Chapter II: Part 2

------------|-----------------|----------|-----------|-------------- Clubs. | League. | Players. | Drafted | Drafted By | | | From | ------------|-----------------|----------|-----------|-------------- Louisville |American Asso. |Stansbury |Louisville |St. Louis N.L. Chattanooga |Southern Asso. |Balenti |Chattanooga|St. Louis A.L. Sacramento |Pacific Coast |Berghammer|Lincoln |Chicago N.L. Sacramento |Pacific Coast |Orr |Sacramento |Phila. A.L. Sacramento |Pacific Coast |[1]Young |Harrisburg |New York A.L. Sacramento |Pacific Coast |Drohan |Kewanee |Washington. Indianapolis|American Asso. |Berghammer|Lincoln |Chicago N.L. Indianapolis|American Asso. |Cathers |Scranton |St. Louis N.L. Indianapolis|American Asso. |Metz |San Antonio|Boston N.L. Indianapolis|American Asso. |Kernan |Oshkosh |Chicago A.L. New Orleans |Southern Asso. |Bates |Newp't News|Cleveland. New Orleans |Southern Asso. |Wilson |Knoxville |Cleveland. New Orleans |Southern Asso. |Betts |San Antonio|Cleveland. New Orleans |Southern Asso. |Drohan |Kewanee |Washington. New Orleans |Southern Asso. |Williams |Newark, O |Washington. Portland |Pacific Coast |Williams |Newark, O |Washington. Portland |Pacific Coast |Drohan |Kewanee |Washington. Portland |Pacific Coast |Bates. |Newp't News|Cleveland. Portland |Pacific Coast |Grubb |Morristown |Cleveland. Portland |Pacific Coast |Wilson |Knoxville |Cleveland. Portland |Pacific Coast |Betts |San Antonio|Cleveland. Milwaukee |American Asso. |Beall |Denver |Cleveland. St. Paul |American Asso. |Berghammer|Lincoln |Chicago N.L. St. Paul |American Asso. |Miller |Harrisburg |Pittsburgh. St. Paul |American Asso. |Booe |Ft. Wayne |Pittsburgh. St. Paul |American Asso. |House |Kewanee |Detroit. St. Paul |American Asso. |Drohan |Kewanee |Washington. St. Paul |American Asso. |Beall |Denver |Cleveland. St. Paul |American Asso. |Balenti |Chattanooga|St. Louis A.L. St. Paul |American Asso. |Agnew |Vernon |St. Louis A.L. Omaha |Western League |Wilson |Knoxville |Cleveland. Omaha |Western League |Williams |Newark, O |Washington. Omaha |Western League |Betts |San Antonio|Cleveland. Omaha |Western League |Drohan |Kewanee |Washington. Buffalo |Internat'l League|Schang |Buffalo |Phila. A.L. Buffalo |Internat'l League|Dolan |Rochester |Phila. A.L. Buffalo |Internat'l League|Cottrell |Scranton |Chicago N.L. Buffalo |Internat'l League|Clymer |Minneapolis|Chicago N.L. Columbus |American Asso. |Drohan |Kewanee |Washington. Rochester |Internat'l League|Dolan |Rochester |Phila. A.L. Montreal |Internat'l League|Connelly |Montreal |Washington. Toledo |American Asso. |Hernden |[2] |St. Louis. Toledo |American Asso. |Stevenson |Oshkosh |St. Louis N.L. Toledo |American Asso. |Bates |Newp't News|Cleveland. Toledo |American Asso. |Wilson |Knoxville |Cleveland. Denver |Western League |Heckinger |Racine |Chicago N.L. Denver |Western League |Drohan |Kewanee |Washington. ---------------------------------------------------------------------

1: Subject to investigation as to whether New York American League Club has title.

2: Subject to investigation as to whether St. Louis American or National League Club has title to this player and how secured.

* * * * *

A WORLD'S SERIES PROBLEM

Much discussion arose after the finish of the last world's series as to whether the adjustment of dates had worked satisfactorily. The contention was that playing off a tie game on the ground where the game had been scheduled might work some inconvenience to "fans" and result in an inequitable allotment of dates, simply to conform to custom.

It was asserted that the importance of the series demanded that it be a home-and-home affair, dates to alternate regularly, regardless of all ties or drawn games. To obtain opinion that is sound and practical the Editor of the GUIDE sent forth the following letter:

NEW YORK, January 31, 1913.

During the recent world's series it so happened that a tie was played in one of the cities, which compelled both teams to remain in that city for another date. Before the series was over this arrangement resulted in one club having five games on its home grounds and the other club having but three games on its home grounds.

It has seemed to some that it is unjust. It is also contended that it is unfair to the patrons of the game to schedule a contest and then not play in the city specified after some had traveled many miles to see it.

Will you please give the GUIDE your opinion as to whether a change would be advisable?

Very truly yours,

JOHN B. FOSTER, _Editor Spalding's Official Base Ball Guide._

Answers were received to the request for a "symposium of opinion" as follows:

"So far as having any effect on the chances of the two teams is concerned, I don't think having to play more games on one ground than on the other makes any material difference. Where cities are sufficiently near each other for games to be alternated daily, it would perhaps be fairer to spectators to do so, irrespective of ties; yet it seems to me that a tie on one grounds should be played off the next day in the same city."

