The 1884 Maroons: The Opening Day Line-Up And A Poorly Crafted Sentence

William Spink

The opening championship game of the season in St. Louis will be that which is to be played at the Union Grounds, commencing at 3:30 to-day, the Chicago and St. Louis Clubs of the Union Association being the competitors.

-St. Louis Globe-Democrat, April 19, 1884


The Maroons line-up was announced as Brennan, catcher; Hodnett, pitcher; Taylor, first; Dunlap, second; Gleason, third; Whitehead, short; Dickerson, left; Rowe, center; and Shafer, right.

One other point that I've been meaning to make for awhile is that the Globe really missed William Spink.  The quality of the writing on the sports page declined noticeably after he left the paper in 1883.  The sentence that I quote at the top of this post would never have made it into the paper if Spink had still been the sports editor.

I'm a great admirerer of the elder Spink and believe that he has never gotten his due as a pioneer of baseball jouranlism.  His work in 1877, when he wrote several great expository pieces about the scandals surrounding the Brown Stockings, was particularly outstanding.  He was the first great St. Louis baseball writer and was a much better writer, and journalist,  than his better known brother.  

For Want Of A Rain Check

In commenting upon the proposed Brotherhood League, the Toledo Blade the other day gave Henry V. Lucas' real reason for forming the Union Association. In 1883 Mr. Lucas and a party of friends visited the St. Louis base ball grounds. The afternoon was stormy and the club management refused to issue rain checks. Mr. Lucas and his companions were highly indignant and then and there resolved to form an organization of their own, which they did, and it cost him $75,000.

-Philadelphia Inquirer, October 30, 1889

I'm not sure I'm buying this but it's possible. William Spink was bringing up the issue of rain checks in 1876 and by July of that year, the Brown Stockings had begun issuing them if a game was called because of rain before five innings had been played. To what extent that policy carried over to Von der Ahe's Browns in the early 1880s is unknown but, according to Peter Morris in A Game of Inches, there was at least one instance in 1883 when a ballpark crowd wanted rain checks and Von der Ahe refused to issue them, although the specific circumstances are unclear.

So when I say that this story is possible, I really mean that the rain check policy was not completely developed and it's possible that Lucas went to a ballgame in 1883, thought he deserved a rain check and didn't get one. However, human action is complicated and I think it's unrealistic that this one incident would motivate Lucas to undertake a project as large and risky as the formation of a new major league. It may very well have played a part in his decision-making but I find it difficult to believe that it was the most important factor. Lucas' love for baseball, his ego, his ability to financially undertake the project and the roll that his family had played in St. Louis baseball all played a part in his decision to form the Union Association. He also specifically mentioned the unfairness of the reserve rule as being a motivating factor, although that may have been an attempt to justify the raiding of other clubs. Regardless, it's unrealistic to describe something as complicated as the UA venture as being motivated by Von der Ahe's refusal to issue a rain check.

An Honest Rain Check Policy

To each purchaser of a ticket to the Grand Avenue Park when a League game is to be played, the St. Louis Base Ball Association furnishes a coupon on which is printed the following:

"If rain prevents the playing of five innings this coupon will be redeemed on presentation at ticket office."

This is a move which can not be too highly commended, and is one which will bear following by all organizations throughout the country. It will, without doubt, pay in the long run. On this subject, the Chicago Tribune justly says: "The St. Louis Brown Stocking management have determined that, when a game at Grand Avenue Park hereafter shall be interrupted by rain before the end of the fifth inning, they will refund the admission money to the spectators. This is an honest policy, and the managers make themselves deserving of a warm support from St. Louis people."

-St. Louis Globe-Democrat, July 27, 1876

William Spink had championed an "honest" rain check policy since the beginning of the season and should be given some credit for the practice being adopted in St. Louis in 1876.

This could be somewhat significant if we're looking at the history of rain checks. I think that what the Brown Stockings were doing fits the definition of a rain check that Morris uses in A Game of Inches. The best Morris offers, with regards to the beginning of their use, is that they were being used before March of 1881. We now have specific evidence of their use in 1876.

I'm not suggesting that Spink and the Brown Stockings be given credit for the invention of the rain check because I don't know enough about the subject to say that. However, if the history of rain checks ever comes up for discussion, they should certainly be mentioned among the pioneers of the idea.

