January 31st, 2013 by Jimmy Leiderman

George Wright’s Curly Shingle

While reading an early Barber Instructor Manual the other day, I came across one hairstyle that looked pretty familiar…

Curly Shingle Hairstyle

The ‘Curly Shingle’ look reminded me of George Wright’s hairstyle, which I’m sure you’ve all have seen in many of his photographs.

George Wright

What’s interesting is that George was kind enough to provided us with a rear view of his fashionable hairstyle when he showed us his (and Ross Barnes) batting and fielding poses in an 1875 instructional booklet.

Panel 8 (Best picture I could find) shows George’s trendy style.

George Wright 1875

Shaping your hair to look like some form of sea sponge or a well-defined brain must have been elegant back in the day, but I’m a ‘Favorite’ and ‘Saratoga’ sober-kind of guy à la King Kelly. Did I say sober?

Favorite - Saratoga Hairstyles

Make sure to visit the Barbers Manual link above and leave a comment or shoot me a message if you’re able to match other early stars with their favorite hairstyles or maybe even print them out, get confident and tell your local Supercuts hairdresser that you want George’s special today.

Remember that Justin Bieber’s hairstyle is so passé.
November 5th, 2012 by Jimmy Leiderman

Cigarette Pictures

I’m sure my baseball and non-sport card collecting community friends will appreciate the following article published on the August 2, 1888 edition of New York’s Daily Graphic.

*Please excuse any typos in my transcription.

Cigarette Pictures 1888

CIGARETTE PICTURES.

HOW THEY ARE SECURED BY THE ENTERPRISING PHOTO MEN.

“How would you like to see your photograph on a cigarette package?”

“What a horrid suggestion! Only actresses, base ball players and other dreadful people have such things taken.”

“And yet your own portrait may appear in such a way, by the thousands of copies, to-morrow or the day after.”

“Why, what can you mean? How is such a thing possible?” demanded the young girl laughingly.

“Very easily,” replied her male cousin. “No one who employs the services of any ordinary photographer is secure against a misfortune of the sort. The likeness – if pleasing to the eye – is always apt to be secured by some enterprising manufacturer of cigarette art products, who employs agents to travel about and gather up new material.”

“But. no decent photographic artist will sell his customers’ pictures – certainly not for so disgusting a purpose.”

Mike King Kelly

“That is true enough in theory, but not in practice. The cigarette portrait maker is acquainted with methods by which he is able to secure for his own use the photograph of pretty nearly any one he chooses. In his pay are men who go about in the guise of canvassers from one photographic studio to another, offering to buy club and other tickets and sell them on commission. Now, the selling of tickets in this way hes become well-nigh universal among sun-picture makers, who are not likely to refuse the gift of samples to anybody who will agree to drum up custom for them. This rule applies even to many concerns of the first class. In good faith, the pretended canvasser is supplied with a number of the prettiest cabinets, &c., in stock, which are subsequently turned over to his employer for consideration. Very likely two or three particularly charming ones are found in the lot, and these are reproduced without scruple, to serve as an advertisement for the ‘Dude’s Delight’ or ‘Crooked Cut’ brands of opium-loaded paper. If the pirates are not successful in obtaining the likeness they want by such methods they do not hesitate to secure them by bribing the employes in the studios. Not long ago the photographs of an entire young ladies’ school near Boston were gotten hold of in this manner and published. Fifty cents or a dollar apiece for copies of exceptionally seductive negatives will furnish a big temptation to a sub-assistant operator on dry plates. Thus no one who can ‘take pretty picture’ is safe against the danger of being mounted, in counterfeit presentment, on cigarette packages, in company with Mlle. Leila of the Bouffes Parisennes [sic], Mike Kelly of the Boston Base Ball Club, the queen of the New York demi-monde and other like celebrities.”

Bouffes-Parisiens

“That is all quite true,” reluctantly admitted Boston’s crack fashionable photographer yesterday, to whom the above remarks were quoted.

