HERE'S THE SOLUTION
HERE'S THE SOLUTION
Dear Phil: I submit that whoever wrote the material under the baseball picture had his eyes and his brain badly out of place, one with the other. Remembering the play as I do I would offer the following as more correct:
Situation before ball was pitched—man on third and two out. Batter has hit the ball directly at third baseman who is set to field it. Pitcher (Roger O'Connor), is standing where he would be bound to be just in front of his box and watching third. Runner also looking over his shoulder at ball on its way to third. Shortstop is starting to right and back to back up third baseman. Second base out of picture on left. First baseman covering in fast to cover his bag. Catcher (Archie Ramsey) also looking to see whether third baseman will make the play. Coacher on each baseline in usual positions and wearing sweaters (probably only one apiece). Game: Dartmouth vs. Harvard, 1892; score (final D. 4—H. 3). Won't guarantee the game, however, but it looks like it. If so writer may be found on fence to left of backstop.
Dartmouth College.
THE BASEBALL PUZZLE
Editor Dartmouth Alumni Magazine: In the April number of your MAGAZINE, at the head of the article, "The Rough and Ready Eighties," there is a picture of a baseball game. I played on that diamond almost every day, except when there was snow on the ground, while college was in session, during the four years '85, '86, '87 and '88, playing first base the last three years on the varsity team, thus becoming well acquainted with the lay of that diamond.
I do not recognize this particular picture and of course could not say what game is being played, as we played a good many games during those years. I think I do recognize myself on first base as I was 6 ft. 1 in. in height and weighed 185 lbs. In regard to the question, "What is happening?" I am going to answer it as I see it. Looking at the picture and beginning at the right: First, the umpire; in front of him the catcher; in line with the catcher, the coacher of the other team; in front of the catcher, the batter who has hit a bunt (this is shown by every player looking in that direction). Next, the pitcher, fielding the bunt; next, the third baseman; and across from him the first baseman; next, the shortstop, and lastly, near the horse and buggy, the second baseman running to back up the first base. This completes the infield and the battery Naturally, it being a lefthanded batter, the shortstop and second baseman are playing well over to the right. None of the outfielders are in sight.
I hope this answers correctly the question, "What is happening?"
Another prank, during the Eighties, not mentioned in this article and which I think should be mentioned, was the sight, early one morning, of a large traverse sled loaded with a cord of four-foot wood, astride the ridgepole of Reed Hall. A careless teamster had left his sled and load on the street the previous night. Needless to say, the sled and wood came down much more easily than they went up during the night.
Strafford, Vt.
ANOTHER SOLUTION
Dear Mr. Editor: The cut in your March issue entitled "West side of Campus in the Eighties" is easy to explain if anyone knows the general layout of the diamond in those days.
I do not know the particular play shown, but I do know the location of the diamond.
The picture was taken with a wide angle lens which distorts distances and shows the infield only.
The man you call the first baseman, is the pitcher in his box. Your right fielder is the first baseman endeavoring to reach his bag which is immediately in front of the front door of the Proctor House. The second baseman is apparently just out of sight. The shortstop is in position and the third baseman is playing off his base and is in position to receive the infield drive or has already picked up the ball, and is about to throw to first.
The play is apparently this: Two out; man on third; the batter drives a grounder to third base and the runner on third who has been given a big lead, dashes for home. The play of course, is to first base, hence the indifference of the catcher.
If you will examine the position of the backstop you will see that my layout of the diamond is correct. New York.
EIGHTY-SIX.
DE WITT DUNCAN AGAIN
My dear Mr. Comstock: I have seen in recent issues of the ALUMNI MAGAZINE anecdotes concerning Indian graduates of the College. Several references have been made to De Witt C. Duncan of the class of '61. Curiously enough, I have found in a small album of my mother's, in which were inscribed sentiments and autographs, which was the custom in her youth, the following inscription:
"Ever onward and upward "Yours truly, "De Witt C. Duncan, "Lisbon, Oct. 29, 1861."
It seems that Mr. Duncan taught school during certain periods of his college life in Lisbon, N. H. For at least one term, earlier than the date of this inscription, my mother had attended the Lisbon High School, and I have often heard her speak of Mr. Duncan who, she said, was the best teacher she ever had. The date of this inscription indicates that he probably went back to Lisbon directly after his graduation from college and taught there for a short time before going west, where he made his permanent home. This item may have no particular historical interest but it furnishes a little side light on the life of a very interesting character.
