playing that it is so, as skilful fielding is decidedly the most attractive feature of our national game. Next to fielding comes base running, and lastly batting. The reason that so much more skill is shown in the fielding department than in that of batting, is due to the fact that more attention is giving to fielding than to batting. Regular training in team-work batting is practically unknown in the professional arena; while practice in fielding is given every attention. No game is played now-a-days without an hour being devoted to preliminary practice in fielding, while efficient batting is unknown except in the college arena, the professionals ignoring team-work batting practice in nearly every club. Hence the superiority fielding has attained over the batting. Go on any amateur field and watch a game in progress, and you can readily see the inferiority in fielding exhibited in comparison with that shown on the professional fields. It is not so in the batting, however. The reason is that amateurs have not the time to devote to the practice required to excel in fielding; but they can bat out three-baggers and home-runs as easily as the record batsmen do in the professional fields; it is different, however, in the case of doing team-work at the bat, owing to their not having time for the necessary practice.

Some splendid fielding was done in 1894, but as a whole it was not superior to that of 1893, or even to that of 1892. One reason for this was the introduction of the catcher's "big mitt" in the infield work—something that should not have been allowed. It was due to this fact that the batting scores were not larger the past season than they were in 1893, the big mitt on the hands of infielders enabling them to stop hard hit "bounders" and "daisy cutters" which, but for the use of the mitts, would have been clean earned base hits. This gave the infielders an opportunity to materially lessen the base hit record. By a mistaken calculation, the pitchers were charged with doing less effective work, single figure games being in a majority last season.

In contrast to the attractions of fine fielding, the average batting of the period is decidedly behindhand. What sight on a ball field is prettier to the good judge of the fine points of the game, than to see a hard hit "bounder" well stopped and accurately thrown from back of third base over to first base in time to cut off a rapid runner? or to see a splendidly judged fly ball held after a long run; or a hot "liner" caught on the jump by an infielder; or a beautiful triple play made from the infield; or a good double play from a neat catch, followed by a fine, long throw-in from the outfield? All these attractive features of sharp fielding all can enjoy and appreciate. But in the batting department too little team-work at the bat—that is, skilful scientific handling of the bat in the form of place hitting, to forward runners—is done to gratify good judges, the mere novices regarding over-the-fence hits for a home run as the very acme of "splendid batting," though they are invariably chance hits, and only made off poor pitching as a rule. Then, too, how the "groundlings," as Hamlet called them, enjoy "fungo" hitting, that is high balls hit in the air flying to the outfield, this style of hitting giving fifty chances for catches to every single home run. Time and again will one hear a "bleacher" remark, "I don't care if the ball was caught, it was a good hit," as if any hit could be a good one which gave an easy chance for a catch. When a "fungo" hitter takes his bat in hand all he thinks of is to "line 'em out, Tommy," in response to the calls from the "bleaching boards;" and when the ball goes up in the air to outfield a shout bursts forth from the crowd, only to be suddenly stopped as the ball is easily caught at deep outfield by an outfielder placed there purposely for the catch by the pitcher's skilful pitching for catches. Contrast this method of batting to that of place hitting which yields a safe tap to short outfield, ensuring an earned base; or the skilful "bunt" hit made at a time when the fielders are expecting a "line-'em-out" hit; or a sacrifice hit, following a good effort for a base hit to right field, which should mark all attempts to forward runners, especially when on third base. Of course there are skilful outfield hits made in team-work, but they are confined to hot, low liners, giving no chance for a catch, or hard hit "daisy cutters," which yield two or three bases; but every ball hit in the air to outfield shows weak batting, and this style of hitting it is which gives so many chances for catches in a game. It will be readily seen how inferior the "bleaching-board" style of batting is to team-work at the bat, and how much more attractive fielding is in contrast to the popular "fungo" hitting method, of which there was altogether too much in the League ranks last season to make the batting compare with the fielding, as an attractive feature of the game.

Single Figure Games.

There is a great difference between first-class single figure games, marked by batting against skilful, strategic pitching, backed up by splendid in and outfield support, and the class of contests known as "pitchers' games." The former are contests in which runners reaching second and even third base by good hits are cut off from scoring runs by superior pitching and fielding, and this class of games comprises the model contests of each season. On the other hand, the "pitchers' games," which yield single figure scores, are tedious and wearisome to the best judges of the game, from the fact that the brunt of the work falls on the "battery" team and one or two infielders, all the attractions of base running and of sharp fielding being sacrificed at the cost of seeing batsman after batsman retired on called strikes, arising from the intimidating speed of the pitching, this requiring the batsman to devote his whole energies to defending himself from the severe and often fatal injuries following his being hit by the pitched ball. Fortunately, the change in the distance between the pitcher and batsman has decreased the opportunity for this class of unattractive games. But it will not do to go over to the other side and by too much weakening of the box work give the "line-'em-out" class of "fungo" hitters a chance to revel in over-the-fence hits, and give the batsman undue preponderance in the effort to equalize the powers of the attack and defense in the game. Single figure games should outnumber double figure contests to make the game attractive for the scientific play exhibited, but not in the line of being the result of "cyclone" pitching.

The Umpiring of 1894.