Some Journalistic Infighting (or William Spink Lays The Smack Down)

The rage of a mad bull at witnessing a red rag flaunted in his face is not a marker to the effect which the name of "Chadwick" has on a Philadelphian. The Times is at present afflicted with the services of a gentleman who hails from the city of systematic swindling, and has brought with him as a journalist all those qualities which have made Philadelphia newspapers famous for their dullness. Because the Globe-Democrat has seen fit to refer to the fact that Chadwick's prophecies have come true, this would-be authority froths at the mouth. Chadwick has demonstrated the fact that he is able to take care of himself. This is not written for his benefit, but for the benefit of the Philadelphia journalist who is at present giving St. Louisans an insight into the manner in which Quaker City newspapers have gained a reputation for "enterprise." On May 23 this journalist manufactured a special telegram from New York, stating among other things that "in the early part of the game Mathews, the pitcher of the Mutuals, was struck by a ball and so badly injured that he had to retire, the score at that time standing 2 to 1 in favor of St. Louis." It is needless to say that no such accident occurred and that the special telegram never saw the inside of a telegraph office. Another bogus dispatch, dated Philadelphia, appears in the Times of yesterday. It was supposed that Pearce would play short and Mack second in the Athletic game, and the telegram referred to contains that information. Unfortunately for journalism on the Philadelphia plan, Pearce played second and Mack short in that game; hence the bogus telegram manufacturer was for a second time given away. When, by evincing similar enterprize, the Dispatch hanged a man at Fort Smith, who is at present alive and kicking, and the Republican resurrects "specials" from New York papers a week old, and both were exposed by the Globe-Democrat, it was thought that the "racket" was played out; but it remained for the Philadelphia base ball reporter of the Times to bring up the rear even in "journalism" of this stripe. Here he will be left, never again to be resurrected in these columns.

-St. Louis Globe-Democrat, June 1, 1876

Wow. That was a bit harsh but also rather amusing. My favorite part is when Spink put quotes around "journalism." The point, however, for all of us is that there were people in the 19th century who were making up their game accounts. That's a very serious and very frightening charge from a historian's point of view. Information can be difficult to come by and you have to scratch and dig and fight to find the stuff you're looking for (and many times without success). The idea that there is information out there in the contemporary sources that was knowingly falsified gives one pause. We know that people have biases and that they make mistakes and, as historians, we look for that and we can account for that. But we are not expecting the contemporary sources to lie to us. We know that they can be wrong but we have to be able to trust our sources. We have to be able to expect a good faith effort on the part of 19th century journalists in reporting the truth as they see it. I may be a bit naive about this but I find this kind of thing rather unethical and I enjoyed reading Spink laying the hammer down.

William Spink's Obituary

Before we start into the 1876 regular season, I thought I'd pass this along:

William M. Spink, the well-known newspaper man, died last night of typho mania, after an illness of three weeks duration. Mr. Spink was born in Montreal, Canada, May 26, 1848, and was, therefore, 37 years of age. At 10 years of age he learned telegraphy, and at 12 he had charge of the telegraph office in the House of Parliament at Quebec. When 16 years old he went to Chicago and engaged in the service of the Western Union Telegraph Company, receiving a first-class operator's pay. Subsequently he achieved a national reputation as one of the fastest "receivers" in the country. Operators who worked with him assert that no telegraph writer in the country was fast enough to make him "break." At one time he was the only receiver on duty at night in the Western Union office in this city, which now runs a night force of over fifty men. In 1870, when the telegraphers' strike occurred, he was in Cincinnati and was Secretary of the Telegraphers' Protective Association. When the strike ended in failure he was black-listed, and it was then that he turned his attention to newspaper work and became a reporter on the Cincinnati Chronicle. In 1873 he came to St. Louis and accepted a position as a reporter on the St. Louis Globe. When the Globe and Democrat were consolidated, in 1875, he was appointed telegraph editor of the Globe-Democrat, which position he occupied with marked ability for seven years. During these years he also acted as sporting editor of this paper, his untiring industry, systematic methods and wonderful speed as a writer enabling him to handle both departments with apparent ease...and his sporting column was by odds the most interesting and complete that was published in any daily paper in the country. Unlike a great many sporting reporters, his work was not limited to one specialty, for he handled the running and trotting turf, base ball, cricket, field sports, billiards, athletics and pugilism with equal facility and ability. In 1883 he had charge of the Globe-Democrat's "Flood Expedition" down the Mississippi, which furnished the Readers of the Globe-Democrat with exhaustive and interesting reports of the effects of the high water of that year between Cairo and New Orleans. Subsequently he was city editor of the Globe-Democrat, but was not connected with the paper for two years. The deceased leaves a widow. He will probably be buried on Thursday.

