Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1912-05-20
A Strike for principle. y

Those Detroit base ball players who
have gone on \ strike for q principle are
displaying a species of fanaticism that Is
by no means uncommon. There are many
men who sacrifice their real interests for
the sake of some theory of existence and
some abstraction of right. Tremendous
economic waste Is caused by these fights
for principle on wrong issues. The his
tory of industrial relations is full of in
stances of entirely unjustifiable conflicts
that have not advanced causes In the
slightest degree, but have cost immense
sums of money and imposed heavy losses
upon innocent people.
The principle for which the Detroit
players have struck is that a. man should
be given a hearing before he is punished.
On the face of it this is sound doctrine,
but unfortunately for the strikers in this
instance, it is contrary to rule that has
prevailed for years in organized base ball.
During recent seasons at least 1t has been
the practice for the league executives to
act upon the statements and reports OF
umpires and to mete out suspensions
without giving the accused any oppor-
tunity whatever to be heard. In a few
cases of unusually grave misconduct on
the part of a player the right of appeal
has been granted and the matter inves-
tigated,~perhaps with the result of an ex-
oneration or a shortening of the term of
suspension. Any other system would
work to the disadvantage of the game.
The players are daily performers in their
line of business, and it would be seriously
disruptive of discipline on the playing
field to allow man who is under serious
cbo Of mite 20 N evil
dence before the public pending an In
quiry into an alleged offense.
There have been numerous instances in
the past justifying principle strike"
quite as fully as the present, but the
players have not seen At to protest against
a rule which has become one of the fixed
methods OF league management. Thus
this wholesale breach of discipline on the
part Of the Detroit players utterly lacks
Justification on the ground that there is
novelty in the condition upon which pro-
test is entered. No pretense is made that
this is the elimination of long series of
injustices, or, in fact. that there is any
particular injustice in the punishment in
this individual case. And here is where
the strike is SO completely lacking in ele-
ments to appeal to public sympathies. 1t
is not as though there were any question
about the facts. The league president in
this case CHANGED to see the affair person
ally and required no testimony to prove
that q player had deliberately violated one
of the fundamental rules of the sport by
leaving the playing field during game to
chastise physically one of theSspectators
who had criticised him. In the circum-
stances it would seem that the league
management could take no other course
than that which it has pursued. unless it
Is inclined to surrender the affairs of the
organization absolutely to the players.
There may be some degree of sympathy
for the players In the abstract on the
ground that they are under the dominion
of rigid system of contract making and
virtually without recourse to the courts,
but when the case is examined on it's
merits it is impossible to approve the
wholesale INSTRUMENTATION of the offending
players associates.