The umpiring of 1894, despite of the new rules adopted early in the year governing the position, was no improvement over that of 1893; in fact, in several instances it was worse. The explicitly worded rule, prohibiting umpires from allowing any player, except the captain, to dispute a single decision of the umpire, was allowed to be openly violated by nearly every umpire on the staff. Then, too, as a rule, they, the majority, lacked the nerve and the courage of their convictions too much to keep in check the blackguardism displayed by a small minority of the players of the League teams of 1894; some of the umpires also displayed a degree of temper at times which sadly marred their judgment. That they all endeavored to do their duty impartially, goes without saying, but no umpire is fit for his position who cannot thoroughly control his temper. There was one instance shown of the folly of condoning the offence of drinking, which should not have been allowed; a drunken umpire is worse than a drunken player, for no one will respect his decisions. None such should be allowed on the League staff under any circumstances; moreover, no umpire connected with the low-lived prize-fighting business should be allowed on the League staff, no matter what his ability may be in other respects. When it becomes a necessity to have to engage pugilists as umpires to control hoodlum players, then will professional ball playing cease to be worthy of public patronage.

One great drawback to the successful umpiring which was expected to follow the revision of the rules made in March, 1894, was the countenancing of the abuse of umpires by the magnates of the clubs themselves. When presidents and directors of clubs fail to rebuke the faults of their club managers in allowing incompetent or hot-headed captains to set their players bad examples in this respect, they have no right to find fault with the poor umpiring which follows.

In the recent past, the rule on the League ball fields—and minor leagues copy all that the major league does—has been that, from the time the umpire takes up his position behind the bat, from the beginning to the end of a game, he finds both the contesting teams regarding him as a common enemy, the losing side invariably blaming him as the primary cause of their losing the game.

Then, too, in addition to the contesting teams as his foes, there are the majority of the crowd of spectators to be added to the list, the rougher element of the assemblage, the latter of whom regard the umpire as an especial target for abuse in every instance in which the home team is defeated. Last on the list of the umpire's opponents are the betting class of reporters, who take delight in pitching into him whenever his decisions—no matter how impartially he acts—go against their pet club or the one they bet on.

It is a fact not to be disputed, that those of the crowd of spectators at a ball game, who are so ready to condemn umpires for alleged partiality in their work, or for a supposed lack of judgment in rendering their decisions, never give a moment's thought to the difficulties of the position he occupies, or to the arduous nature of the work he is called upon to perform. There he stands, close behind the catcher and batsman, where he is required to judge whether the swiftly-thrown ball from the pitcher, with its erratic "curves" and "shoots," darts in over the home base, or within the legal range of the bat. The startling fact is never considered that several umpires have been killed outright while occupying this dangerous position. Neither does any one reflect for a moment that the umpire occupies this perilous position while regarded as a common enemy by both of the contesting teams, and as a legitimate object for insulting abuse from the partisan portion of the crowd of spectators. In fact, the umpire stands there as the one defenseless man against thousands of pitiless foes. The wonder is that half the umpires in the arena are as successful in the discharge of their arduous duties as they are, and the still greater wonder is that any self-respecting man can be induced to occupy a position which is becoming year after year more objectionable. There can be no successful umpiring accomplished in the position, no matter how perfect the code of rules governing the umpiring may apparently be, as long as that nuisance of the ball field, the professional "kicker," is allowed to have his way. In view of the express rules which are in the code, prohibiting the disputing of a single decision made by the umpire, it is astonishing that the umpires themselves, not to mention club managers and field captains, are so derelict in their duty in not enforcing the letter of the law of the code in this respect.

Let the magnates remember, when they say to each other this year—as they did at the close of the season of 1894—that "this hoodlumism in professional ball playing must be stopped," that it is themselves who are to blame for the blackguardism exhibited in the League arena in 1894. It is the failure of presidents and directors of League clubs to do their duty which is the real cause of such umpiring as we had in 1894. Club managers of teams, as a rule, do what they know the club presidents or directors quietly approve of or countenance, hence the latitude given to the hoodlum tactics of the rough element in each team. Don't blame umpires from meekly following the example club presidents and directors afford their team managers and captains.

Editorial Comments

ON THE OCCURRENCES, EVENTS AND NOTEWORTHY INCIDENTS OF 1894 IN THE BASE BALL ARENA.

Here is a list of the rules governing the movements of the pitcher, in delivering the ball to the bat, which we saw violated repeatedly during 1894, without any protests from any of the umpires who acted in the games we reported. First—

Not a pitcher had his foot in contact with the rubber plate last season, all of them invariably placing their back foot a few inches in front of the plate. Not one pitcher in ten, after feigning to throw to a base, resumed his position, as required by the rule, after making the feint. Not one in ten held the ball "firmly in front of his body," as the rule requires. Not one in ten faced the batsman, as required by Rule 30. As for the balk rule it was as openly violated last season almost as it was in 1893. Time and again was Section 29, Rule 32, violated as was Section 3 all the time, as not one had his foot in position as the rule requires, and yet not an umpire fined a single pitcher for the violation of the rules in question, that we saw.

What the pitching rules should be made to foster is, first—thorough command of the ball, with the consequent accuracy of aim in delivery; secondly—the substitution of skilful strategy in delivery in the place of mere intimidating speed; thirdly—the avoidance of the wear and tear of an extremely swift delivery of the ball; fourthly—the prevention of obstacles to successful base running, in the way of allowing too many balk movements in preventing stolen bases. These desirable objects were almost impossible of attainment under the badly-worded rules in existence in 1894.