-St. Louis Globe-Democrat, July 1, 1885

William Spink was one of the first baseball writers in the Midwest. Going to Cincinnati as a telegrapher, he left the Western Union Telegraph Co. to work on the Cincinnati Gazette and then moved to St. Louis, where he joined the Missouri Democrat. When the Globe merged with the Democrat, Spink took over as telegraph editor and during his spare time developed the sports page for the Globe-Democrat. He covered all sports and was regarded as one of the top writers of his day because of his versatility. He is credited with naming the Cincinnati team the "Reds" in 1896, first to tag the St. Louis team the "Browns" and the Chicago team the "White Stockings."

-Brooklyn Daily Eagle, July 2, 1885

Hat tip to Bill Burgess for the photo and Daily Eagle obit. And in case you're interested, typho-mania is a form of manic-depressive psychosis that is more commonly referred to as Bell's mania. The symptoms include a sudden onset of overactivity, marked sleeplessness, a great push of speech with statements that are disconnected at times by reason, disconnected and poorly systematized delusions, transient hallucinations, and the appearance of confusion that can be suspended long enough to answer direct questions. According to an 1934 article in the American Journal of Psychiatry, "(the) course of the illness is from three to six weeks, with a fatal termination in a large percentage of cases, apparently from cardio-vascular failure due to overactivity."

The 1876 Brown Stockings: The Game As A Whole Was Decidedly Brilliant

About eight hundred spectators at the Grand Avenue Park, yesterday afternoon, were delighted at the display made by the rival ball-tossers of the two most prominent home organizations. The Browns had on their new suits, and the uniforms, though it varies little from that of last year, is a very tasty one. The Reds presented their full nine, and the ponies acquitted themselves nobly. Play was called promptly at 4 o'clock, with the Browns at the bat, Capt. McGeary having again lost the toss. The professionals opened well in the first inning, scoring two runs, one of which was earned by Cuthbert's ferocious drive for three bases, followed by Clapp's single. Run-getting after that was slow, the Browns adding one run in the seventh and one in the eighth, neither of which was earned. The Reds were presented with an unbroken chain of nothings, the boys, failing utterly to master Bradleys delivery, off which but two safe hits were made, one by Collins and one by Magner. The Browns secured five base hits, Dehlman being credited with two, and Cuthbert, Clapp and Blong with one each. The pitching on both sides and the fielding throughout were admirable, errors being few and far between. Loftus made as brilliant a catch as any ever seen in St. Louis, and carried off the honors, he making no less than five catches. Dolan caught in splendid style, and all did well. The Browns one and all played up to their usual high standard, and the game as a whole was decidedly brilliant.

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

This is another great game account by William Spink. Being an admirer of his writing, I'm really looking forward to following his day-by-day game reporting on the Brown Stockings. Just in this paragraph, there are four turns of phrase that forced me to stop, admire his work and despair over my own ponderous prose stylings. William Spink was a darn fine writer.

Also, note Spink's description of the Brown Stockings and Reds as "the two most prominent home organizations." It's almost shocking to see the Empire Club not included as one of the two most prominent clubs in St. Louis. That this was certainly true goes to the point that I was trying to make the other day.

An Organization Of Their Own

Eighteen professional and co-operative clubs have already been announced for the Centennial year, as follows: Chicago, St. Louis, Cincinnati, Louisville, Mutual, New York, Hartford, Boston, Athletic, Philadelphia, Americus, New Haven, Atlantic, St. Louis Reds, Buffalo, Cleveland, Burlington, Washington. Of these it is safe to presume that the majority will not live to see the end of the season, and as it will be impossible for all of them to compete for the championship, the Chicago Tribune sensibly suggests the following remedy:

When the professional association meets it should adopt the following principles to govern the championship contests:

1. No club should be allowed to enter for the championship unless it be backed by a responsible association, financially capable of finishing a season when begun.

This, if adopted, would cut off the Atlantic Club and other co-operative frauds.

2. No club should be admitted from a city of less size than 100,000 inhabitants-excepting only Hartford.

This would cut off the New Havens and other clubs in places so small that, under the most favorable circumstances, a first-class club could never expect to get its expenses paid for going to them.