W.B. HANNA, _New York Sun._

* * * * *

"In my opinion the arrangement on tie games in the post-season contests is a poor one. I saw the result of it in the series between the Cubs and White Sox last fall. Two tie games were played and the confusion and inconvenience it caused the fans was deplorable. It is unjust to the followers who support Base Ball. It is also unjust, in a small way, to the club which has to play two or more games on its opponent's field. Players when away from their home grounds, in a fall series, are more or less under a nervous strain. If there was confusion, inconvenience and difficulty in a local series as a result of a tie game, the folly of the arrangement must appear more absurd when towns like New York and Boston are involved. Dates should alternate, tie or not tie."

OSCAR C. REICHOW, _Chicago Daily News._

* * * * *

"We are in receipt of your favor of the 31st nlt., and wish to thank you for the opportunity presented.

"It is our opinion that a tie game was played and it should be considered as a game. Either side had an opportunity to win and any advantage that the home club might have had was lost when it failed to break the tie.

"It is, therefore, our belief that this game should have been played in the other city.

"As to it being unfair to the patrons who had traveled so far to see the scheduled contest, there is no doubt that they were afforded a sufficient amount of amusement and excitement for their trouble, in witnessing a closely played contest."

J. G. T. SPINK, _St. Louis Sporting News._

* * * * *

"It seems to me that the game should be alternated between the contending cities regardless of ties. The tie game gave Boston five games on the home grounds, while the Giants had only three. Besides, many persons, who traveled to see the games in New York, were inconvenienced."

JOHN E. WHEELER, _New York Herald._

* * * * *

"I think that the scheduled programme should be played through irrespective of the results of the respective games, and any extra playing or playing-off should be done after the originally set schedule is completed."

H. P. BORCHELL, _Sports Editor New York Times._

* * * * *

"I believe it would be inadvisable to change the method that now prevails. While the situation which arose last season did seem unjust to the New York club, I think the very fact that Boston had five games on its home grounds, and the Giants but three on their own diamond, was an answer to those ill-advised skeptics who are always ready to raise the cry of hippodroming.

"That same situation is not likely to again arise for a long time, and I believe the rule as it stands is a guarantee to the public of the strict honesty of the world's championship contests."

DAMON RUNYON, _The New York American._

* * * * *

"A change in the rules regarding world series games would he fairer to the patrons of the sport. Here in Chicago this past fall two ties were played and, as a result, there was considerable confusion over the ticket arrangements. How much more is the case when two cities are involved? A condition which allows five games to be played in one city and only three in another is scarcely fair to the two teams. By making a schedule calling for alternate games in each city, irrespective of ties, everybody--fans and players--would get an even break."

MALCOLM MACLEAN, _Base Ball Editor Chicago Evening Post._

* * * * *

"I think it might be fairer to both world's series contenders to play a regular schedule, regardless of the fact that any tie games may arise in the series. Under the old system of playing the tie off in the city where the tie game is played, it brings about a great deal of confusion. Many fans make arrangements to see a game on a certain day and are greatly disappointed when the game is played in a different city. Of course, the old rule of playing the play-off game on the same grounds as the tie game, is fair to both contesting clubs, as it is merely a matter of chance where a tie game is played."

FRED. G. LIEB, _New York Press._

* * * * *

"The rules regarding the manner of scheduling games for the world's series should not be changed. There are times when they apparently work a hardship to one team or the followers of one club, but, after all, they help to throw the necessary safeguards around the contests. As for the argument for not playing off a tie game on the same grounds, thus disarranging the dates and inconveniencing the fans, patrons of the world's series games are accustomed to this, since bad weather frequently cuts into the event and causes postponements.

"In a way it does not appear fair that one club should have the privilege of playing five games at home to three games at home for its opponents. The rule of playing off a tie game on the same grounds is a fixture in Base Ball. As to the other game, this was a question of the luck of the toss of the coin.

"The fans have to trust to luck as to the number of games they will see in a world's series, this depending upon the number of games played and possibly upon the toss for a seventh battle. In 1905 the fans of Philadelphia saw only two games in a world's series with New York. In 1910 only two games were played here in the series with Chicago.

"Any time a club has three games on its own grounds in a series where four victories decide the issue either it or its followers have not much chance to raise an objection."

WILLIAM G. WEART, _The Evening Telegraph._

* * * * *

"It was, of course, to the disadvantage of the Giants to be obliged to play five of the eight games in the post-season series last fall on the grounds of their opponents, but this came as a result of one tie game on the Boston grounds and being outlucked on the toss to determine where the deciding game should be played. This tie game unquestionably caused much inconvenience to patrons because of the change in the schedule made necessary because of it.

"It is not clear to me, however, just now these things can be remedied without disturbing the balance of an even break for both teams more violently than was the case last fall.

