Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1897-10-13

can say positively that the Bostons did
everything possible to win the Temple cup
and played their best In every game ex-
cept the last. In that last game think they
had about given up all hope of winning
the trophy. and knowing that they did not
have pitcher whom our men could not
hit, and feeling sure that they could not
hit Hotter as hard as we could hit any
pitcher of theirs. they did not play as
hard as they might have done. On the
other hand. 1 believe they would have
fought their very best IL they had had a
spark of hope that they could win the cup,
even after taking that game.
Mr.. Temple says that the series was not
a fast one, but he did not see 1t, and TAX
ing into consideration the long fight for the
pennant and the strain on the players, /
think the series was n remarkably fast
one. As II the question of dividing the
money, even If it had been divided equally
Mr.. Temple could not think of blacklisting
anybody for that, unles he considered that
there was some crooked agreement back
of it. Nov, any one who thinks for a mo-
ment. will how absurd such an idea
woul1 be. Why should the Bostons resign
their chances for the cup and the credit
of winning it, even supposing that the
agreement was TIC divide equally? There is
considerable credit and prestige in winning
the cup. New Works winning 1t in 1894
took away much of our credit for winnin z
the championship. Does any one suppose
that the Boston players would sell out. or
that the Baltimore players could afford to
buy the honor?
Whether any of the players agreed to
6ivide equally CT not the series was a good
one and was played strictly on its merits,
and such al agreement to divide equally
only showed that the men who made il
We're afraid of the other club and thought
it more likely to win than their own club.
Now, If any of the players agreed TO
divide equally ii was done wholly without
my knowledge or consent 1 know that L
got my go per cent, every dollar of il, and
Selee got 40. But what IL an agreement 20
divide equally was made? There, is moth
ing IN that. 1t was done in 1894 by a num-
Der OF our players with the New York
players. and the fact wars published and
nothing was said of it. The very facts of
the recent series show how honest it was
We could have played all seven of the
games and played them in other cities to
big crowds. The Bostons tried hard to get
US not to play any of the games in Balti-
more, saying we would not get any money
here. We knew that, for the cup games
here last year were very poorly attended.
but still we insisted on playing here, be-
ause We wanted to win the cup.
Even after last Saturdays game here
we could have transferred the other game
to New York, Philadelphia, or even WASH
ington. and If We wished it could have al
lowed Boston to win in order to play other
games, but We refused, preferring to play
1t out here and take no chances Does that
look like there was anything wrong? The
fact Is. 1t Is all nonsense; Boston lost tie
cup ior the same reason that We lost the
pennent-because it could not win"
Captain Robinson, DIR. Pond, Catcher
Clarke and others. when asked about the
division, said they did not know on what
basis it was divided. but they had made no
agreement to take less than co per cent 1t
not all. the players on both sides privately
made sucn an agreement among them
selves. Many persons believe that the di-
vision should be made in that way. anyhow.