3. No two clubs should be admitted from the same city.

The evil effects of having more than one club in a city have been shown in Philadelphia this year. First, the Centennials went under, and then the Philadelphias and Athletics divided the interest, so that both of them have ended the season at a loss, poorer than poverty, and owing their players. One club can live in Philadelphia, but two must starve-not only themselves, but visiting clubs. This is shown in the statement of White Stocking receipts. And it is well known that the Athletic Club owes $6,000 as its showing for the year, while the Philadelphias are not much better off-or would not be, but for some peculiar practices.

4. The faith of the management of a club should be shown by the deposit of $1,000, or perhaps $1,500, in the hands of the association before the season begins. The sum not to be played for, but returned to each club which carries out its agreements and plays its return games. If it refuses to play all the games that it agrees to, let the sum be forfeited.

The adoption of these restrictions would limit the contestants next year to Chicago, Cincinnati, St. Louis and Louisville in the West, Athletic, New York, and Mutual in the Middle States, and Hartford and Boston in the East; and with such an association the games would be prosperous, and the people who attended championship games would have a guarantee that they were to see the best clubs and the best games possible.

It may be doubted whether the Professional Association will be willing to vote the restrictions proposed, and, if they do not, it will be the plain duty of the nine clubs named to withdraw from the association as it now stands, and form an organization of their own-a close corporation, too. Every club which has a backing should discuss this matter before the meeting of the Professional Association and so instruct their representative that he will feel at liberty to take such action as may be for the best interests of the game.

-St. Louis Globe-Democrat, October 31, 1875

Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't William Hulbert write the piece in the Trib that William Spink is quoting here? Or at the very least, he passed the ideas along to the Tribune who acted as his spokesman in the matter. Either way this is the outline for the new National League that the Brown Stockings would join for the inaugural 1876 season.

One thing of interest here, in light of the Globe's later editorial policy, is that Spink describes Hulbert's plan as sensible and implies that he supports it. It didn't take long for Spink to change his tune and attack the plan as monopolistic. It will be interesting to see when exactly Spink begins to sour on the League. I would imagine it happens at the exact moment that the Reds realize that they aren't part of the Grand Scheme.

The Guardians Of Baseball High Culture

Between 1881 and 1882, St. Louis newspapers offered sparse coverage of the city's colored clubs...Why the poor coverage? One answer was column space.  Critics complained that editors gave baseball too much column space.  And the press doted on the white professional club, the Brown Stockings, which it viewed as a lucrative, civic-minded enterprise.  On the other hand, the Black Stockings colored nine hardly qualified as the city's iconic sports symbol...Throughout the 1870's, the white press' coverage of colored baseball declined.  In 1878, when the Globe-Democrat reported only games the sports editor "deemed sufficiently interesting," colored clubs became the first casualties.  In 1876, newspapers reported over thirty games; in 1877, only three contests appear in print, among them the Black Stockings vs. Our Boys (the "Blacks" won 6 to 4).  Colored clubs disappeared from the sports pages until 1881.  Of course, the Red Stockings, Brown Stockings, and Empires received coverage.  And sports editors devoted attention to white business and trade nines.  Coverage seems to have been based on their social and business relations with newspapers.  This exclusion represented only part of a strategic plan, that being the desire of the professional league to control labor, eliminate the numerous teams competing for attention (the Globe-Democrat identified over 200 nines in the city), and consolidate the market.

In the Mound City, guardians of baseball high culture-the Spink brothers, the McNeary brothers, Gus Solari, and Christopher Von der Ahe-wielded the civic clout and socioeconomic control to push an exclusionary agenda. 

-James Brunson, Henry Bridgewater's Black Stockings of St. Louis, 1881-1889

While Brunson goes on to place Bridgewater and the Black Stockings within the context of Reconstruction era St. Louis and the politics inherent to the era, I find his interpretation of the actions of the Spink brothers, McNeary, Solari, and Von der Ahe to be fascinating.  Throw in J.B.C. Lucas and some of the members of the Union Club and one can construct an argument that there was a cabal of men attempting to organize and control the St. Louis baseball market.  