In regard to the wearing of the catcher's "big mitt" by infielders in 1894, it is worthy of note that that first-class utility man of the Philadelphia team, "Lave" Cross, while wearing a catcher's mitt as third baseman—a large one at that, too—used it to such advantage that it was next to impossible for a ball hit to his position to get by him. At times it was simply laughable to see him stop ground hits. To wear such gloves is making a travesty of skilful infield work in stopping hard hit, bounding or ground balls. But with the speedy batting of the hard ball now in use, the stopping of hard hit balls in the infield becomes dangerous to the fingers without the aid of small gloves. But no such glove as the catcher's mitt should be allowed to be used save by the catchers or first basemen. In this position the "mitt" in question is a necessity in view of the great speed of the pitcher's delivery and the extremely wild, swift throwing from the field positions to first base. It should be borne in mind that in the days when gloves were not worn, when the pitching was far less swift than now, even then broken and split fingers marked nearly every contest, and behind the bat four catchers were needed where one or two will now suffice.

A Washington scribe, in commenting on Manager Schmelz's work in 1894, said: "Schmelz is a base ball man from the crown of his head to the soles of his feet, and we have been taught to believe here that when he says he will do a thing he comes pretty near fulfilling his prediction. If the team gets a fairly good start at the beginning of this season he is just as like as not to let several teams chase him under the wire in September next. A lack of team-work and a most deplorable weakness at short, second and third throughout the past season lost the team many a game."

To this latter list may be added, incompetent captaining of the team by the noted kicker, Joyce.

The Boston correspondent of the St. Louis Sporting News, in one of his letters of last winter, sent the following interesting account of an interview had between Manager Selee, of the Bostons, and a business man he met on a train last October. The B.M. asked the manager "whether ball-players, as a class, were a disreputable set of men, who made a practice of spending their money foolishly, and of saying and doing things on the ball field that were decidedly objectionable; also if, in consequence, the interest in the game had not to a very large degree been on the wane for a number of years past? He said he had read in the papers of a number of acts that had led him to believe that such was the case, and that, while formerly he had been an attendant at the games, that latterly he had lost his desire in that respect, though he still had an interest in all that is published about the game and the ball-players." Mr. Selee at once attempted to show the gentleman where his opinion was at fault, and an interesting conversation was carried on until the train reached Boston, the gentleman severely criticising the players and the Boston manager defending them.

The correspondent, in commenting on this, wrote as follows: "This incident opens anew a topic that has created considerable discussion for several years, and which was brought most forcibly to the public eye by a number of cases that occurred during the season of 1894, namely: Has the rough, rowdy, disreputable, hoodlum element increased or decreased in the professional arena in the past five or ten years?" Further on he adds: "Any intelligent, unprejudiced student of the game cannot but reach the conclusion that in recent years the excessive drinkers, the foul-mouthed talkers, in short, the worst element in the professional ranks, has been gradually weeded out, until the evil has been reduced to almost a minimum, while the intelligence, manliness and exemplary habits of the players have increased correspondingly; where, even five years ago, a ball team could be found where a majority of its players were of the drinking, gambling, disreputable class, to-day can be seen the results of a great and gratifying reform in the personnel of the teams, brought about largely by the efforts of the management, who have had their eyes opened to the trend of public opinion, and have gradually gotten rid of this unpopular element, and secured in their places players of a far different plane of morals." Judging from reports of contests in the League arena in 1894, the reformation above referred to has been far too slow in its progress for the good of the game. Witness the novelty in League annals of men fighting each other or striking umpires on the field, the use of vile language in abuse of umpires, and the many instances of "dirty" ball playing recorded against the majority of the League club teams of the past season. "The time was," says the same writer, "when a ball player's skill was the primary recommendation for an engagement, his moral qualifications being of a secondary consideration. To-day, however, while playing skill is, of course, one of the leading qualities that an applicant for honors on the diamond field must possess, it does not fill the whole bill by any means. His habits, his influence among his fellow players, his general reputation with the public, are also taken into consideration more than before, and if he can pass muster in all these respects he is eligible for engagement in all well managed teams."