"I do not believe there will be another series just like the one of 1912, and so, in my opinion, an immediate change in the conditions governing these series would not be advisable. It is not clear to me just what changes could be made. One club or the other is bound to have the advantage of an extra game on its own grounds, providing seven games are necessary. The championship in nine out of ten contests will be decided in seven games or less.

"Then, as to having the games played according to an arbitrarily fixed schedule, so as not to inconvenience patrons--that would be out of the question, being open to the objection that it would then be possible to have every game that figures in the result of the series played on the home grounds of one of the contestants. For instance, tie games or unfavorable weather which would prevent a game being played in one city, would throw all the games to the other city where there might be no tie games nor unfavorable weather. That would mean four straight, if it so happened that the home team won the games, and the loser would never have gotten action on its own grounds. That would be considerably worse than five to three.

"So it looks to me as if the patrons would have to take their chances in the future as they have in the past."

JAMES C. O'LEABT, _Boston Globe._

* * * * *

"It seems to me that it would be better to alternate (in case of a tie), as a team able to tie its opponent on a hostile field would be entitled to consideration for this performance. I am very certain, however, that the players of both clubs in the recent world's series were satisfied with an arrangement which minimized the amount of traveling they were called upon to do.

"Persons who had seen a five-inning tie game terminated by rain would hardly be satisfied. It seems to me that the rule as to alternating ball parks should be applied strictly, but only in case the tie game involved went nine innings or more."

FRANCIS EATON, _Sports Editor Boston Journal._

* * * * *

"To me the feasible thing to do appears to be to insert a clause in stipulations covering all short series of a special character, such as intercity, inter-league and world's series, making it compulsory for the teams to alternate between the cities or grounds of the competing clubs."

PURVES T. KNOX, _New York Evening Telegram._

* * * * *

"Why wouldn't it be a good scheme to toss up for the deciding game only in cases where an equal number of games had been played in each city, and, in cases where one city had seen more games than the other, to play the deciding game in the city which had seen the fewer games?

"I do not believe it advisable to change the commission's rule regarding postponed games. The rule now provides that, in case of a postponement, the clubs shall remain in the city in which the game was scheduled until it is possible to play. If this rule were changed and there happened to be a week of bad weather, as in 1911, the teams and many fans might be forced to travel back and forth from one town to another for a week without participating in or seeing a single game; and it might happen some time that the jump would be between St. Louis and Boston."

R. W. LARDNER, _Chicago Examiner._

* * * * *

"A change in the rule governing the playing-off of tie games in the world's series should be made. The teams ought to appear in each city on the dates named in the schedule drawn up before the series starts, unless the weather interferes."

WILLIAM H. WRIGHT, _New York Tribune._

* * * * *

"Drawn games are as unavoidable as rainy days in world's series, but not as frequent. They operate the same in their effect on the contest for the world's pennant and in causing confusion among the patrons by disarranging the schedule. It would be manifestly unjust if, after a rain postponement, the competing teams did not remain and play the game off before playing elsewhere. That might result in playing all of the games in one city. Since drawn games are treated like postponed games in the regular season, and are of infrequent occurrence in world's series, any other arrangement than the present does not seem advisable. The patrons, who should be considered always, would be among the first to object if each team did not have an equal show to win. In the last series only four games that counted were played in Boston and three in New York and if New York had won the toss for the deciding game the situation would have been reversed. It would be manifestly fairer to play the seventh game if necessary in some neutral city."

L. E. SANBORN, _Chicago Tribune._

NEW FACES IN THE OLD LEAGUE

BY JOHN B. FOSTER.

Not for some time has there been such a turning over of the leaves of history in the National League as during 1912-13, and because of this there are many new faces peering out of the album. There have also been changes in the minor circuits and one prominent change in the American League.

The death of John T. Brush removed from Base Ball a dean of the National League. Wise in the lore of the game, a man more of the future than of the present, as he always foresaw that which some of his contemporaries were less alert in perceiving, it meant no easy task to be his successor.

Prior to the death of Mr. Brush there was a great deal of curious and some idle speculation as to his ultimate successor in case of decease, or, in the event of his retirement because of bodily weariness. One or two went so far as to say that upon his death Andrew Freedman would return to prominence in Base Ball, because he was the real owner of the New York club. Once and for all the writer would like to put the personal stamp of absolute denial on the repeated statements made by certain individuals in New York and Chicago that Andrew Freedman retained the control of the New York club after John T. Brush was reported to have purchased it.

Mr. Freedman retained nothing of the kind. Not that Mr. Brush objected to him as a partner, but when Mr. Brush purchased the stock he purchased the control outright, although he did request Mr. Freedman to hold a few shares and not give up his personal interest in Base Ball, for Mr. Freedman had a great liking for the game in spite of his stormy career. The assertions that Mr. Freedman was the real owner and Mr. Brush the nominal owner were made with malicious intent, of which the writer has proof, and through a desire, if possible, to combat the popularity and the success of the Giants.

This digression has been made to call attention to the fact that while rumor was plentiful as to the future control of the Giants Mr. Brush was carefully "grooming" a young man--his son-in-law, Mr. H. Hempstead--to take his place.

