Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1951-08-05
Congress Is Taking Course in Baseball
By Miriom Gutenberg


like any one else. The chairman of
the House Monopoly Subcommittee
feels strongly about the Brooklyn
Dodgers. One member has the
Rochester ball club in his district
and thinks it's q fine ball club. A
California legislator believes some
West Coast. teams would look good
in the majors.
They all know about Stan Musial,
Jackie Robinson and Joe DiMaggio.
They are aware of the tight pennant
race in the American League, and
they realize that Clyde Vollmer is
currently the wonder boy of baseball.
But, like other ball fans who read
but don't study the sports pages.
that's about all they know about
baseball.
Which is why last weeks hearings
on the antitrust aspects Of the great
American sport developed into such
curious blend of bleacher gossip and
legal parlance. Sports writer's who
turned out en- masSe to cover the first
Congressional investigation of base
ball were appalled, at the abysmal
ignorance of the legislators about
such matters as waivers, options and
what is a Class D League. On the
other hand, they couldn't understand
why the congressman should stray
into discussion of Leo Durocher's
strategy and whether the st. Louis
Browns will ever sell Ned Carver.
They were puzzled, too, when the
same hearing produced such far
removed terms as -balling" and
"cartels."
Jonus-Like Role
Actually, the legislators found
They had made it their duty as
judiciary subcommittee to find out
whether baseball was violating anti
trust lawS-and, if so, whether base
ball should be brought on the right
side of the law by exempting it from
monopoly curbs. But, at the same
time, they had the typical American
feeling about baseball that made
them look with wide-eyed adulation
on the great Ty Cobb and inspired
them to ask questions hardly relevant
to antitrust laws.
Through it all, however, the legis-
lators were gradually getting an
education about a legal structure
more complex than Sam insult ever
dreamed of in his holding company
heyday.
They needed no lesson in what
constituted a monopoly. When ap-
parently competing industries get
together to interfere with full and
free competition, you have monop-
oly-and the subcommittee is against
it, The question is whether baseball
can be considered in those terms.
Here is an industry governed by the
rules of it's members rather than by
free competition. Here are ball
players tied by contract for their
baseball life Here are member clubs
with the power to veto where other
members clubs could practice their
ball-piaying trade.
The subcommittee members had
before them a 1922 Supreme Court
decision that baseball was neither
interstate nor commerce, and there
fore was not subject to antitrust
laws. On the other hand, they were
aware of pending suits claiming
baseball was monopoly, as we'll as
pending bills of their colleagues to
exempt the game from antitrust
laws.
On the roStrum with the legislators
were Committee Counsel E. Ernest
Goldstein and Associate Counsel
John Paul Stevens Their principal
chore was to make sure that the two
weeks of testimony give the subcom-
mittee fair idea Of what makes
baseball tick.
From the witnesses-Ty Cobb and
baseball executives-the subcommit-
tee drew history and the details of
working agreements between the
leagues. The history was designed
to show the coming of age travails
of baseball, and why its rules were
written. The legislators had to study
the agreements in detail to under
stand how organized baseball is at