“We have small means of defence [sic] against these unprincipled people, who will stop at nothing in their effort to secure what they want. The portraits of private individuals are, as a rule, too commonplace for their uses; but when they can find one that is exceptionally pretty or attractive, they are always eager to get it. A young woman who has a pleasing picture taken in a photographic studio can hardly be certain that she will not subsequently appear as a cigarette advertisement, though the chances in an individual case of such an accident are necessarily small. If the likeness is exposed in the window or seen in any other way by the cigarette agents, they will surely try to obtain it – if it takes their eye – by bribery or otherwise. Such cases have given rise lately to suits against the producers in several instances, but it is almost impossible to get any legal satisfaction out of them. Under the circumstances it is advisable that young women who sit for pictures should avoid theatrical attitudes and low-necked dresses, which may render their counterfeit presentments more available from the cigarette fiend’s point of view. Sooner or later I hope to see a law passed that will hold these scoundrels and put a stop to their abominable business.”

“Will you not tell me,” inquired the writer, “something of the method by which these cigarette pictures are reproduced in such countless numbers and put on the market so as to ingeniously combine moral destruction with the physical injury inflicted by drugged tobacco upon youths.”

“It is very simple. A photographer is given by the cigarette manufacturer a contract to supply so many million pictures of the size and general description named. He goes into the market and buys, chiefly through agents, every new and suitable photograph he can lay his hands on of actresses. ballet dancers, popular celebrities, anything, in short, that will serve his purpose and attract the popular eye. These he mounts, in sizes matched, on huge cards or ‘mats,’ 100 or more on each. The card thus prepared is placed in front of the camera, and the whole taken on a scale as much smaller as may be desired. In this way whole sheets of portraits are struck off at once from the resulting negatives, to be subsequently cut apart, mounted and delivered to the cigarette maker, who place one of them in each package he sends out.”

Cigarette Maker

“But do these photographers hire people to sit for them?”

“Not as a rule, though it is sometimes done. Not long ago a manufacturer hit upon the notion of having the prettiest girls he could get to do the work pose as operators in the act of making cigarettes. Something off color being considered essential in a cigarette picture, every young woman had her dress so arranged as to expose about a foot, more or lees, of rather ugly ankle. It was difficult for the healthy eye to discover wherein the seductiveness of the thing lay, and yet the shop windows where these portraits were exhibited always had an eagerly curious crowd about them. At the same period of time, you will remember, cigarette pictures of all sorts were displaying a steady tendency to the worse, but a howl against the abuse arose in the newspapers, and the very objectionable ones were prudently withdrawn from circulation. It is only a temporary reform, however. I presume you are aware that Boston is the great depot for such photographic supplies, which are turned out here in incalculable quantities.. The most popular photographer in the city produces millions of them every year on the sly. There is money in the business.”

November 2nd, 2012 by Jimmy Leiderman

SABR PHRC Mystery Photo Supplement – November 2012

Don’t miss Mark Fimoff’s latest Mystery Photo Supplement for the SABR Pictorial History Research Committee Newsletter.

18 pages of excellent research work… as usual!

Oh, and thank you Mark for supporting The New York Clipper!

November 2012 PHRC Newsletter: PHRC Newsletter November 2012 (PDF)

October 30th, 2012 by Jimmy Leiderman

Base Ball Coat of Arms

I couldn’t pass on the opportunity of writing about this piece of information I ‘found’ yesterday while scouring old newspaper scans.

Base Ball Coat of Arms

The following was printed on the January 23, 1867 edition of the Brooklyn Daily Eagle:

THE BASE BALL COAT OF ARMS. -

We have received a photograph copy of a novel work of art, representing the coat of arms of the base ball fraternity of the United States. The design is of Mr. Andrew J. Garvey, of the Mutual Club, the original is an alto relievo cast, five feet six inches in height, in plaster ornamented with gold, and cost one thousand dollars. Copies in plaster and photographs, the latter very finely done are for sale by Mr. Garvey. The original cast will be on exhibition at Irving Hall, at the ball of the Mutual Club on Monday evening.

I have to admit that I don’t remember reading about this before, (information overload?) but at least the name of the artist sounded pretty familiar.