However, the problem with the argument is that these men were actually in competition with each other.  While certainly the Spink brothers used their position as editors to promote and publicize the game, this was well within the tradition of "upbuilding" and a common practice of time.  But, in the late 1870's, when they were involved in the running of the Interregnum Brown Stockings, they were in direct competition with McNeary's Red Stockings.  McNeary originally was a part of the group that organized the NA Brown Stockings but, after the club decided to play its home games at the Grand Avenue Grounds, he placed the Red Stockings in the NA to directly compete against the Brown Stockings.  McNeary's Compton Avenue Grounds competed with Solari's Grand Avenue Grounds for clubs, games, and fans and the Reds were in competition against the Grand Avenue Club.  Von der Ahe had worked with Solari when they were both board members of the Grand Avenue Club and part of the Sportsman's Park and Club Association but essentially forced him out in the early 1880's.  

While these men worked together to promote baseball in St. Louis, they were just as often competitors.  There was no cabal.  There was no grand strategic plan.  The only exclusionary agenda was that of single-minded businessmen who were attempting to make money and establish the professional game in St. Louis.  They weren't out to destroy the black clubs or the mercantile clubs or the old amateur clubs but, rather, their goal was to establish something more.  These men were instrumental in transitioning St. Louis baseball from the amateur to the professional era and by simply looking at the history of the period-the starts and stops, the failures and successes-one can see that there was no over-arching grand vision being driven by a monopolistic establishment. 

As I said, I see some merit to the argument.  If one was looking at the situation from the view of someone like Bridgewater, who was not a member of the white St. Louis establishment, then you might see a monopolistic baseball establishment that marginalized Bridgewater's contribution.  But in the end, what I see is a group of businessmen fighting each other for control of the baseball market rather than working together to monopolize the market.           

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.    

Bad Timing

About thirty gentlemen, interested in base ball matters-most of them shareholders in the St. Louis Base Ball Club-met yesterday evening in parlor No. 22 of the Lindell Hotel. The chair was taken by Mr. J.B.C. Lucas, President of the club, who, after calling the meeting to order, stated that, though the fact was generally well known, he would remind those present that for the past years base ball ventures in St. Louis had not proved financially successful. This season the club found itself considerably in arrears, and the meeting had been called in order to start an effort to raise the necessary amount with which the salaries of players might be paid. Individual Directors had, at their own expense, carried the club through the season, and they wanted now to see if they could not get assistance from shareholders and others. Out of $20,000 of stock only $17,000 had been subscribed, and on this some stockholders had not fully paid up.

After a brief discussion of the situation and the best means of improving it, a motion by Mr. Charles A. Fowle was carried, calling upon the Chair to appoint a committee of six gentlemen to collect subscriptions from stockholders and others to make up the deficiency.

The Chair appointed as such committee Messrs. W.C. Little, P.C. Butler, W.A. Stickney, W.C. Steigers, Aug. Solari and E.S. Brooks.

Subscription lists were opened at the meeting, when the sum of $400 was immediately subscribed.

In answer to a query, the Chair stated that upon the raising of the amount necessary to pay the deficiency, the question of whether there would be a St. Louis nine next year or no virtually depended. At the same time he did not like to say that, if the amount was raised, there would be a club, as this season closed his connection with the club. He believed that $2,500 had already been subscribed by parties towards next year's team.

After a discusion on general base ball topics, the meeting adjourned.

-St. Louis Globe-Democrat, November 1, 1877

This attempt to raise funds took place the day before William Spink's long piece about gambling in baseball, the St. Louis connection, and the effect that it would have on the fate of professional baseball appeared in the Globe. The piece must have had a devestating effect on the Brown Stockings' attempt to salvage their financial situation and on the moral of St. Louis baseball supporters. Lucas was stepping aside as club president, the Globe was withdrawing its support for professional baseball, numerous Brown Stocking players were being accused of throwing games, other clubs and players were being accused of crookedness, and the fate of the League itself was in doubt. There could not have been a worse time to go to the public and ask them to financially support the Brown Stockings.

