The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1914-04-06
DAVE FULTZ EXPLAINS
ABOUT RESERVE CLAUSE
FRATERNITY AWAITS
COURTS DECISION
FAIRNESS TO MEMBERS DE-
MANDS GLANDS OFF, POLICY
is PRESIDENTS OPINION.

NEW YORK. April SIN answer
to the charges that the Baseball Play
ers' Fraternity was not observing It's
obligations to organized baseball in
refusing To advise its members in re-
spect TO the reserve clause of their
contracts. President David L. Fultz.
of tha organization, has issued the
following statement:
The fraternity has been more or
less severely criticised for not COM
polling It's members TO regard the so
called reserve rule contained In con-
TRACKS of organized ball. We have
refused to do this. for one reason,
because we have felt that we would
be- putting ourselves in a very ques-
tienabe light by discfplining our
members for not doing something the
law might later decide they were not
bound to do. Had we taken this STEP
we would have run the risk OF not
only being unf fair to our members,
but Of subiectng ourselves to actions
at law for unjust disciplinary meas
ures.
IF this very troublesome clause Il
tested, as now seems likely, we be-
lieve the result will prove that we
have been wise in the stand we have
taken.
Whether or not this clause is bind
/ in law is a question which has OFTEN
been discussed, with various lines OF
reasoning and with results which can
in no way he reconciled.
MANY persons apparently think OF
the clause as a fixed quantity, where-
as until very recently there were al
most as many different forms of II
as there were leagues in existence.
AS some of these clauses are undoubt-
eddy without force and others possi-
bly, good, no blanket opinion can be
an intelligent one. and those which
have been rendered without giving the
! text OF the particular clause passed
| upon are, it seems to me, valueless.
The reserve clauses as set forth
| in the two major leagues contracts
for the season of 1913. and under
which players who have jumped to
the Federal league must be held, II
at all, are identical and, to my mind.
are unauestionably unenforceable.
There are two alleged defects in
the provision; First, its inequitable
nature, in that 1t binds the player
for his entire career. while the Grub
is bound for only ten days, and, sec
ond, its neglect TO state what salary
shall be paid In the contract to be
entered into. The first objection Is
omewfaat involved, and does not need
to be considered here, as the second Is
sufficiently vital to rob the cause OF
any binding force.
This clause reads, in part, as fol-
lows:
Tin consideration of the compen-
sation paid to the party OF the Sec
end part by the party OF the first part,
as recited in clause l hereof, the party
of the second part agrees and oblf-
gates himself to contract with and
continue in the service of said party
- 81 ~
season at a salary to be determined
by the parties OF such contract
at can be easily seen that one OF
the vital elements OF the contract.
namely, the salary, has been left to
future negotiations. There is, there
fore, no meeting Of the minds Of the
party and no contract agreed upon
for the courts to enforce.
THE leading New York case on the
point is Metropolitan Exhibition COM
pany at one time operating the New
York ball club. against John NJ
Ward. the present business manager
of the Brooklyn tF'ederal ieaguel
club and a successful New York att
torney.
THE New York ball club attempted
by preliminary injunction to re-
strain Ward from playing with one
of the Brotherhood teams during the
war of 1890. The reserve clause OF
Wards contract was stronger than
the one OF today. as it provided that
the salary for the succeeding year
should not be less than $4,000, while
the present one provides no minimum
whatsoever, leaving the matter eDH
.ireiy with the owners
THE court. however, refused ~
grant the injunction. for the reason.
among others. that the terms were
too indefinite 1t said: THAT court
Of equity will not make ~ contract
which the parties themselves have
not made, and that It will not enforcl
an indefinite one. are elementary
propositions that need no citation 81
authorities to support them
I'm the case OF the Philadelphia
bah club against Lajoie n Penn&yf-
vania case which Is looked upon ~
uphoiding the reserve clause. the con~
tract provided that the salary under
the renewals should be the same, thus
doing away with the objection Of want