In commenting on the existing situation of the professional branch of our grand national game, Mr. Wm. H. Bell, the Kansas correspondent of the St. Louis Sporting News, says: "The growth and development of our national game as been wonderful. Its success has been unparalleled in the world's history of athletic sports, and stands to-day a living monument to the courage, energy and perseverance of the American people. When we pause a moment in our contemplation of the brilliant future of our game and turn a glance back over the past, and try to realize that less than one generation has lived since the birth of base ball, and our fathers guided its first feeble steps, even we Americans, familiar with progress unequaled in the history of the world, are forced to marvel at the rapid growth of this athletic sport." Further on, on the same topic, Mr. Bell says very truly: "While base ball has advanced with great strides, its growth has been normal and healthy. Its success is not the result of a boom, giving it a fictitious value, its prosperity is not as an inflated balloon that will collapse when torn by the knife of adversity. It is but a creation of man, and while its life has been one of unequaled prosperity it has suffered, as do all things of this earth. One factor has ever been potent in its success and that is honesty. The honesty of the game has always been its motto, and though often assailed has still remained intact. This, alone, has gained for baseball a foothold in the hearts of the American people that nothing can dislodge. Americans are known the world over as lovers of fair and honest sport, and to base ball they have given their unswerving allegiance." Here is a merited compliment to the National League from the same able pen: "Our national game was never so firmly established in the hearts of the people as at the present time. It is safe in the hands of true and tried men, who are devoting their lives to its success. It is dominated and controlled by that grand old organization, the National League, which for twenty years has been the great exponent of the game, and has done more to advance the game than any other factor. The League has, during its life, stood on one platform, "honesty and purity in base ball," and has always retained the confidence and respect of the people. It has elevated the game until to-day base ball stands on a firm foundation of popular approval unequaled by any other athletic sport. While the game has advanced with marvelous rapidity it has experienced short periods of depression and stagnation during its career of thirty years. It has had enemies who have sought to pervert it for their own uses. It has been all but torn asunder by civil war. But each time it has bravely met the issue and in the end triumphed. It is just now recovering from the effects of a civil war which all but destroyed it. The rapidity with which it has recovered has been wonderful and is to me a greater proof of prosperity and success than any success that could come to it while enjoying a long period of peace." We regret not having space to quote more at length from Mr. Bell's very able article published in the Sporting News of January 12th last.

* * * * *

The Following Paragraph, Published In The New York Clipper Of February
5, 1895, Tells A Quiet Little Story Well Worthy Of Record In The Guide:
"A.G. Spalding, Of The Chicago Club, Was Asked How So Much Stock Of The
New York Club Came To Be Owned By Outside Parties, And He Said: 'well, I
Will Tell You. During The Troublous Brotherhood Times Of 1890, Along In
July, I Think, I Was Suddenly Summoned To New York. I Went Direct To
Mr. Abell's House, By Request, Entirely Oblivious Of The Object Of The
Sudden Call, And There Met Soden Of Boston, Reach Of Philadelphia, Byrne
Of Brooklyn, Brush Of Indianapolis, And One Or Two Others. There We
Received The Pleasant Information From John B. Day That The New York
Club Was Financially At The End Of Its Rope, And Must Have Immediate
Assistance. Imagine Our Surprise When We Were Told That The Club Must
Have $80,000 At Once To Carry It Through The Season, Or The New York
Club Must Give Up Its End Of The Fight. When We Had Collected Our
Senses Sufficiently To Speak, It Was The General Opinion That If The New
York Club Failed At That Stage Of The Game, The Fight With The
Brotherhood Was Lost, And The Future Of The Old National League Was, To
Say The Least, Uncertain; So It Was Finally Decided That We Must Save
The New York Club At All Hazards, And Before We Separated That Night I
Agreed To Provide $20,000, Soden And Brush Came Forward With Similar
Amounts, And The Balance Was Taken By Reach, Abell And One Or Two
Others, As I Remember. It Was Pretty Costly, But That Prompt Act Saved
The National League, And, By Saving It, The Future Of Professional Base
Ball In This Country Was, In My Opinion, Also Saved. This Will Explain
How I First Became Interested In The New York Club, And, As A Result,
Find Myself Criticised For Ever Being Permitted To Hold Any Of The
Stock. Of This $20,000 Stock Alloted To Chicago, Anson Took And Paid
Cash For $5,000, Another Chicago Gentleman Took $5,000, My Brother
Walter $5,000 And Myself $5,000. Afterward I Sold Or Practically Gave My
Stock To My Brother, And I Think He Picked Up Some More While He Was A
Director Of The Club. That Brotherhood Fight Was A Great Fight, And One
That Will Probably Never Be Duplicated. The Real Inside History Of That
Struggle, And Its Final Settlement, Was Never Written, But If It Ever
Is, It Will Prove Quite Interesting, As Well As Quite A Surprise To The
Base Ball Men Of That Day. But Why Talk In This Strain Any Longer. You
Know I Am Out Of Active Base Ball, And These Reminiscences Simply
Emphasize The Fact That I Ought To Be Out Of It, For I Am Getting Too
Old.'"

What A Commentary On The Selfish Greed Of The Overpaid Star Players Of
The "Out-For-The-Stuff" Class Of The Professional Fraternity
Mr. Spalding's Account Of One Costly Result Of The Players' Revolt Of
1890 The Above Story Presents. It Also Tells The True Story Of How The
Above-Named Magnates Of The Boston, Chicago, Philadelphia, Brooklyn And
Indianapolis Clubs Of 1890 Came To Be Financially Interested In The New
York Club, Not For Profit, But To Save The Disruption Of The League.

