An Argument Among Losers

Every one who takes an interest in the national game will be pleased to learn that the little job put up by the Mutuals and Hartfords, to beat the St. Louis Brown Stockings out of their proper place in the race for the championship, is not likely to succeed. In an interview with Mr. Fowle, Secretary of the St. Louis club, last night, that gentlemen stated that the Browns intended to claim forfeit from the Athletics and Mutuals in each of the unplayed games of their series. It will be seen by the following extracts from the League's Constitution, that the claim is a perfectly valid one.

Art. 12, Sec. 2. Each club shall be entitled to have five of its games with every other club played on its own grounds; and when a club shall have first played one or more games, pursuant to agreement, upon its adversary's grounds it may require its adversary to play an equal number upon its own ground in return within a reasonable time (not to exceed two months), under penalty of forfeiture of the number of games due: Provided, however, That if any game arranged according to the requirements of this rule be prevented by rain, or if a tie or drawn game be played, the visiting club shall not be required to extend its stay, or to again visit such city for the sole purpose of playing off such tie or drawn game, or game prevented by rain.

Sec. 3. Clubs shall be entitled to forfeited games-to count in their series as games won by a score of nine runs to none-from other clubs, in the following instances, namely:

Any club which has agreed to play with another club upon a day certain, and fails to meet its engagement, shall forfeit the game to the latter club, unless the failure is caused by an unavoidable accident in traveling, or the game is prevented by rain; provided, however, that games shall be postponed upon the death of a player belonging to either of the contesting League clubs, as the request of either club.

It is true that section one of the same article states that each club entering the lists shall play ten games with every other club so entering; and if any club shall of its own fault fail to finish its series with every other club, its games shall not be counted at the close of the season, and such club shall not be eligible to enter the championship lists the ensuing season.

The words in italics, Mr. Fowle claims, crept into the constitution by mistake, but even then they have no bearing on the case in point, as the second section expressly stipulates that any club which fails to fulfill its engagements shall forfeit the number of games due.

-St. Louis Globe-Democrat, October 15, 1876

The situation is this: Hartford and St. Louis both finished six games back of Chicago. St. Louis had the better winning percentage but Hartford was awarded second place due to the fact that they had two more wins than the Brown Stockings. St. Louis was not pleased, especially considering that the Brown Stockings won the season series against Hartford and that if St. Louis had gotten to play a full schedule, they most likely would have finished with more wins than Hartford.

It's a bit of a mess but Brown Stockings' management believed that they had the League constitution on their side and that St. Louis had rightfully won second place. However, I can't claim that I can work up much enthusiasm regarding a fight over second place. Maybe if there was money at stake...

Anyway, I'm just noting that this was an issue and moving on with my life.

And An Honest Base-Ball Association Is Born

The most important measure ever adopted by the professional base ball clubs of this country has been considered and approved by a council of representatives of the eight principal clubs of the country, in a session at the Grand Central Hotel.

The new scheme, which is destined to elevate base ball to the rank of a legitimate amusement, is the formation of a new association of professional clubs on the debris of the old National Association, and the clubs which participate are the Bostons, of Boston; the Hartfords, of Hartford; the Mutuals, of New York; the Athletics, of Philadelphia; the White Stockings, of Chicago; the Cincinnatis, of Cincinnati; the Lousivilles, of Louisville; and the St. Louis, of St. Louis.

The last-named clubs were represented at this conference by W.A. Hulbert, President of the Chicagos, and Mr. Fowle, of the St. Louis Club. The Eastern clubs were all represented by delegates.

The conference met yesterday noon at the Grand Central Hotel, and organized by the election of Nick Young as Secretary, after which the Western delegates stated the proposition for a new association more fully than it had been given by letter, and proceeded to enumerate the advantages to be gained by the proposed union.

As nearly as I could get at the reasons, they were these:

1. The feeling that something must be done to get rid of the dishonest players who have brought disrepute on the game...

2. Is seemed clear to the members of the council that the distinction between professional and amateur clubs had grown somewhat lax, and that there were growing up all over the country a swarm of semi-professionals who sought to be classed with the real first-class organizations by the simple process of applying for the membership in the National Association...

3. The instinct of self-preservation impelled the members of the Council to band together to better their financial condition in any way possible...

A consideration of these facts, and an argument over them, decided the wavering opinion of a few doubters that the only way that the National game could be put on a sound financial and moral basis was to cut down the number of clubs in the ring and made the selection so as to leave out the weaker clubs, as well as those most doubtful in character of management and players, and those from the places so small as to render it difficult, if not impossible, to pay expenses while visiting them.