How St. Louis Was Sold Out, Part Two

The nature of the proof against these men will be found below. It will probably be remembered that on August 24 the St. Louis and Chicago clubs played a game in this city, the home club being beaten by a score of 4 to 3. Two or three days previous a certain St. Louis sharp visited Chicago and was seen to spend a good deal of his time in Mike McDonald's company. He returned to St. Louis in time to witness the game referred to, and on the day on which it was played received a considerable sum of money from McDonald by means of telegraphic orders. These orders were received under an assumed name, but as the Telegraph Company refused to pay them, the address was changed by the sender in Chicago, and the money was paid over to the party referred to. On the same day this individual backed the Chicago club heavily to win and telegraphed McDonald, in substance, as follows: "Buy wheat. Smith is all right. Jones will assist." This game, as previously mentioned was won by Chicago and it was lost to St. Louis by two members of the Brown Stocking nine, who committed the errors which gave Chicago the game at precisely the right moment. To ascertain whether they were "Smith" and "Jones" was now the problem which the officers of the club determined to solve, and a detective was employed to work up the case. That night McDonald's agent and the two men who lost the game for St. Louis met in the back room of a saloon in the northwestern part of the city, held a long and secret interview, and money was seen to change hands. When the conference broke up, the middleman was heard to remark: "For God's sake, don't lose your nerve to-morrow." To still further strengthen the case against these men, it should be stated that on the same day, and before the game, one of them telegraphed to a friend in Philadelphia, "We'll go to Chicago, but don't know when," and as the St. Louis Club had, as was then supposed, paid its last visit to Chicago for the season, and the sender had no business to transact in that city, the idea naturally suggested itself that the word "Chicago" in the dispatch meant a good deal more to the recipient than it would have done to an outsider. The next day the dame clubs again met, and McDonald's miserable tool again telegraphed his employer to dabble in grain, although he was never known to handle anything except the implements of the gambling fraternity. On this occasion, however, the pool-sellers were neatly "whip-sawed," for the suspected men were closely watched, and the instant that one of them attempted to duplicate his errors of the previous day, Capt. McGeary made a judicious change, sending him to a position where, as luck happened, he had little to do, and the result justified the act, for St. Louis won and the gamblers "went broke."

In view of the above, was it not natural that the friends of the club gave up all hope of winning the championship? It must be remembered that the officers did not have sufficient proof to convict these men, nor could they cancel their contracts, and the only punishment in their power to inflict was to make them play on through the season. Otherwise they could have drawn their salary and enjoyed a term of idleness. A similar state of affairs existed in the Chicago and Louisville clubs, and the question has arisen how can these swindlers be driven from the fraternity. The managers of the League are at present busily engaged in devising a plan of action to be adopted at the annual meeting in December, and it is probable that about a dozen men will be "black-listed," and the League clubs will invite the co-operation of all other organizations in weeding these "crooks" out of the profession. It is also highly probable that the League will refuse to play any organization including among its employees any one whose name appears on the list of black sheep.

-St. Louis Globe-Democrat, November 1, 1877

One interesting question that arises from this article is how, specifically, did Spink know the content of telegrams sent between the conspirators? Spink came to St. Louis in 1855, at the age of fifteen, to take a job as a telegraph operator with Western Union and was a member of the Telegrapher's Union. Even after he began covering baseball for the St. Louis papers in the 1860's, Spink continued to work for Western Union. While it's unknown when specifically he began to work full time as a newspaper man, it can be assumed that in 1877 he still had numerous friends and contacts with Western Union. On has to assume that it was through these contacts that Spink was able to see the telegrams he quotes in the article.

One more point. Jon David Cash, in Before They Were Cardinals, mentions that the middleman, mentioned in the article as "a certain St. Louis sharp," was identified by the Chicago Tribune as National League umpire L.W. Burtis. Burtis never umpired another League game after the 1877 season.

How St. Louis Was Sold Out, Part One

The base ball season is virtually at an end, although it does not officially close until November 15, and a few remarks pertaining to the year and its work may not be out of place, especially as numerous rumors have been afloat for some time past to the effect that "crooked" dealing has been indulged in to a great extent. To those who keep thoroughly posted concerning the national game, it has been evident that several screws have been loose in at least three of the leading clubs of the country-the St. Louis, Louisville and Chicago. To this same class of persons it has also been evident that pool sellers and players, instead of club organizers and managers, are alone responsible for the dirty tricks which have been practiced. Ever since pool selling became an established institution of the land a small number of strictly first-class ball players have been suspected of co-operating with the gamblers and throwing games to suit the "box." They were merely suspected, however. So cunningly did they carry out their part in the various swindling schemes, that it was an utter impossibility to obtain sufficient proof on which to base a charge which would terminate in their expulsion from the fraternity. These men have been "marked" for years and will be readily recognized by the patrons of base ball, although no names are given. In the face of innumerable hints thrown out as to their character, the various club managers of the country seem to have thought that by giving them a chance to reform they might be induced to cut loose from the gambling fraternity and remove the odium which, by their conduct, had become attached to the base ball profession. As a result of this mistaken idea, when the season opened the names of one or more of these scoundrels appeared in each of the lists of players furnished by the Louisville, St. Louis, and Chicago clubs. For this reason Chicago dropped from the head to the tail of the League, Louisville did not win the championship, and St. Louis, after opening the season in magnificent style, closed it by pressing Chicago closely for last place. The root of the evil in the St. Louis club was not reached until the season was so far advanced that it was impossible to remedy it, and even then proof necessary to make out a case in a court of justice was not obtainable, although sufficient evidence of a conclusive nature had reached the officers of the St. Louis club to demonstrate that at least two of their men were playing into the hands of Mike McDonald, the notorious Chicago gambler, who carries out a system of pool-selling on an extensive scale.