To a few it was known that Mr. Hempstead was acquiring such experience and information as would be necessary to assume the control of an undertaking which has grown so big as the organization of the Giants in New York. The business details of the club have quadrupled and the cares and anxieties of the man at the head have increased in proportion.

The Giants, as successful as they have been under the control of John T. Brush and John J. McGraw, the men who have been the executive heads in both the business and the playing departments of the game, are as susceptible to reverses as if they were the lowliest club in the organization. It is only by constant and severe application that the club's affairs may be kept at the best pitch.

Mr. Hempstead brings to Base Ball the advantage of youth, a keen business sagacity developed beyond his years, coolness, a disposition that is sunny and not easily ruffled, and a reputation for unvarying fairness and the highest type of business and sport ideals. Quite a list of qualities, but they are there.

If characteristics of that description fail to maintain the high standard of the New York club, then it will be due to the fact that our standards of business deportment have turned topsy-turvy.

William H. Locke is the new president and part owner of the Philadelphia club. He and Mr. Hempstead are the "junior" presidents of the league. There is no necessity for the Editor of the GUIDE to enter into any long and fulsome praise as to William H. Locke.

His career speaks for itself and he speaks for himself. A young man of the finest attributes, he has brought nothing to the mill of Base Ball to grind except that which was the finest and the cleanest grain.

The writer has known Mr. Locke almost, it seems, from boyhood and esteems him for his worth, not only as one who has administered the affairs of Base Ball with skill and intelligence, but as one who wrote of Base Ball with understanding and excellent taste, for it must not be forgotten that Mr. Locke is a newspaper graduate into the ranks of the great sport the affairs of which fill a little corner of the hearts of so many of America's citizens.

Perhaps no young man ever left a newspaper office to become a Base Ball president with more good wishes behind him than William H. Locke. He served his apprenticeship as secretary of the Pittsburgh club and he served it well. He is a high class, delightful young man, every inch of him, and Philadelphia will soon become as proud of him as Pittsburgh is now.

Still another newspaper writer has been claimed from the desk by the National League. He is Herman Nickerson, formerly sporting editor of the Boston Journal, who is now the secretary of the Boston National League club.

"Nick" is known from one end of the National League circuit to the other as one of the most solid and substantial of the writing force, and also as one of the most demure and modest. In addition to his great fund of information on Base Ball topics he is an author, and "The Sword of Bussy," a book which was published during the winter, is even more clever than some of the author's best Base Ball yarns, and that is saying a great deal in behalf of a man wedded to Base Ball.

Another change in the National League was the selection of Frank M. Stevens of New York, as one of the Board of Directors of the New York National League club.

This brings into Base Ball one of New York's cleverest and brightest young business men, one who is forging so rapidly to the front in business circles in the big metropolis that many an older head goes to him for advice. Mr. Stevens knows a lot about Base Ball, which is of even greater importance in the game, and is not afraid to swing any venture that will put with fairness a championship team into the big city. He is a son of Harry M. Stevens, whom everybody knows, rich and poor alike.

In the American League the death of Mr. Thomas D. Noyes, president of the Washington club, a young man who left behind naught but friends, left a vacancy in the organization which was filled by the selection of Mr. Benjamin S. Minor.

The new president of the club has had practical experience in Base Ball and perhaps plenty of it, as almost everybody has had in Washington, but he is a wideawake, progressive and ambitious man, who is of just the type to keep Base Ball going, now that it has struck its gait in the national capital, and the future of the sport looks all the brighter for his connection with it.

THE UMPIRES

The umpires are always with us, and the umpire problem has been a vexation of Base Ball since the beginning of Base Ball time, yet neither the umpires, the public, the club owners nor the league officials need be discouraged, for it was fully proved in 1912 that umpiring, as a fine art, has advanced a step nearer perfection. We may well doubt that perfection in its every quality shall ever be achieved, but we may all feel sanguine that it is possible to realize better results.

It is true that some men make better umpires than others, exactly as some men make better ball players than others, but it is also true that if the men who find it the hardest task to become the most expert umpires would be given a little more encouragement they might be a little more successful.

To the staff of umpires of the National League and the American League it is but fair to render a compliment for their work of last season. Some of them made mistakes but the general average of work on the part of the judges of play was excellent.

There was less tendency on the part of the umpires to render their decisions without being in a position to follow the play correctly. They were occasionally willing to concede that they might have been wrong when an analysis of the play was brought to their attention and they were firm in asserting discipline without becoming overheated on their own account.

To the mind of the Editor of the GUIDE, in the general light of observation, the most serious blunders committed by the umpires in 1912 were in making decisions before the play took place. This did happen and more than once. To illustrate, by an example, the Editor of the GUIDE had exhibited to him some photographs taken during 1912 in which a player had been "waved out" before he actually had arrived at the base. Granting the desire of the umpires to be alert and ready to render decisions promptly, it is equally apparent that giving decisions in advance of the completion of plays is likely to imbue the spectators with an idea that the umpire is either partisan or incompetent.

Young umpires, in their haste to "make good" in the major leagues, are apt to overdo rather than fail to be on time.