A constitution for the new Association, embodying the ideas here advanced and providing, generally, for an association of the eight clubs named, was adopted Tuesday without much difficulty...

The work to-day has been that of revising the playing rules and championship code...

That the new movement is one of great importance to the game no one here for a moment doubts, and, so far as I know, every honest player and manager will approve the steps taken...

-St. Louis Globe-Dispatch, February 5, 1876 (from the Chicago Tribune)

If you ever find yourself in a debate about team nicknames (as I know some for you have been involved in at other sites), just quote the above article and this odd designation of the Bostons of Boston or the St. Louis of St. Louis. While I know that the St. Louis of St. Louis were properly known as the St. Louis Club, they were obviously also called the Brown Stockings. I'll take a look about and see if I can find any pattern in name usage because I think that would make for an interesting post.

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.

The Globe On The Fair-Foul Rule

The subject which seems to excite most attention in base-ball circles at present is how the rules can be changed so as to do away with the wretched style of fair foul-hitting which many professionals have adopted during the last few years. Nothing can be imagined more disgusting to the patrons of the game than the sight of a broad-shouldered athlete bunting at the ball for ten minutes, and keeping it constantly out of play in an effort to accomplish something which does not prove successful once in ten times, instead of swinging the bat in a graceful and easy manner, but with sufficient force to drive the sphere, if squarely hit, over the heads of the outfielders, or so hard that it requires nerve and pluck for the infielders to face it. A hard-hit bounder, even though it be driven directly at an infielder, frequently results in a base hit, owing to the fact that it was a sheer impossibility for the fielder to handle the ball. Harry Wright has been heard from on the subject, and his idea is to consider as foul all hit balls that pass outside the foul lines before reaching first base or third base, and as fair all hit balls that strike the ground and pass into the infield and in front of the first base or third base, or that shall be fielded inside of the foul lines. Also, to do away with catching the call on the bound; an out on a hit ball or three strikes to be when it is caught on the fly only. Harry thinks this will equalize the batting and fielding, and also tend to lessen the discretionary power of the umpire, and relieve him of responsibilities now resting upon him.

A day or two since a Globe-Democrat reporter called on Mr. Chas. A. Fowle, Secretary of the St. Louis club, to ascertain what the gentleman who had drawn up the playing rules of the League had to say on the subject. Mr. Fowle was not in favor of the change as proposed, though extremely anxious to have fair-foul hitting abolished in the future. The change as proposed, in his estimation, did not fill the bill for several vital reasons, the main one being that it would be absolutely impossible, in many cases, for the umpire to decide whether the ball was picked up inside or outside the foul lines, especially in cases of very swift grounders in the direction of first and third bases, and again when the ball was hit directly along the foul lines. By the proposed change balls could be still "blocked" so as to roll slowly towards the basemen and it is essential that this style of hitting should also be done away with. Mr. Fowle has given the problem a great deal of consideration, and finds it an extremely difficult one to solve. In his estimation the best way to dispose of the matter is to place the home plate six inches back of its present position and then pass a stringent rule, very carefully worded, compelling the bats man to strike at the ball with a full swing of the arm. Were this done, the ball, when fairly hit, would very rarely get back of the foul lines, and there would be very few tedious waits during the progress of the game. This plan seems to be the best yet presented, and the attention of the League Directors will be called to it at their meeting on the 4th of December.

-St. Louis Globe-Democrat, November 19, 1876

From A Game of Inches: "What ultimately provided the impetus to abolish the fair-foul was the fact that it was very difficult for umpires to determine whether a ball that was hit into the ground first hit fair or foul. Accordingly, the rule makers redefined the concepts of fair and foul in 1877 and, in the process, eliminated the fair-foul."

Base Ballers At Bonnet's

Last evening an elegant...little affair came off at Bonnet's private supper-rooms on Fourth street, at which about twenty-five well-known young gentlemen of this city were present. The banquet, as it might with propriety be termed, was given to Mr. Charles A. Fowle, Secretary of the St. Louis Base Ball Club, by his friends appreciative of the enterprise and efficiency exhibited by him in his efforts to organize the Professional Base Ball League. among those present were William Steigers, E.B. Johnson,...Joseph P. Carr, C. Chase, Charles A. Bragg, Frank A. George, J.B.C. Lucas, James Fowle, Wm. Medart, Louis M. Walton, F.C. Swift, C.O. Bishop, and others. Among the ball-tossers present were John E. Clapp, who arrived at the Southern yesterday morning, Miller, Pike, Bradley, and McGeary.