4750 Sheridan Rd., Chicago, Ill.
POEM IN FEATURE SECTION
To the Editor: I am inclosing a copy of a poem entitled "The Indian's Revenge." It is copied from an old manuscript found among old papers in Keene, N. H. The paper, style of writing, and ink all indicate it to be not less than one hundred years old. It was found among old letters, sermons, and records which were between the years of 1807 and 1840. I think there can be no question of its being one hundred years old. Have you ever seen this poem? Do you know anything of its history? What I have may be a copy of a poem or it may be the original manuscript. I have no means of telling.
Was there ever an Indian at Dartmouth named Strongbow? I cannot find his name in the Dartmouth Alumni record.
You are at liberty to make any use of the poem you see fit. It is interesting on account of its age rather than literary qualities.
Lyndon Institute, Lyndon Center, Vt.
THE VANDERBILT REPORT
(An Expose)
Hard on the heels of the Carnegie report anent the amateur status of college athletes, comes the Vanderbilt report which is even harder on the toes of the supposedly amateur babies in last year's Baby Parade at Asbury Park.
It is common knowledge that Baby Josey of 437 South Washington Street, Pompton Lakes, New Jersey, won in a toddle, in the feature event for three-year-olds and under. Now it develops that Baby Josey was born in Mauch Chunk several hours before the parade, and iiQt in Pompton Lakes at all!
The coach of the Pompton Lakes contingent immediately offered to let Josey listen to his watch tick every hour on the hour, and Josey, not realizing how this might color her future in the ICUUUU, accepted the offer.
Now, the question is, did Josey lose her amateur standing by this procedure? The Vanderbilt Committee says yes and further states that such corruption undermines the entire fabric and threatens the very future of Amateur Baby Parades in this country. Baby Josey, when questioned, is said to have replied, "Da,"* this having been interpreted by the Board as a full confession of her part in the affair.
*Da in the Slavonic, Great Russian, White Russian and Ukrainian means yes.
IS BABY ANNIE A PROFESSIONAL?
As if this were not enough, the Yanderbilt authorities (not to be confused with the Vanderbilt Convention which meets only every second year) have conclusively shown that the runner-up, Baby Annie Grewl, is not en- tirely without soiled skirts. It seems that Baby Annie has been, and is being, supported entirely, as well as in part, by the senior Grewls and was actually induced to enter the Grewl household by them. Now, if that isn't subsidizing, the investigators want to know, what is?
As if in reply to their own question, they point out the thoroughly unsportsmanlike details of the treatment accorded the winners in the "cutest twins" division. Everyone will remember the excitement attending the decision—two minutes left and the judges divided between the Hoey twins (male) dressed as bunnies, and the Rosenthal twins (mixed) dressed as bunnies. Finally, Thorp (Carlisle) stepped forward and raised two Hoey arms in token of victory. The decision was very popular with the Hoey contingent; it was not quite so popular with Rosenthal adherents.
Now it seems that the Hoey twins are the children of Ed Hoey, well-known Yonkers butcher, who rarely suffers from colds, if at all. Even before the ice-cream was cool that night Mr. Hoey reports that the twins were invited to a party in Hoboken, while he, Ed Hoey, received a real estate map of Hoboken and two tickets for "After Dark." This, the Committee points out, is a particularly flagrant case of proselyting and unjustified pressure on the part of a rival community.
From this report it looks very much as though Baby Parading in this country was rotten at the core as well as a little bruised on the surface.
Unless an immediate clean-up follows the Vanderbilt Report, it might be well to end them all. It might anyhow—it couldn't possibly do any harm.
After all, 1905 news reel views will do as well as this year's, as is the case with "Niagara Falls Dons Winter Mantle," "Cherry Tree Blossoms in Nation's Capital," "Battle Fleet Off On Practice Cruise," or "Stirring Plays Mark Yale-Harvard Game." Babies are all alike anyway, and so, for that matter, are parades. ROBERT J. MISCH '25.
12 Went 72nd St., New York.
THREE TOWERS