* * * * *

The veteran Comiskey thus explains the difference in one special respect, between a seasoned player and a colt—and he is one who ought to know, you know. He said, in an interview: "No one appreciates the superiority of hustling, aggressive youngsters over the old standbys of the diamond more than I do. A seasoned player, as a rule, develops into a mechanical player who is always watching his averages and keeping tab on himself. While he may be too loyal to shirk, he will not take a chance which he is not compelled to. Especially is this true in running bases. How many of these old players will slide or go into a bag when they are blocked off? Very few. On the other hand, a young player appreciates that he has to make a reputation, while the old player, who has one to protect, is in the business for a livelihood and nothing else. Popular applause has lost its favor for him, and, while it is not unwelcome, it does not stimulate him to renewed exertions as it did when he began his career. It is entirely different with the man who is trying to establish himself in the major league. An ambitious young player thinks that the game depends upon him, and is dead sure that every crank agrees with him. Give him a good send-off in the papers, or let his manager commend him for a creditable piece of work, and he will break his neck in his efforts to deserve another installment to-morrow. The public demands snappy ball, and the young players are the only ones who can serve up that article."

In his remarks, Comiskey furthermore said: "The good effect of a manager's or captain's praise of a 'colt' is surprising. Both of these officials of the League clubs, almost without exception, are apt to be silent as the grave when a player makes a good point or a fine stop or catch; but the moment he fails to make an almost impossible play then comes the ill-natured snarl or the rutty growl. Harry Wright stands out alone as the only manager or captain to encourage a player with praise."

* * * * *

A Philadelphia scribe, in commenting on the rowdy ball playing of 1894 in the League ranks, says: "We could fill pages with evidence of the rowdyism indulged in by the majority of the League teams during the season of 1894, and that, too, if we were only to confine ourselves to the local reports of the season at Cleveland, Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, Baltimore, and half a dozen other cities." As the Cleveland Leader had it, in commenting upon one of the Baltimore-Cleveland games:

"I say it with reluctance—for I have always admired Ned Hanlon's pluck—that the national game never received so severe a set-back as it did during the last Baltimore series here. The effort to spike players, the constant flow of profanity and vulgarity, the incessant and idiotic abuse of an umpire, all combined to make the Baltimore club—that local people have been led to believe was made of a crowd of earnest, honest players—thoroughly despised and detested. In ten years' experience in scoring games in Cleveland I have never heard such a torrent of vulgarity, profanity and brutal, senseless abuse heaped upon an umpire as Lynch stood from the Baltimore players upon the field here."

Similar charges against visiting teams were made by the Pittsburgh people against the Cleveland team; by the Philadelphia scribes against the Bostons, etc. In fact, proof, and plenty of it, was easily attainable from the reports from every League city during 1894, to a more or less extent.

The question apropos to this comment is, "What are you going to do about it" in 1895, Messrs. Magnates?

* * * * *

John Rowe, the veteran player, who was one of the "Big Four," transferred from the Buffalo club to the Detroit club, in the fall of 1885, is a firm believer in Southern trips during the preliminary season, to get the players in condition for a championship season. In speaking on that subject, he said: "The year the Detroits won the National League pennant we went South, and before the regular season opened that team had played over 40 games. In consequence we were in the acme of condition, and some of the teams nearly lost their breath when they tackled us for the first time. The men could hit like fiends, and field fast and perfect. There were no cases of 'charley horse' in our team, and as for 'glass arms,' they were not included in our outfit. It is a great thing, I tell you, and the managers who take their men into a warm climate are doing a sensible act. According to my idea the plan is to first practice until the players become limbered up, say for a week or so, before attempting to play a game. Then get in as many games as possible, without overdoing it, until the regular schedule begins, In the exhibition games the experiments can be tried out, and the men will gradually learn to play together, which means much to a club. Of course, there is more or less luck in base ball, but at the same time luck can't win alone all the time. Team-work and an agreeable manager count a long ways toward winning a pennant." We would add to the last line, that the absence of drinking and hoodlumism in the ranks is equally a necessity.

* * * * *

In the arena of minor leagues, in professional baseball, outside of the sectional leagues, like those of the Western, Eastern, Southern, New England and other like leagues, there is no class of minor leagues which is so much fostered as individual State leagues. Trio or duo State leagues should be avoided except in very exceptional cases. In the organization of the various minor leagues in existence, one special point has been too much neglected, and that is the importance of making the league's pennant race specially attractive by the attractive character of the honors to be won. Sectional leagues, made up of well-arranged circuits, present as good attractions in their championship honors at stake as that of the great major league, and next to these come the pennant races of State leagues. But what special object, in this respect, is there to strike for in the championships of trio or duo State leagues? None whatever. They are mere gate-money organizations, lacking all of the attractive features of sectional and State league pennant races. State leagues also possess the advantage of not interfering with the interests of the sectional leagues which include State clubs. Take any State in which professional base ball flourishes, and in the State there will be found two classes of professional clubs, viz., the one strong class, which exist in the larger cities of the State, and the weaker class which represents the smaller towns. The sectional leagues, of course, seek to attach the former to their circuits, leaving the latter eligible for State league circuits.

* * * * *

For many years past columns of space in papers making base ball a specialty have been occupied with long arrays of figures giving the averages of the players in the batting and fielding departments of the game. To such an extent has this feature of the annual statistics of the game been carried that the records based upon these averages have come to be regarded by the players as the primary object in view during each season's work in the field. As a result of this system those club directors and managers who have never fully examined into the merits of the subject, and who are not, therefore, aware of the fact that, as criterions of the most skilful play in each department, these averages are comparatively useless, have been led into the costly error of making their selections for their teams each season upon the basis of the figures of the players' averages, and hence the customary announcement made at the beginning of each season that "our team has the best batting average of the season." It is about time that the fallacy of this average business should be shown up in its true light and that the existing system of making out averages should be so changed as to make it some sort of a test of a player's skill in his home position, which it certainly is not now. The worst of this average business as it prevails now is that it is a powerful incentive for every player to make "playing for a record" his principal object in his season's work, and that all-important duty, "playing for the side," a matter of secondary consideration.