-St. Louis Globe-Democrat, November 1, 1877

I'll post the rest of this long but fascinating article tomorrow.

William Spink, who wrote the article for the Globe, was being rather coy about naming names. However, we know that the two Brown Stocking players that Spink fails to name in the article are Joe Blong and Joe Battin. Davey Force and Mike McGeary would also find themselves accused of improprieties as the Louisville/St. Louis scandal blew up.

Spink, the sports editor of the Globe, did an outstanding job covering the scandal, writing a series of articles about gambling corruption in baseball. According to Jon David Cash, Spink was so disgusted by the scandal that he "temporarily ceased to promote the game and instead pursued an investigation into the negative effect of gambling."

The Only Real History Of Base Ball Ever Published

Best Base Ball History

Interesting to Fans and Invaluable to All Connected With the Game

At last a standard work on base ball has made his appearance-the only complete history of the national game ever published. The book is called "The National Game."

In the earliest days of base ball in St. Louis, William Spink was the first real base ball editor. When he died his brother Al took up the reins and held unto the early records kept by his brother. From these early records and figures obtained since securing them, Al Spink has written the only bona fide history of base ball that has ever been published. It is a story woven out of real wool and is not only well and interestingly written but is beautifully illustrated with portraits of old and also of upcoming players.

Mr. Spink's story of "base ball in the cities," which is part of this book, covers the upbuilding of the game in Chicago, New York, Philadelphia, Boston, St. Louis, Cincinnati and other major league cities and gives the book a national and widespread importance.

The book also contains sketches of very man who has played in the major base ball leagues from the days of the old Professional Association in the early 70's up to the present moment.

Mr. Spink in his time was associated with the great base ball leaders like Reach, Spalding, Johnson, Comiskey, Brash, Ewing, Anson, the Wright Brothers, George and Harry, Ward and others and he has written lively and interesting stories about them.

The book is not only an interesting one to read but it will prove of great value to managers, club-owners and base ball writers containing as it does all sorts of information which until this book was published was unobtainable.

-The Sporting News, November 17, 1910

Who would have imagined TSN giving The National Game a positive review? I don't really see any sort of conflict of interest there. Anyway, the image at the top of the post is an ad for The National Game that appeared in the same issue as the review.

The Bias Of The Globe-Democrat

I'm sure I've mentioned that the Globe-Democrat was a pro-Reds paper. The paper began as The Globe in 1852 and became the Globe-Democrat after an 1875 merger with the Missouri Democrat.

In the late 1860's, William Macdonald Spink moved to St. Louis, went to work for the Missouri Democrat and became the telegraph editor at the Globe-Democrat after the merger. According to The National Game, "One day he asked the editor of his paper leave to insert baseball and other sporting items in the Globe-Democrat. Mr. Spink offered to do this work as a labor of love, and his offer was accepted." Spink, as the sports editor of the Globe, became a champion of baseball in St. Louis and a supporter of efforts to place a team in the NA.

As to any biases that Spink may have brought to his baseball coverage, his brother, Al Spink, wrote that "In the early days 'Billy' Spink championed the Empires and the St. Louis Reds. He was their friend even after the professional teams had come in."

There is no doubt that Spink gave more favorable coverage in 1875 to the Reds at the expense of the Brown Stockings. The Reds were "our boys" while the Brown Stockings were the "St. Louis-Easton-Atlantic professionals" and his post-season coverage of the Reds is more apologetics than journalism.

All journalists have their biases and all newspapers have an editorial slant. I'm not knocking Spink for his pro-Reds stance (which I happen to share). I just think it's important to note it.