This Is A Good Question

During 1877 many charges of crooked umpiring were made, and it is worth while asking why it was, in view of these wholesale charges of fraudulent work in connection with umpiring in St. Louis and Louisville, especially in regard to mutual charges of corruption made by Umpire Devinney of Louisville and Manager McManus of St. Louis, in which, too, Umpire Burtis of St. Louis was mixed up, that the League Board of Directors made no effort to get at the truth, and failed to investigate a matter having such an important bearing on the future of the League Association.

-Mears Baseball Scrapbook, Volume 4, 1856-1907

The 1876 Brown Stockings: Giving The Field A Presentable Appearance

Two or three hundred people assembled at Grand Avenue Park yesterday afternoon to witness the contest between the New Havens and Browns, most of the interest, of course, centering in Nichols, the New Haven pitcher, who is to supplant Bradley in the Brown stocking team next year. George Seward, who was always, and justly so, a great favorite in St. Louis, as well as Waitt and Fleet, who played with the Browns last season, were recognized and warmly welcomed by those in attendance. Shortly before 4 o'clock a thunder-storm came up, and the rain fell in torrents just long enough to make the grounds unfit for playing purposes. Mr. Solari and his assistants, aided by the irrepressible Battin, Dicky Pearce and one or two other industrious experts, went to work with a will, and, by means of sawdust and brooms, gave the field a presentable appearance, although the diamond looked more like a circus ring than anything else. Play was not called until 5 o'clock, and a conclusion was not reached until nearly dark. Mr. Burtis having returned from Chicago, where he gave great satisfaction to the Bostons and Whites, occupied the umpire's position, and acquitted himself with is usual accuracy. Nichols did not pitch, his place being supplied by Cassidy, the center fielder, Manager Jewett holding the former in reserve for the game with the St. Louis Red Stockings this afternoon. Loud cries were heard for "Nick," but he was really not in a condition to occupy the "six by six," and the disappointment could not well be avoided. For the Browns Blong pitched seven innings and Bradley two-the seventh and eighth. The in-fielding on both sides was very fine, especially the work of Pearce and young Sam. Wright at short.

-St. Louis Globe-Democrat, July 18, 1876

It appears that Bradley gave up a run in the seventh but since this was a non-League game, it doesn't count against his consecutive shutout innings streak. Also, this gives us a nice account of Solari getting the grounds ready after a rain delay. Don't think I've ever come across anything like that before. Peter Morris sees Solari as one of the pioneers of grounds keeping and this gives us a rare look at the kind of work he was doing.

The 1876 Brown Stockings: An Unusually Exciting Contest

The St. Louis Brown Stockings were again defeated by the Bostons, at Grand Avenue Park, yesterday afternoon, the Red Legs, as on Tuesday, outplaying their adversaries at every point, both at the bat and in the field. Morrill played second for the champions, in place of Leonard, Andy having been suddenly called home by the illness of his child. For the Browns Pearce was substituted for Mack at short, and Pike played second in the early part of the game, but was subsequently relieved by McGeary. The attendance was slim, and Mr. Burtis acted as umpire. He had a number of very close points to decide, and acquitted himself to the satisfaction of all. The Bostons again lost the toss, but the lead which they assumed in the third inning they maintained to the end. Brown's batting, and the magnificent way in which he attended to everything at the home plate, and Murnan's first base play were the features of the game...It was an unusually exciting contest throughout.

-St. Louis Globe-Democrat, July 7, 1876

It was indeed a rather exciting game. Down 5-3 going into the eighth, the Brown Stockings got within one on Lip Pike's two out triple which drove in Cuthbert. Pike was stranded when Battin grounded out. In the ninth, Bradley singled with one out and then stole second. Dehlman reached on an error, putting the go-ahead run on. Pearce "drove a bounder to right short, which was well fielded by Morrill to Murnan, and, as Bradley endeavored to tie the game on the hit, he was splendidly doubled up by Murnan's throw to Brown, and the home nine was again defeated by one run." That's a 4-3-2 double play to end the game. Can't say that you see that too often.