The bill of fare was an elaborate one, and was inscribed to "our guest, Charles A. Fowle, St. Louis, February 24, 1876." The menu embraced delicacies of every description, and choice and rare viands, which were washed down with wines of rare vintage. After the splendid collation had been partaken of, jest and song were indulged in until a late hour.

-St. Louis Globe-Democrat, February 25, 1876

Misc. Player Movement in 1878

A telegram from St. Louis to the Cincinnati Commercial says: "Joe Blong, pitcher of the St. Louis Browns in 1877, Charlie Houtz, the Indianapolis first baseman in 1876 and 1877, and George Baker, who is looked upon by many as the coming catcher of the country, to-day signed contracts to play with the Springfield (Mass.) Base-Ball Club, and will leave for the East to-morrow night. Baker is a splendid batsman, as well as a fine fielder. Daniel Morgan, who captained the Milwaukees last season, has rejoined that club, and left for Milwaukee to-night. This breaks up the St. Louis Brown Stockings for the present season, but they are to be reorganized by Mr. Charles Fowle, a prominent business-man, who is well known in League circles, and who intends placing the strongest possible team in the League next year."

-The Chicago Daily Tribune, May 26, 1878

A Look At Management And Fans In 1877

It is undoubtedly true that the phases of base ball in the different cities are as varied as to make for an interesting study if one had time to pursue them. (In St. Louis), for instance, the patron and lover of the game is entirely different than anything else in the world and, like the whole development, deserves so much study as you can give space for.

The (Brown Stocking) Club itself is duly incorporated and has a great plenty of officers. Chief among them are Mr. J.B.C. Lucas, the President, a young man whose father left him some such indefinite sum as the average citizen speaks of as "ten or twelve million, sir." Unquestionably Mr. Lucas is a fine head to the Club, and is of course the representative of the young men of wealth who live a part of the time in St. Louis; and, to their great credit be it said, go to the ball-matches instead of to some worse places. Concerning their behavior when there, I may wan to say a word hereafter. Mr. Campbell O. Bishop, who is the Vice-President of the Club, is a lawyer in excellent practice and with a good reputation. He stands for the professional part of the Club's support.

Charles A. Fowle, the Club's Secretary, is a prosperous merchant and represents a street full of stock. He probably suffers more than any other man in the management, because, if his Club should suffer defeat, and he should thereafter appear on the street, he would be at once surrounded by indignant stockholders, who demand an explanation of the cause of the loss of the game. Let it be to Mr. Fowle's credit tat he furnishes the necessary talk, and keeps things smooth where they would most assuredly spike up with a less even-tempered man to run matters...to find a more fitting representative in this city would be a difficult matter. Behind the officers named there are a Board, a Treasurer, and a bunch of stockholders, who (spend their time), as far as I could judge, to petting different members of the nine, and, therefore, without the slightest desire or intention to do so, stirring up a row in the camp. I am informed by a gentleman connected with the Club that this "buttering" players from a spirit of partisanship and favoritism, without approving or disapproving their work in the game, was one of the elements which (he said) prevented them from winning the flag last year. I am compelled to add my belief that if Lucas (wealth), Bishop (legal knowledge), and Fowle (Yankee sharpness, shrewdness, and sense) had the whole concern in their own hands, they would win the flag and make money while doing it.

Referring back to the word "buttering" used above, I want to call attention to the fact that the whole credit of games won in St. Louis is given to the pitcher, and he cannot go to the bat without a round of applause-at least that has been the case this year. A more foolish notion can hardly be imagined.

A word is due to the St. Louis Club grounds, called Grand Avenue Park, and one of the prettiest bits of land in the country-when you get to it. I can hardly make a Chicagoan understand its location by comparison. Consider, then, that if you in Chicago were going to a ball game just like in St. Louis, you would have to go down State street fourteen blocks beyond where the cars now run, and then turn off to the right and go about twelve blocks further. In other words, you would have to ride in a street-car to a point twelve blocks beyond the Stock Yards and Dexter Park. When you have got this through your head, you will understand what the St. Louis citizen has to undergo to see his favorites play ball.