* * * * *

The cranks' title of "Giants," given years ago to the New York club's team, has become a misnomer. The team most entitled to it in 1894 was that of the Chicago club, no other club team making such a show of heavyweight players last season as did Anson's real "Giants," as will be seen by the appended record. Look at the figures of their biggest men:

——————————————————————
Height Weight
Feet Inches lbs.
——————————————————————
Schriver, catcher 5 10 185
Camp, pitcher 6 160
Anson, first base 6 1 202
L. Camp, second base 6 165
Parrott, third base 5 11 160
Clayton, short stop 6 1 180
Decker, left field 6 1 180
Lange, centre field 6 1 180
Dungan, right field 5 11 180
—— ——— ——
Average 6 173
——————————————————————

How does Murphy, Fuller, Burke, Ward et al stand in weight and size compared to the above "Giants"?

* * * * *

Here is something worthy of note by club managers who begin to get their teams together each spring, which we clipped from the St. Louis Sporting News of last December. The editor of the News said: "The player that is on the upward path is the man for success. He is playing for something far more than the salary he gets. He is looking forward to a place in the foremost ranks of the nation's ball players. Consequently he proves to be a hard worker at all times. He tries to land his club in the top notch, and his record, for the part he took, stands out as a recommendation to all the world. On the other hand, the older player, who has made his record and is going down again, has lost all his ambition. He can put no life into the club, his ginger has been expended in the days gone by, and the people look upon him as a back number. He sticks to the profession generally for a livelihood. He wants to play so as to hold his place, but he has lost the powers that he once had, and cannot do what he would like to accomplish. The old-timers had better get a hump on themselves this year, else will the youngsters drive them out of the business."

* * * * *

The well-known base ball writer, Mr. Pringle, was right when he said: "It is useless to get new rules until existing ones have been rigidly enforced and tested." It is an undeniable fact that the umpires of 1894, almost without exception, failed to properly enforce the rules governing the umpire's duties. In this regard Mr. Pringle said: "The rules relating to the duties of umpires are all right. They have power to stop all rowdy conduct on the field, but the trouble has been the lack of nerve on the part of umpires to enforce the rules." This, and the fact that the presidents and directors of clubs who governed the managers and captains of teams, were largely to blame in the matter for not backing up the umpires as they should have done. The latter have arduous duties enough to discharge as it is without their finding obstacles in their way in the partisan actions of club officials who control club managers and captains. When this class supports the umpires against the club teams it will be time enough to lay the whole onus of hoodlumism in the ranks on the umpires—not until then.

* * * * *

A Philadelphia scribe hits the nail on the head when, in commenting on the existing abuses of kicking and dirty ball playing in the League arena, he says: "If the club owners would take the initiative in enforcing decorum upon their players, upon pain of fine or suspension, instead of shifting the burden and onus upon the umpire, the problem of order at ball games would be solved at once. But the majority of magnates and managers, while openly, hypocritically, deploring dirty ball playing, secretly wink at it and rather enjoy it, especially if their particular club secures advantages from it. The players all know this, and so do the umpires; hence the former presume upon it, while the latter weaken in their intent and desire to strictly enforce the rules. When the duty of preserving order on the field and decorum among the players is devolved upon the clubs, who represent direct authority, power and responsibility, instead of irresponsible umpires, then, and not till then will the evils complained of cease, or at least be mitigated."

Al Wright, the base ball editor of the New York Clipper, in its issue of February 15, 1895, had this noteworthy paragraph in its columns: "Frank C. Bancroft, the business manager of the Cincinnati club, in speaking about the equalization of the players of the major league teams, said: 'I am not a firm believer in the prevalent practice of selling the best men in a weak or tail-end team to one of the leading clubs, and register a vigorous kick against it. My plan is that the National League shall pass a rule forbidding the sale of a player from a club in the second division, to a club in the first division. I think this would, in a measure, prevent some of the hustling to dispose of a clever man for the sake of the cash that is in the trade. There is certainly some good arguments in the idea, and not one against it. The clubs of the second division have been too willing to dispose of their best men for a decent cash consideration, and the damage that has been done to the game is incalculable.'"

A young Brooklyn writer, in commenting on the threatened war on the reserve rule which Messrs. Richter, Pfeffer, Buckenberger and Barnie were active in promoting, said: "Since the National League and American Association amalgamated at Indianapolis in 1892 the League has not been a glorious success." The reply to this is a statement of fact which contradicts the above assertion very flatly. The reorganized National League started its new career in the spring of 1892 with an indebtedness, resulting from the base ball war of 1891, of over $150,000. At the close of the season of 1892 it had partially redeemed its heavy indebtedness, and by the close of the season of 1893 it had paid the debt off in full, and it closed the season of 1894 with a majority of its clubs having a surplus in their treasuries, and that, too, despite the hardest kind of times of financial depression. If this is not a glorious success, pray what is?