The 1876 Brown Stockings: A Very Tame Affair

About 1,500 people witnessed the game yesterday between the Mutuals and the Browns, at the Grand Avenue Park. About an hour before the game, the Howe Sewing-machine Band, of Peru, Indiana, which accompanies the delegation from that State, put in an appearance, they having volunteered their services for the occasion, and discoursed several popular and pleasing compositions. Music was had throughout the game, between every two innings, and this novel feature proved a source of delight to the patrons of the game. The day was a beautiful one for ball tossing, with a clear, cloudless sky overhead, and the grounds free from dust, and a gentle breeze sweeping over the field. Owing to the poor play of the visitors, the exhibition was a very tame affair. The New Yorkers were in sad trim, having arrived from Chicago behind time, and put up with crowded accommodations at their hotel. They were sadly in need of rest, and on the field had the appearance of worn-out, dejected men rather than hard, earnest workers for Centennial ball honors. The game was called at 4 o'clock, Mr. L.W. Burtis being chosen as umpire. His decisions were well rendered, and no discriminations were at any time shown. He gave general satisfaction to both clubs. The Browns won the toss, and sent the Mutuals to bat, and blanked them. The home nine scored one run this inning. In the second inning the Mutuals gained a tally and succeeded in blanking their opponents, but after that failed to secure a single run. By a streak of good batting the Browns scored three runs on the third inning, and then took zeros until the seventh inning, when they again scored. They made two more runs during the eighth inning, and went out with a whitewash in the ninth. The Browns played a fine fielding game and batted well, the only errors being charged to Clapp, Mack and "the old man."

-St. Louis Globe-Democrat, June 28, 1876

As I've always said, you should never miss a chance to see the Howe Sewing-machine Band. They always put on a good show.

This appearance of the Howe Sewing-machine Band (of Peru, Indiana) got me thinking about the differences between the ballpark experience of 19th century fans and modern fans. We're all big St. Louis Blues fans in my family and, over the holidays, we were talking about our recent experiences at the arena, watching our hockey club. It's become this constant bombardment of audio and visual stimulation, to the point that it distracts from the game on the ice. I've grown to hate it with a passion. I love going to the hockey game but can't stand the music and the videos and the little contests and the stupid mascot and the non-stop instructions telling me to clap and cheer and yell. Just drop the puck and play hockey. The baseball experience in St. Louis is not quite as bad but it's getting there. Give me a little "When the Saints go marching in" and a "Let's go Blues" chant or a Budweiser jingle and "Let's go Cardinals" and I'm good. I don't need the fluff and filler. Just give me the Howe Sewing-machine Band between innings and that will do fine. I'm there to watch the game. I think I'm getting old.

And speaking of old, that's a nice reference to Bad Dickey Pearce as "the old man."

The 1876 Brown Stockings: That St. Louis Goose

Twelve hundred spectators witnessed the reappearance of that St. Louis goose at Grand Avenue Park yesterday afternoon. The Athletics were made painfully aware of the presence of the bird of ill-omen at the termination of the fifth game of their series with the St. Louis club. The Athletics again won the toss, Fergy Malone taking Ritterson's place behind the bat, when the Browns went to the field. For the home nine Pike played second, Mack short, Blong right, Clapp center, and McGeary caught. The brilliant playing was all done by the home team, the visitors not coming up to the expectations either at the bat or in the field. The features of the contest were the short fielding of Mack, Battin's third base play, Pike's display at second and Bradley's pitching. Mack captured a hard-hit liner with one hand, for which he was applauded. Mack, Pike and McGeary accomplished a magnificent double play, which was eclipsed by Battin, Pike and Dehlman later in the game. Sutton and Meyerle played without an error. Fisler, Hall and Malone were the only Blue legs who could do anything with the stick, while all of the Browns, except Blong, got in a safe hit. The visitors were outplayed at every point, but want of space prevents further comment.