This matter of the location of the park has unquestionably a considerable influence on the number of people who attend, because they understand that to go to a ball-match is not a slipping out after work is nearly done but a serious and solemn matter which means a half-day lost. Despite this fact, the crowds are good, and a first-class Club always does well-at least so long as there is interest in the home nine. The Chicagos took more money last Tuesday than they will in both Louisville games...

With the heartiest wishes for the success of the St. Louis Club, it is impossible to compliment the city on its base-ball audiences. The grand stand is filled in good part with real ladies and perfect gentlemen; but, as has before been said, they are so bitterly partisan as to one or two players in their nine that they cannot see anything else. I have been on the watch in front of that stand, and heard a owl like tat of forty demons (well-behaved, well-dressed demons, I mean) go up because one man (say Remsen) made an easy catch, while an almost impossible stop (say Blong) would pass unrecognized. It is impossible not to recognize these little cliques, and they do no end of harm. To describe the outside crowd-the barbarians-hoi-polloi-would break up anybody's objections. They have a long row of seats to themselves and they take their 50 cents out in yelling-and if yells were only a cent apiece they would cheat the management at that rate. Nobody can possibly object to enthusiasm and all that, but when a parcel of men and half-grown boys empty upon the heads of a player opposed to their nine a volley of the most utterly filthy epithets known to the slang language of the world, it is proper to note that fact...The writer has heard a lot of boys and men who must have gone through the grand stand if they were honestly in the ground, shout out to John Glenn while he was running for a fly within a little distance of where the party stood, "God d--n your black soul to hell, drop that ball you ---of a ---." and then a moment after when he was running for a foul, "You black-hearted ---------, drop it or I'll cut you in two." The same things, or nearly, have been said to first basemen so loudly that scorers and reporters on top of the stand, a hundred feet off, could hear them plainly. Evidently, the "pigpen" needs reforming. And lest there should be some question of doubt about a plain matter, your correspondent wishes to add that he blames no part of this filthy or profane language on the management of the St. Louis Club. Being, one and all, gentleman, they have no sympathy with the scoundrels or the mob. They could not very well help themselves if they wanted to, and the whole scurrilous practice must be charged upon the imperfect civilization of the masses, for which the social economist, and not the ball-managers, must find a remedy.

Let no man dare to misunderstand me, and say that I lay the loss of any game to this blackguarding. I disavow all that. Glenn and Spalding caught the balls after which they were running when they were so foully bespattered with muddy names. Passing over the fact that both are gentlemen, and never in their lives did anything to be called names for, thee fact remains that the St. Louis cheap public feel so strongly over their Club that they cannot well refrain from breaking out into their native blackguardism. The question whether a man must submit, whenever he contracts to play ball, to have his mother's good name abused by a St. Louis crowd, is one on which I need not enter. I am not little sorry that the game in St. Louis should be so far an exception to others as to make, so far as my experience goes, a necessity to have loafers as patrons. i think I am right in saying that it is the only city which does.

I wish to add-and I do it with considerable loss of pride in, and respect for, my profession-that I am afraid that the St. Louis press is partly responsible for this state of things. The papers here have faithfully inculcated the idea that their Club was the best in the world, and they have hinted, and once in awhile said, that if they lost it must be corruptly. Let me cite a case: A paper, which stands in St. Louis a shade below the station of the News in Chicago, but which is largely read by the bums and slums, said after the 4-2 game last Tuesday that it was thrown by St. Louis for the purpose of getting a larger crowd Thursday...upon which another paper...gravely reads the League a lecture on the sinfulness of giving away games for gate-money, when assuming to reform the game, taking its facts from the other previous idiot's assertions.

-The Chicago Tribune, May 27, 1877

Charles H. Turner

This weekend I was doing research on three projects that I wanted to get off my plate. The first was a basic genealogy of the Lucas’s, a prominent St. Louis family that was deeply involved in the history of 19th century baseball in the city. The second was the makeup of the board of directors of the 1875 St. Louis Brown Stockings. In A Newspaper Man’s Motion-Picture View of the City, Bill Kelsoe lists the members of the board and I wanted to gather some general information about the men who were instrumental in financing and organizing the team. Finally, I wanted to find more information about the social makeup of the Union Base Ball Club of St. Louis. Based on a few sources that I have, it appears that some of the members of the Union Club came from prominent and wealthy St. Louis families. That members of the Union Club came from the city’s upper class seems to be fairly unique among baseball clubs of the era and demanded more research. While I was unable to finish any of the three projects, interestingly all three research threads came together in the person of Charles H. Turner. As a wise man once said, “I love it when a plan comes together.”