While it is not a pleasant subject to discuss, it is a fact that some umpires had been accustomed to use the very language to players on the field that they were presumed in their official capacity as umpires to correct. The writer knows of instances where this took place.

It has ever been the policy of the GUIDE to stand for clean and high class Base Ball. Twenty per cent. more women attend ball games now than did ten years ago. Eighty per cent. more women spectators are likely to attend five years from now. To encourage their attendance every effort should be made to eliminate all disgraceful conversation on the field. Wherever it may be ascertained that an umpire has used profane or vulgar language on the field the editor of the GUIDE believes that he should be fined and punished as sternly as an offending player.

It is contended that the position of the umpire has been rendered more arduous by reason of the world's series. The argument is advanced that the players are more intractable, by reason of their eagerness to play in the post-season games. That argument would be stronger were it not for the fact that some of the worst disturbances emanate from the players of the clubs that have no chance to play in the world's series.

As a general rule two good reasons may be advanced for disputes on the part of players.

First: Desire to "cover up" the player's own blunder.

Second: General "cussedness."

There are players who make honest objection on the excitement of the moment from sheer desire to win, but their lapses from Base Ball etiquette are so few and far between that their transgressions usually may be forgiven with some grace.

The Editor of the GUIDE would offer one suggestion to league presidents and umpires; it is this: whenever two possible plays occur in conjunction, instruct the chief umpire always to turn to the spectators and inform them which player is out.

For instance, if a player is at bat and another on the bases and two are out and an attempt is made to steal second, as the chief umpire calls the batter out on strikes the public should be clearly informed that the batter is out. If the play looks close at second base the crowd frequently believes the runner has been called out and resents it accordingly. In line with the same play, when the runner is called out and the fourth ball at the same time is called on the batter, the chief umpire should turn to the spectators and to the press box and make it clearly understood that the batter has been given a base on balls. It saves a great deal of annoyance and fault finding.

By the way, although it has been said elsewhere, the Editor of the GUIDE would beg the indulgence of repetition by stating that the work of the umpires during the world's series of 1912 was one of the finest exhibitions of its kind ever seen on a ball field, and somehow it seemed as if the players, would they but deport themselves during all series as they did during the world's series might find that there are more good umpires in the world after all than bad ones.

BASE BALL WRITERS OF THE SOUTH

While the Base Ball writers of the cities which comprise the Southern Association have no organized membership similar to the Base Ball Writers' Association of the major leagues and the organizations which are best known as the class AA leagues, they are a clever, hard-working group of young men, who have labored in season and out of season, not only to build up Base Ball but to build it up on the right lines.

Experience of more than a quarter of a century has most abundantly proved that the standard of Base Ball has steadily been elevated. It needs no compilation of fact nor any dogmatic assertion on the part of the Editor of the GUIDE to attest that fact. It is a present condition which speaks for itself. The general tone of the players is far higher than it was and there has come into evidence a marked improvement in the spirit of the men who own Base Ball clubs. In the earlier history of the sport there was a tendency to win by any means that did not actually cross the line of dishonesty. Later there came a season when the commercial end of the game tended to encroach upon the limits of the pastime. This has been repressed in the last two seasons and to-day the morale of Base Ball is of a higher type than it ever has been in the history of the pastime.

It is a high class sport in the main, managed by high class, men for high class purposes.

Going through the early stages of building up a successful league, which, by the way, is the severest of all tasks, and even now at intervals confronted with changes in the league circuit, the Southern writers have steadily been sowing the seeds of high class Base Ball and they have seen results prior to this date, for Base Ball has become popular and has been handsomely and loyally supported in sections in which fifteen years ago it would have been considered impossible to achieve such results.

It is true that business reverses and adverse conditions have had at times their effect upon Base Ball in the South and possibly may produce similar results again, but the admirable offset to this fact is that none of these conditions at any time has daunted the spirit and the resolution of the young men who have zealously been preaching the cause of clean and healthy Base Ball.

Very likely to their zeal, their courage, their tact and their ability it is possible to ascribe the increase in good ball players which is making itself manifest in the South. More high class and attractive athletes are coming from the Southern states in these days than ever was the case before. Base Ball is very glad to have them. When a representative major league team is made up of players who represent every section in the Union, engaged for their skill, it seems as if Base Ball has become nearer an ideal and a national pastime than ever before in the history of the sport.

To the Southern writers the members of the Base Ball Writers Association and those of the organizations patterned on like lines send greeting.

BASE BALL WORTH WHILE?

One of the foremost divines in the East who has a deep concern in Base Ball and Base Ball players is Rev. Dr. Reisner, pastor of the Grace Methodist Episcopal Church, of New York City. Throughout the season he attends the games and is greatly interested in the work of the players. He knows Base Ball well, and in addition to that he knows the environment of Base Ball players and their character and endeavor as well as any person in the United States.

It is Dr. Reisner's custom each year to preach a sermon to the Base Ball players and their friends in his church in New York, and the building always is filled to listen to his discourse. In view of the interest which he takes in the national game and because of his excellent knowledge as to the general details of the sport, the Editor of the GUIDE asked him to say a few words to the ball players of the United States through the medium of this publication, and he has graciously consented to do so in the following pithy and straightforward talks:

BY THE REV. CHRISTIAN F. REISNER, NEW YORK.