-St. Louis Globe-Democrat, June 23, 1876

Please note the appearance of Mr. L.W. Burtis as umpire. This is, I believe, the first Brown Stockings' game that Burtis ever umpired.

Some General Thoughts On The 1877 Scandal

The gambling scandal that rocked the St. Louis Brown Stockings organization in 1877 and, combined with the clubs financial troubles, helped bring about their resignation from the League in December of 1877 was not one scandal or one event but rather several.  There are at least four components of the scandal that I can see:

-On August 1, 1877, umpire P.H. Devinney accuses George McManus of offering him money in exchange for favorable ball and strike calls.  Devinney also stated that Joe Blong encouraged him to accept the offer.  Both McManus and Blong denied the accusations.

-On August 24, 1877, Joe Blong and Joe Battin conspire with Chicago gamblers to throw the Brown Stockings' game against Chicago.  The next day they attempt to do the same but are put on notice that Brown Stocking management are aware of their activities when McGeary moves Blong off the mound after suspicious activities in the second inning.  The conspiracy to throw the games of August 24 and 25 does not come to light until William Spink reveals them in the Globe-Democrat on November 1, 1877, although the club was aware of what was happening before the start of the game on August 25.   

-On October 31, 1877, William Spink publishes information about the Louisville scandal in the Globe-Democrat.  The Brown Stockings were caught in an awkward position, having previously signed Devlin and Hall for the 1878 season, just as they were revealing the depths of their financial trouble to stockholders and attempting to raise funds to pay off their debts from the 1877 season.  The next day Spink publishes his expose on the events of August.  

-L.W. Burtis umpires numerous questionable games in St. Louis.  Burtis, who Spink claimed operated as the middleman between St. Louis players and Chicago gamblers in August of 1877, was accused by the Chicago papers of dishonesty in his umpiring.  Devinney accused him of betting on the Brown Stockings and using his position as an umpire to influence the games that he had bet on.  While not specifically a member of the Brown Stockings, the best that can be said is that the club had unknowingly allowed a crooked umpire into the League and access to their club.  

With all of these events exposing a culture of corruption surrounding the club, it's no wonder that the club's management (which was made up generally of honorable men of some standing in St. Louis) decided to resign from the League.  Combined with the financial difficulties of 1876 and 1877, the revelation of this corruption was a death blow.  All one has to do is read William Spinks' expose in the Globe on November 1, 1877 (which is an absolutely brilliant piece) and it's obvious that there was no way the Brown Stockings were going to survive into 1878.

A couple of more thoughts:

-While the Devinney accusation adds to the portrait of a corrupt ball club, there has to be some serious reservations about Devinney's veracity.  McGeary strenuously denied the accusations and his actions on August 25, when he moved Blong off the mound, support the idea that he was uninvolved in the corruption.  Also, after the 1877 season, the Chicago papers made some accusations against Devinney that were similar to those they made against Burtis.  So while the Devinney accusation is relevant and adds to the weight of evidence against the Brown Stockings, Devinney is not exactly a perfect witness.  

-For some time, I've been trying to figure out, from a historiographical point of view, why the Louisville scandal is better remembered than the St. Louis scandal.  I may be wrong but it's my understanding that the Louisville scandal is the substantially more famous or remembered event.  I assume it's because the events of the Louisville scandal had a major impact on the pennant race.  Also, I would think that Devlin's statements to the press had a drama to them that the denials of those involved in the St. Louis scandal lacked.  But the fact that the stories broke at almost the exact same time and were reasonably similar should have linked the two together in historical accounts.  I'm honestly surprised that we don't have "the Louisville/St. Louis scandal" rather than "the Louisville scandal...and, oh yeah, something happened in St. Louis too and baseball in general had a problem with gambling and throwing games."  Not a really big deal but it's kind of interesting.  I think, in the end, I'm just a bit upset because the 1877 Brown Stockings were as corrupt as any team in the nation and have never received their due.