Charles Turner was born in 1849 to Henry S. Turner and Julia Hunt. Henry Turner was a West Point graduate and classmate and friend of William T. Sherman who served with Stephan Kearney in the Mexican-American War. Julia Hunt was the daughter of Theodore Hunt, a naval officer and favorite in St. Louis social circles, and Anne Lucas, the only daughter of J.B.C. Lucas, one of the earliest settlers of St. Louis and one of its wealthiest and most influential citizens. H.S. Turner, with the support of his wife’s powerful family, would serve as a member of the St. Louis Board of Aldermen, the Missouri State Legislature, and as Assistant United States Treasurer. In the 1880 census, he listed his occupation as “retired capitalist.” In the 1870’s, H.S. Turner, as a member of the Board of Aldermen, would introduce legislation that established the street car system in St. Louis. Within a few years, his son Charles would own the company that his father helped to establish.

Charles Turner, according to Jeremiah Fruin, was an original member of the Union Base Ball Club of St. Louis. Other members of Turner’s social set who were members of the club included his cousin Robert Lucas, Shepard Barkley, Joseph Charles Cabanne, Orrick Bishop, and Harry Carr. Turner, a catcher, was described as a part of the original battery of the Union nine. He also pitched and played second base for the club. His membership in the original Union Club raises some questions. If the club was founded in the early 1860’s at about the same time as the Empire Club (and they were certainly playing baseball by 1861) then Turner could not have been an original member, being too young. It’s most likely that Turner did not join the club until after the Civil War.

In 1875, Turner was involved in the founding of the Brown Stockings. With the urging of newspaper men W.C. Steigers and R.P. Thompson, “several young St. Louisans of prominence” set up an organization to create a professional baseball team in St. Louis that could compete with the professional Chicago White Stockings. The board of directors that was elected to run the new organization included J.B.C Lucas, president; W.C. Steigers, vice-president; Charles A. Fowle, secretary; and Charles Turner, treasurer. Other members of the board included Orrick Bishop, William Medart, and Joseph Carr. Interestingly, the Union Club was heavily represented on the board with Turner, Steigers, and Bishop all being members and with the possibility that Lucas and Carr were as well. The Lucas family was also well represented with Turner joining his cousin J.B.C. Lucas on the board.

While it’s unknown exactly what role Turner played with the Brown Stockings, he was involved, according to Jon David Cash, in the signing of the Louisville players in 1877. These signings which were an attempt to duplicate Chicago’s raid on the Boston Red Stockings, coupled with the gambling scandal that involved both the signed Louisville players as well as members of the Brown Stocking nine, helped to bring about the collapse of the Brown Stockings organization and the experiment with professional baseball in St. Louis.

It’s difficult to overstate the prominence of Charles Turner in 19th century St. Louis. Not only was he a member of the wealthiest St. Louis family, he also married into another prominent family. His wife Margaret was the daughter of Stephen Barlow, the cousin of Stephen Douglas and a wealthy politician and railroad magnate in St. Louis. Turner himself was the president of the Suburban Railway Company, which owned the St. Louis street car system, and the Commonwealth Trust Company. He was described by Lincoln Steffens as being a millionaire and served on the St. Louis Board of Police Commissioners in the 1880’s. Turner also was a member of the Board of Directors of the Louisiana Purchase Exposition Company, which raised the money to put on the 1904 World’s Fair in St. Louis.

Turner’s influence in St. Louis was exposed in a negative way by Steffen in 1902. In what became known as “The Boodle Scandal,” Turner was shown to have been a member of a cabal that bribed city aldermen and state legislators in order to get legislation passed that was favorable to their business interests. In grand jury testimony, Turner was shown to have paid over $144,000 in bribes to secure legislation that would double the value of the Suburban Railway Company, which he was looking to sell. The case was tied up in court for several years and Turner died in 1906 before facing the legal consequences of his actions.

While “The Boodle Scandal” and Steffen’s exposes may have tarnished Turner’s reputation, his legacy was saved by the service of his grandson. Charles Turner Joy was the son of Charles Turner’s only daughter, Lucy Barlow Turner, and Duncan Joy. He graduated from Annapolis in 1916 and served in World War I, World War II, and the Korean War. During Korea, Rear Admiral Charles Turner Joy served as Commander of Naval Forces, Far East. After he passed away in 1956, a destroyer was named after him. The USS Turner Joy, pictured above, served the nation proudly until it was decommissioned in 1982.