The Bible is the Spalding book of rules for the game of life. James B. Sullivan, beloved by all athletes, gave me these rules for athletes: "Don't drink, use tobacco or dissipate. Go to bed early and eat wholesome food!" The boozer gets out of the game as certainly as the bonehead.

I have interviewed scores of the most noted players. Every one had a religious training. Many are church members. All avoid old-time drinking, as our fathers did smallpox.

Mathewson belongs to the high type now being generally duplicated. He is a modern masculine Christian. Base Ball demands brains as well as brawn. Minds muddled by licentiousness and liquor are too "leady" for leaders. Hotheadedness topples capable players.

I am proud to style scores of Base Ball players, I know, as gentlemen. They are optimists. Defect is unrecognized. Team work makes them brotherly. Bickerings break a Baseballist. Every member of the team gives himself wholly to the game. Jeers are as harmless as cheers.

Every minute he does his best. He sleeps only at night. To do these things the player must follow Bible rules. If he keeps it up life's success is certain. Governor Tener and Senator Gorman proved it. No wonder "Billy" Sunday wrote me "I would not take a million dollars for my experience on the ball field."

It taught him how to knock the Devil out of the box.

Base Ball is invaluable to America. It thrills and so rests tired nerves. It brings the "shut-in" man into God's healing out-o'-doors. While yelling he swallows great draughts of lung-expanding, purifying air and forgets the fear of "taking cold."

He is pulled out of self-centeredness, while shouting for another. He stands crowd jostling good-naturedly or gets his cussedness squeezed out. He chums up with any one with easy comments and so gets out of his shell and melts again into a real human.

Base Ball absolutely pulls the brain away from business. It emphasizes the value of decency and gives healthy and high toned recreation to millions. If kept clean its good-doing cannot be measured. Nothing is worth while that does not do that.

THE SPALDING BASE BALL HALL OF FAME

(From Spalding's Official Base Ball Record.)

New faces enter into the Spalding Base Ball "Hall of Fame" this year. The object of this "Hall of Fame" is not necessarily to portray the very top men of each department of the national game, for it frequently happens in these days, when players take part in only a few innings now and then, that they become entitled to mention in the records, although they do not bear the real brunt of the work.

In the "Hall of Fame" will be found the men who might well be termed the "regulars." Day in and day out they were on the diamond, or ready to take their place on the diamond, if they were not injured.

NATIONAL LEAGUE.

First of all, Daubert has earned his place at first base for the season of 1912. Threatening in other years to become one of the group of leading players, he performed so well in the season past that there is no doubt as to his right.

There is a new player at second base. The regularity with which Egan of Cincinnati performed for the Reds earned him a place as the banner second baseman.

At third base the honor goes to J.R. Lobert, the third baseman of the Philadelphia club. In this particular instance Lobert was crowded, not for efficiency, but in the number of games played by Byrne, third baseman of Pittsburgh, and Herzog, third baseman of New York. In the matter of chances undertaken on the field, Herzog surpassed both Lobert and Byrne, but, in justice to Lobert, the honor seems to be fairly deserved by him.

John H. Wagner, the brilliant veteran of the Pittsburgh club, fought his way to the position of shortstop in 1912. His fielding was better than that of his rivals and at times he played the position as only a man of his sterling worth can play.

Owing to the fact that the able secretary of the National League, John A. Heydler, has compiled two methods of comparing pitchers, the "Hall of Fame" in the National League this year will include two faces. They are those of Hendrix of the Pittsburgh club and Tesreau of the New York club. The former won the greater percentage of games under the old rule in vogue of allotting percentage upon victories. Tesreau, however, under a new rule which classifies pitchers by earned runs, easily led the league. The editor of the RECORD is very much inclined toward Mr. Heydler's earned run record; in fact, has suggested a record based upon the construction of making every pitcher responsible for runs and computing his average upon the percentage of runs for which he is responsible. That places Tesreau in the front row, with Mathewson second.

There are two catchers who run a close race for the "Hall of Fame" in 1912. They are Meyers of New York and Gibson of Pittsburgh. Meyers caught by far the larger number of games, and, basing the work of catcher upon the average chances per game, seems to lead his Pittsburgh rival. Both men are sterling performers, and Meyers is an instance of the greatest improvement on the part of a catcher of any member of the major leagues.

For the position of leading outfielder, all things considered, Carey of Pittsburgh is selected for the "Hall of Fame." Not only did he play in the greatest number of games of any outfielder, but his general work in the outfield was sensational.

For the position of leading batsman the "Hall of Fame" honors Zimmerman, the powerful batter of the Chicago club. His work with the bat in 1912 approached in many ways that of the high class and powerful batters of old. He batted steadily, with the exception of one very slight slump, and his work as batter undoubtedly was of tremendous assistance to Chicago. Zimmerman did not shine alone as the best batter, as he was also the leading maker of home runs and the best two-base hitter of the season. That gives him a triple honor.