A Pittsburgh scribe, in commenting on the dead failure of the scheme to organize a new American Association, one object of which was to levy war upon the now permanently established rule of the National Agreement clubs, very pointedly said last winter that "such a scheme would be folly of the maddest kind. There is not a good reason, theoretical or practical, sentimental or otherwise, in support of it. The success of base ball, to a very great extent, depends on public sentiment, and we have seen what a base ball war did to that sentiment four years ago. There is one solid basis for all base ball organizations, and that is the reserve rule. The proposed organization ignores this fundamental and necessary principle, and consequently can only be compared to that foolish man who built a house on sand."

During the decade of the eighties the League's code of rules had this special clause in it:

"Any player who shall be in any way interested in any bet or wager on the game in which he takes part, either as a player, umpire, or scorer, shall be suspended from legal service as a member of any professional Association club for the season during which he shall have violated this rule."

The question is, Why was this important and much-needed rule taken from the code?

No player can play ball as he should do who is personally interested in any bet on the content he is engaged in; that is a fact too true to be contradicted. Independent of this fact, too. Experience has plainly shown that the step of betting on a game he plays in is but a short one from accepting bribes to lose a game. The rule should long ago have been replaced in the code.

The Cleveland Leader says: "The patrons of the game have begun to realize the true inwardness of scientific batting, as shown in the securing of single bases by well-timed place hits, safe taps of swiftly-pitched balls to short outfield, and skilful efforts in sacrifice hitting and bunting, every such hit forwarding a run or sending a run in. Of course, to occupants of the bleaching boards, as a rule, the great attraction is the long hit for a home run, which is made at the cost of a 120-yards sprint, and at the loss of all chances for skilful fielding. But to the best judges of scientific batting the safe tap of the swiftly pitched ball, the well-judged bunt or the effort to make a safe hit to right field, which, if it fails, at least yields a sacrifice hit, is far more attractive than the old rut of slugging for home runs and making fungo hits to the outfielders."

There is something to fight for in the winning of a State league's championship honors, while there is little or nothing at stake in a trio or duo State league. Suppose each State had a four or six club circuit, and at the close of its season, each August or September, what a paying series of October games could be arranged in the Southern section of the country in October for a grand championship series for the prize of leading all the State leagues of the country for the honors of the champion pennant of State league organizations? By all means let State leagues be organized, until every State in the Union—North, South, East and West—has its representative State league.

The fickle nature of base ball "rooters" was conspicuously shown at the Polo Grounds in 1894. At the end of the June campaign, when the New York "Giants" stood sixth in the race, Ward's stock among the local "cranks" and "rooters," stood below par; at the close of the July campaign, however, that same stock was at a premium; and yet it was the same John M. Ward at the head of the "Giants." In May there were "none so poor to do him reverence." In August, John was carried off the field a hero. Of such are the "cranks" and "rooters."

A Toronto paper says: "Spalding Brothers will present to the champion club of all regularly organized base ball leagues, junior or senior, in Canada, a valuable flag, 11x28, pennant shaped, made of serviceable white bunting, red lettered, and valued at $20. The flags will be forwarded, duty free, immediately after the season closes. Each league must consist of four or more clubs, and each club must play not less than 12 championship games." This is a good plan to encourage the game on foreign soil. It has worked well in England and Australia, too.

Among the magnates of the League who could be seen at nearly all of the home games of the twelve clubs during the past season were the Boston triumvirate, Messrs. Soden, Conant and Billings; the irrepressible Charley Byrne, of Brooklyn; the handsome Vonderhorst, of Baltimore; the smiling Eddie Talcott, of New York; the noted "Philadelphia lawyer" Rogers, of Philadelphia; the "Boss Manager" Von der Ahe, of St. Louis; the energetic Kerr, of Pittsburgh, and Al Spalding's successor, President Hart, of Chicago.

The Louisville team was a strong one as regards its individual players. But it lacked harmony in its ranks and suffered from cliques. With two ex-captains in its team, besides the one who ran it, but little else could be expected. Ambitious ex-captains are obstacles in the way of successful management of a team. One regular captain should be the rule, with an acknowledged lieutenant—a pair like Comiskey and Latham, who worked the old St. Louis "Browns" up to being four-time winners of pennant honors.

It is a noteworthy fact that Anson has been manager and captain of the Chicago club's teams since 1877, and from that year to this he has taken his team to the goal of the championship five years of the six the club won the pennant, A.G. Spalding being the manager in 1876, the first year the club won the honors. Fifteen successive years of management in one club beats the League's records in that respect.

[Illustration: P. T. POWERS, President Eastern League.]
[Illustration: Yale Team, '94.][Illustration: Harvard Team, '94.]
[Illustration: University of Pennsylvania Team, '94.]
[Illustration: Princeton Team, '94.]

#EASTERN LEAGUE SCHEDULE.# —————————————————————————————————-

Clubs. At Toronto. At Buffalo. At Rochester.

