Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1901-04-27
LA J0IE'S CASE UP
Validity of Base Ball Contracts Will
Be Tested by 1t.
HEARING IN PHILADELPHIA
Defendants Claim That League
Terms Are Unfair.
L III E TEN DAY CLAUS E"
pecial Dispatch to The Evening Star.

Special Dispatch to The Evening Star.
PHILADELPHIA, Pa. April a1.-The sec
ond inning of the legal contest between the
Philadelphia Base Ball Club. limited, and
the Athletic American League team to
test the validity OF the reserve or option
clause In the National League players con-
tracts. was vigorously fought on both
SIDES before a large crowd IN Court No.
today. with Judges Martin, Ralston and
Stevenson presiding
The case was partially heard last Satur-
| day. when II came up on a motion for
| special Injunction to enjoin LaJoie. Bern
hard. Fraser and Piatt. who were for
merly with the "Phillies." from playing
with Connie Mack's local American League
team. and to restrain the latter. together
with President Shibe's agent. Hough. OF
the same club. from employing the de-
PENDANT players for the current base ball
season.
day, Mr.. Rogers contended that II was alb
soiutely necessary for the benefit OF club
owners, as well as the game that the
! present contracts. which We're the result OF
long experience and hints from the court
as to their construction. should remain IA
force.
He argued that they were mutual on both
sides. despite the right given TO the man
days notice, exercise the option clause
and reserve the players for a period of three
years. Mr.. Rogers said that It was neces-
| sary for the ten days clause TO be inserted
| In the contract. arguing that this clause
was spur to a high standard OF merit.
II II were not for this right to discharge
he said some players would give indifferent
service and not try 10 win games. knowing
that they would remain with the club all
season and draw salary. matter how
they played.
Argument OF che Defendants.
The argument OF William J. Turner for
the defendants when the hearing was re-
sumed this morning. principally based
| on the allegation that the contract to
which the league club seeks to hold La
joie and other players Is invalid. because
1t lacks mutually by requiring the players
at the plaintiffs option to render services
for three successive base ball seasons with
out any obligation on the part OF the COM
/ plainant club to empty them for longer
than ten days
| He said: 1T is perfectly apparent that
| such a contract is so unfair and so want
| ing in mutually that no court OF equity
would lend it's aid to compel compliance
| with 1t"
He cited the legal requirements necessary
| for the granting of an Injunction to re-
| strain the performance of personal services.
! and said the kind of base ball players con-
tract which the courts will enforce is well
| described in the cause of the Exhibition
CO npany VS.. Ewing. wherein Justice Wal
lace held that 1T is Indispensable that IL
be one for the breach of which damages
would not afford an adequate compensation
to the plaintiff. 1t must be one in which the
plaintiff comes into court with clean hands.
and which is not so oppressive to rem
der 1t unjust to the defendant to enforce
1t. 1t must be one in which there are
mutual promises. or which is founded on
| sufficient consideration. 1t must be one the
! terms Of which are certain, and In respect
| to which the minds OF the parties have dis
| tinctly met, SO that there can be no mis-
understanding OF their rights and obliga-
tfons.'
Lajoie Could BE Replaced.
| Attorney Turner emphatically denied that
the vacancy in the Philadelphia club
caused by the withdrawal Of LaJoie could
| not be satisfactorily filed, saying that
| other base ball players could be supplied
| as is now being done and the complainant
| saved from any pecuniary losses. There
being no irreparable injury done or threat
| ened to complainant club. he argued. the
| breach OF contract OF which they complain
| can be adequately redressed at common
law I'm suit for damages.
No Injunction Granted.
By Associated Pres&
PHILADELPHIA, April 27.-Argument in
the injunction proceedings instituted by
the Philadelphia National League base ball
club to restrain Second Baseman Lajoie
from playing with the American League
team in this city. was concluded in the
common pleas court today. The Judges
took the papers in the case and reserved
decision.
Meanwhile no temporary Injunction was
granted.
Attorney Richard c. Dale concluded the
argument on the part OF the defendants by
citing and comparing four decisions OF
Pennsylvania judges-Hare, Thayer. Sim
onton and Arnoid-and pointing out that
while the Judges were equally divided, the
right Of the decisions was In favor OF the
defendants. InJunctions to compare the
specific performance OF contracts OF per-
In the early days Of courts OF chancery.
One Of the four cases decided by the Penn
sylyania authorities-the Ford case--he
said. involved an entirely different state OF
facts.
In that case, where the injunction was
granted. the respondent was an opera singer
who sang with voice that nature had
given her. She was gifted by nature to an
extraordinary degree. and her voice could
not be duplicated by any amount OF training
or education and study.
Was the Star Of the Troupe.
When she broke her contract a breach
was committed which could not be oom-
pensated She was the star Of the troupe.
and without her the troupe could no longer
give the performance. That was not the
case IN the present instance. There were
any number OF other professional players
who could BE- secured to take the places Of
the defendants on the Philadelphia Ma
tional League team.
Mr.. Dale contended that IN every case
where the doctrine OF compelling the sps-
cino performance OF personal services was
involved there was unantmity on the part
OF every Judge that such performance
should not be enforced unless the contracts
were mutual ana equitable In their terms.
Under the contracts In dispute he con-
tended that the player In only employed
for one year specifically. with the right
given to the club to retain him indefinitely
In their service from year to year. which
practically ties the player to that club.
prevents him from securing any other en-
ployment. and at the same time relieves
the club OF the liability to pay him the
salary agreed upon by withholding the
right to dismiss him at their own WIN at
any time and In any place. whether Il be
New York or San Francisco. and leave
him to ind his way home the best way he
can, by giving him q ten days notice