The best three-base hitter of the league was the quiet Wilson of Pittsburgh. Though not so high in rank as a batsman as some of his contemporaries, there was none in the organization who could equal his ability to get to third base on long hits.

Bescher, as in 1911, earned in 1912 the position of leading base runner in the National League. He stole more bases than any other player of the league, and was also the best run getter--that is to say, scored more runs than any other player.

AMERICAN LEAGUE.

First of all comes Gandil for first base. His greater number of games played and his steady work at first almost all of the season, as he did not join the Washingtons at the beginning of the season, places him in the "Hall of Fame" at first base.

Rath is a newcomer to the Chicago club, but by all around good work he earned the place at second base. Not so heavy a batter as some of his rivals, he covered a great amount of ground for the Chicagos and steadied the infield throughout the year.

For the position of shortstop, McBride of Washington is the logical selection. Day in and day out he was one of the most reliable shortstops in the American League.

At third base John Turner of the Cleveland club retains the honor which he earned for himself in 1911, and he is one of the few players who is a member of the "Hall of Fame" two years in succession.

In the outfield, for all around work, the place of honor goes to Amos Strunk, the young player of the Philadelphia club. He was in center field and in left field, and he was a busy young man for most of the year.

Pitching at a standard higher than the American League had seen for years, Wood of Boston is given the "Hall of Fame" honor as pitcher. His average of winning games was very high, and he was compelled to fight hard for many of his victories.

The man who caught him seems entitled to be considered the leading catcher. He is Cady of Boston, although for hard work Carrigan, also of Boston, gives him a close race.

Once more Cobb is the leading batsman of the American League. There was none to dispute his right to the title. He was also leading batsman in 1911 and is another American League player who holds a position in the "Hall" two years in succession.

The leading home run batter of the American League was Baker of Philadelphia. He earned the same title in 1911. It is a double "Hall of Fame" distinction for him.

Jackson of Cleveland enters the "Hall of Fame" by being the leading batter for three-base hits.

Speaker of Boston becomes a member of the high honor group by being the leading batter of two-base hits.

Lewis of Boston is the leading batter of sacrifice hits.

Collins of Philadelphia was the best run getter.

Last, but by no means least, of all, Milan, the clever outfielder of Washington, is the best base stealer of the year, and better than all the rest, earns his distinction in joining the "Hall of Fame" by establishing a new record of stolen bases.

JOHN TOMLINSON BRUSH

BY JOHN B. FOSTER.

John Tomlinson Brush was born in Clintonville, N.Y., on June 15, 1845. He died November 26, 1912, near St. Charles, Mo., on his way to California from New York, for his health. Left an orphan at the age of four years, he went to live at the home of his grandfather, in Hopkinton, where he remained until he was seventeen years old. At this age he left school and went to Boston, where he obtained a position in a clothing establishment, a business with which he was identified up to his death. He worked as a clerk in several cities in the East, and finally went to Indianapolis in 1875 to open a clothing store. The store still occupies the same building, and Mr. Brush continued at the head of the business until his death. It was in the early '80s that he first became interested in Base Ball in Indianapolis, and he made himself both wealthy and famous as a promoter.

In 1863 Mr. Brush enlisted in the First New York Artillery, and served as a member of this body until it was discharged, at the close of the civil war. He was a charter member of George H. Thomas Post, G.A.R.; a thirty-third degree Scottish Rite Mason, and was also prominently identified with several social and commercial organizations of Indianapolis, notably the Columbia Club, Commercial Club, Board of Trade, and the Mannerchor Society. In New York Mr. Brush took up membership in the Lambs' Club and the Larchmont Club. For several years he made his headquarters at the Lambs' Club.

Mr. Brush is survived by his widow, Mrs. Elsie Lombard Brush, and two daughters, Miss Natalie Brush and Mrs. Harry N. Hempstead. His first wife, Mrs. Agnes Ewart Brush, died in 1888.

Mr. Brush's career in Base Ball, a sport to which he was devotedly attached, and for which he had the highest ideals and aims, began with the Indianapolis club of the National League.

It has been somewhat inaccurately stated that he entered Base Ball by chance. This was not, strictly speaking, the case. Prior to his first immediate association with the national game he was an ardent admirer of the sport, although not connected with it in any capacity as owner. He was what might be called, with accurate description, a Base Ball "fan" in the earlier stages of development.

An opportunity presented itself by which it was possible to procure for the city of Indianapolis a franchise in the National League. Mr. Brush was quick to perceive the advantages which this might have in an advertising way for the city with which he had cast his lot and subscribed to the stock.

Like many such adventures in the early history of the sport there came a time when the cares and the duties of the club had to be assumed by a single individual and it was then that he became actively identified as a managing owner, as the duty of caring for the club fell upon his shoulders.

From that date, until the date of his death, he was actively interested in every detail relating to Base Ball which might pertain to the advancement of the sport, and his principal effort in his future participation in the game was to see that it advanced on the lines of the strictest integrity and in such a manner that its foundation should be laid in the rock of permanent success.