—————————————————————————————————- ……………. May 29, 30, 30 June 6, 7, 8 Toronto ……………. June 17, 18, 19 July 6, 8 ……………. July 15, 16 Aug. 14, 15, 16 —————————————————————————————————- May 24, 24 ……………. June 1, 3, 4 Buffalo May 31, July 1,2 ……………. July 9, 10 Sept. 11, 12, 14 ……………. Aug 17, 19, 20 —————————————————————————————————— June 10, 11, 12 June 13, 14, 15 ……………. Rochester July 12, 13 July 4, 4 ……………. Aug. 24, 26, 27 Aug 21, 22, 23 ……………. —————————————————————————————————- June 13, 14, 15 June 10, 11, 12 May 29, 30, 30 Syracuse July 9, 10 July 12, 13 July 1, 2 Aug. 21, 22, 23 Aug 24, 26, 27 Sept. 10, 11, 15 —————————————————————————————————- Wilkes- May 16, 17, 18 May 13, 14, 15 May 23, 25, 27 Barre July 26, 27 July 24, 25 July 20, 22 Sept. 3, 4, 5 Sept. 6, 7, 9 Aug 28, 29, 30 —————————————————————————————————- May 13, 14, 15 May 16, 17, 18 May 20, 21, 22 Scranton July 24, 25 July 26, 27 July 18, 19 Aug. 31, Sep. 2,2 Aug. 28, 29, 30 Sept. 6, 7, 9 —————————————————————————————————- Spring- May 20, 21, 22 May 23, 25, 27 May 13, 14, 15 field July 20, 22 July 18, 19 July 26, 27 Aug. 28, 29, 30 Aug. 31, Sep.2, 2 Sept. 3, 4, 5 —————————————————————————————————- Provi- May 23, 25, 27 May 20, 21, 22 May 16, 17, 18 dence July 18, 19 July 20, 22 July 24, 25 Sept. 6, 7, 9 Sept. 3, 4, 5 A'g 31, Sep. 2, 2 —————————————————————————————————-

—————————————————————————————————-

Clubs. At Syracuse. At Wilkes-Barre. At Scranton.

—————————————————————————————————- June 1, 3, 4 May 6, 7, 8 May 9, 10, 11 Toronto July 4, 4 June 21, 22 June 24, 25 Aug. 17, 19, 20 Aug. 10, 12, 13 Aug. 7, 8, 9 —————————————————————————————————- June 6, 7, 8 May 9, 10, 11 May 6, 7, 8 Buffalo July 6, 8 June 24, 25 June 21, 22 Aug. 14, 15, 16 Aug 7, 8, 9 Aug 10, 12, 13 —————————————————————————————————- June 17, 18, 19 Apr. 29, 30, May 1 May 2, 3, 4 Rochester July 15, 16 June 28, 29 June 26, 27 Sept. 12, 13, 14 July 30, 31 Ag. 1 Aug 2, 3, 5 —————————————————————————————————- ……………. May 2, 3, 4 Apr. 29, 30, May 1 Syracuse ……………. June 26, 27 June 28, 29 ……………. Aug 2, 3, 5 July 30, 31 Ag. 1 —————————————————————————————————- Wilkes- May 20, 21, 22 ……………. July 1, 3, 4 Barre July 18, 19 ……………. July 4, 4 Aug. 31, Sep. 2,2 ……………. Aug 14, 15, 16 —————————————————————————————————- May 23, 25, 27 May 29, 30, 30 ……………. Scranton July 20, 22 July 1, 2 ……………. Sept. 3, 4, 5 Aug. 17, 19, 20 ……………. —————————————————————————————————- Spring- May 16, 17, 18 June 6, 7, 8 June 10, 11, 12 field July 24, 25 July 15, 16 July 12, 13 Sept. 6, 7, 9 Sept. 13, 14, 15 Sept. 10, 11, 12 —————————————————————————————————- Provi- May 13, 14, 15 June 10, 11, 12 June 6, 7, 8 dence July 26, 27 July 12, 13 July 15, 16 Aug. 28, 29, 30 Sept. 10, 11, 12 Sept. 13, 14, 15 —————————————————————————————————-

————————————————————————

Clubs. At Springfield. At Providence.

———————————————————————— Apr 29, 30, May 1 May 2, 3, 4 Toronto June 28, 29 June 26, 27 Aug. 2, 3, 5 July. 30, 31 Ag.1 ———————————————————————— May 2, 3, 4 Ap. 29, 30, May 1 Buffalo June 26, 27 June 28, 29 July. 30, 31 Ag.1 Aug. 2, 3, 5 ———————————————————————— May 9, 10, 11 May 6, 7, 8 Rochester June 24, 25 June 21, 22 Aug 10, 12, 13 Aug 7, 8, 9 ———————————————————————— May 6, 7, 8 May 9, 10, 11 Syracuse June 21, 22 June 24, 25 Aug 7, 8, 9 Aug 10, 12, 13 ———————————————————————— Wilkes- June 17, 18 19 June 13, 14, 15 Barre July 6, 8 July 9, 10 Aug. 21, 22, 23 Aug. 24, 26, 27 ———————————————————————— June 13, 14, 15 June 17, 18 19 Scranton July 9, 10 July 6, 8 Aug. 24, 26, 27 Aug. 21, 22, 23 ———————————————————————— Spring- ……………. May 29, 30, 30 field ……………. July 4, 4 ……………. Aug. 17, 18, 20 ———————————————————————— Provi- June 1, 3, 4 ……………. dence July 1, 2 ……………. Aug. 14, 15, 16 ……………. ————————————————————————