Naturally this was bound to bring him into conflict with some who looked upon Base Ball as an idle pastime, in which only the present moment was to be consulted.

The earliest environment of Base Ball was not wholly of a substantial nature. It was a game, intrinsically good of itself, in which the hazards had always been against the weak. There was not that consideration of equity which would have been for its best interests, but this was not entirely the fault of the separate members of the Base Ball body, but the result of conditions, in which those whose thought was only for the moment, overshadowed the best interests of the pastime.

There was an inequity in regulations governing the sport by which the clubs in the smaller cities were forced, against the will of their owners, to be the weaker organizations, and possibly this was less due to a desire upon the more fortunate and larger clubs to maintain such a state of affairs, than to the fact that the organization generally had expanded upon lines with little regard to the future.

The first general complaint arose from the players who composed the membership of the smaller clubs. They demurred at the fact that they were asked to perform equally as well as the players of the clubs in the larger cities at smaller salaries. Not that they did not try to do their best, for this they stoutly attempted under all conditions. It was the effect of a discrimination which was the result of the imperfect regulations that existed relative to the management of the game.

This attitude of the players resulted at length in the formation of a body known as the Brotherhood. To offset not the Brotherhood, but the cause which led to its formation, Mr. Brush devised the famous classification plan. Imperfectly understood in what it intended to do for the players, it was seized upon as a reason for the revolt of the players and the organization of the Brotherhood League.

At heart it was the idea of Mr. Brush so to equalize salaries that the players of all clubs should be reimbursed in an equitable manner. As always had been the case, and probably always is likely to be, the players who received the larger salaries were in no mood to share with their weaker brothers any excess margin of pay which they thought that they had justly earned, and it was not a difficult matter for them to obtain the consent of players who might really have benefited by the plan to co-operate with them on the basis of comradeship.

The motives of Mr. Brush were thoroughly misconstrued by some, and, if grasped by others, they were disregarded, because they conflicted with their immediate temporary prosperity.

The dead Base Ball organizer had looked further ahead than his time. His plan was born under the best of intentions, but it unfortunately devolved upon the theory that players would be willing to share alike for their common good. Later in life, through another and unquestionably even better method, he succeeded in bringing forth a plan which attained the very end for which he sought in the '80s, but in the second resort, by a far more efficacious method.

The Brotherhood League came into existence and rivaled the National League. The players of the National League and the American Association deserted to join the Brotherhood League, upon a platform that promised Utopia in Base Ball. Unquestionably it was the idea of the general Brotherhood organization that the National League would abandon the fight and succumb, but the National League owners were built of sterner stuff.

They fought back resolutely and hard and while for a time they were combated by a fickle opinion, based upon sentiment, it developed within two months that the public had learned thoroughly the reasons for the organization of the new league and declined to lend it that support which had been predicted and expected.

Meanwhile, Base Ball had received a setback greater than any which had befallen the sport in an organized sense from a professional standpoint.

The Brotherhood League was a pronounced and emphatic failure. This is not the verdict of personal opinion, but a record which is indelibly impressed upon Base Ball history.

It was the theory of the Brotherhood League that it, in part, should be governed by representative players, but the players would not be governed by players. Discipline relaxed, teams did pretty much as they pleased, and the public remained away from the games. It may be added with truth that the National League games were not much better patronized, but that was due to the prevalent apathy in Base Ball affairs throughout the United States.

When the Brotherhood League was formed and withdrew so many players from the National League the latter organization undertook to strengthen itself where it could and when Brooklyn and Cincinnati applied for membership in the circuit both were admitted.

The New York National League club had lost many of its players and, upon the substitution of Cincinnati for Indianapolis in the National League circuit, procured from Mr. Brush many players of note, among them Rusie, Glasscock, Buckley, Bassett and Denny.

Relative to the withdrawal of Indianapolis from the circuit it may be said that Mr. Brush flatly refused to give up his club, asserting stoutly that he was perfectly able to continue the fight, but when he felt that the exigencies of the occasion demanded that Cincinnati become a member, he agreed to give up the franchise, providing that he be permitted to retain his membership in the National League, and transfer such of his players as New York desired to the latter city. It has been alleged that he demanded an exorbitant price from New York for the transfer of the players.

This is untrue. He asked the price of his franchise, the value of his players, and the worth of giving up a Base Ball year in a city in which there was to be no conflicting club and, as he had expressed full confidence in his ability to make a winning fight for the National League, it was agreed that his rights to be considered could not be overlooked. To retain his National League membership he accepted stock in the New York club.

Toward the close of the Base Ball season the Brotherhood League dealt what it believed to be a death blow to the National League by the purchase of the Cincinnati franchise. It proved to be a boomerang, for before the first day of January, 1891, the Brotherhood League had passed out of existence. The backers of the organization, tired of the general conduct of the sport, were only too willing to come to an acceptable agreement and retire.

A.G. Spalding, John T. Brush, Frank De Hass Robison, Charles H. Byrne and A.H. Soden were prominent members of the National League to bringing this result about. Of these, Mr. Spalding and Mr. Soden survive, but have retired from active participation in Base Ball affairs.