The Clipper also published the story on February 2, just a few days after the Mutual’s ball event:

BASE BALL COAT OF ARMS -  The public generally, and the devoted of our national pastime particularly, are indebted to the serious and artistic skills of Mr. Andrew J. Garvey, a member of the Mutual Club, for the production of a new and beautiful work of art, representing the “Coat of Arms of the Base Ball Fraternity of the United States.” The original design is modeled in plaster of Paris, ornamented with gold, stands 5ft 4in high, and cost, it is said, one thousand dollars. In the centre, resting upon a pedestal, is a shield, upon which are grouped together colors, bats, balls, belts, caps and all the paraphernalia of the ball field. Above this and partly hidden by the crest of the shield is a globe, circled with a star-studded belt, upon the top of which is perched an eagle, with wings outspread and bearing a menacing attitude. The background is formed by a stand of national colors, the folds of which fall gracefully about the picture, and on other side, with an arm resting carelessly on a point of the shield, is the life-size figure of a man, attired in playing costume, one holding a bat and the other having in his hand a ball, both looking very natural, though representing no particular celebrities as one would naturally suppose they did. The originality of conception and excellence of workmanship reflects great credit upon Mr. G; the more especially as it is his first essay in a fresh field of labor. [Update: Blurry words in scan 'deciphered' courtesy of John Thorn]

A quick search yielded another newspaper bit covering Garvey’s ‘work of art’, this time under the General City News section on the February 4, 1867 edition of The New York Times, where Garvey, yet again, identified as a member of the New York Mutual club, describes the coat of arms as “an alto-relievo in plaster of Paris, 5 feet 6 inches in height, and presents two figures in full playing costume upon the right and left, respectively holding a ball and bat, an American eagle in the centre, and the whole of interspersed with the emblems of the fraternity.” According to the article, the ‘work of art’ attracted considerable attention at the annual reunion of the Mutual Club.

After reading the clippings, somehow, I found myself thinking about the art used on a 1865 NABBP Club Certificate of Admission while trying to picture Garvey’s ‘Coat of Arms’ would have looked like.

NABBP Club Certificate

The certificate, which was sold in Barry Halper’s Collection auction, has similar characteristics to those mentioned in the both the Clipper and NY Times articles.

The name of the person that created the art for the certificate or the lithographic company that printed it weren’t disclosed in the auction listing.

Lets stop here and talk about Andrew J. Garvey, whose name sounded familiar.

Andrew J. Garvey

Andrew Jeffries Garvey, born in Troy around 1830, was a plasterer by trade who became famous for being one of Boss Tweed’s Ring favorite henchmen.

As a young man he interested himself in local Democratic politics and that’s when he attracted the notice of Tweed.

Garvey did much of the plastering work for the city of New York during Tweed’s corrupt reign over the city and his bills were so high that it was said that he could have plastered all of Europe at the same price and still made a pro?t.

In two years’ time, Garvey charged the city almost $3 million for plastering work, nearly 60 percent of which was kicked back to the Tweed Ring.

No wonder the New York Times called him the “Prince of Plasterers.”

The Times added: “Generations of plasterers yet unborn will take off their hats to his memory!” and finished with this pearl: “His good fortune surpasses anything recorded in the ‘Arabian Nights.’”

A.J. Garvey Cartoon by Thomas Nast

At the very first discovery of the frauds, Garvey fled from the city and sailed for Switzerland to avoid standing trial under the indictments found against him.

Garvey returned from hiding under promise of immunity if he would turn State’s evidence on Tweed’s trial that began on January 7, 1873.

During the trial, Garvey, with a straight face, said that he ?ed to Europe because he feared assassination at the hands of The Ring.

Tweed’s face went red with rage at this wanton perjury so at recess he followed Garvey into an ante-room of the court and said something sotto voce to the man he made a millionaire.

A reporter inquired of Garvey what Tweed had said.

“His language was blasphemous,”  answered Garvey.

The indictment against Garvey was dropped in consideration of the service he rendered.

He remained in New York in relative obscurity after the trial and later in life lived between England and Algiers.

Garvey died in England in 1897 as a very wealthy man and is buried in Woodlawn Cemetery in the Bronx.

More on Garvey and his relation with the Tweed Ring can be find online but I strongly suggest that you read a couple of books that stand out for mention: Alexander B. Callow’s ‘The Tweed Ring‘ and Kenneth D. Ackerman’s ‘Boss Tweed: The Rise and Fall of the Corrupt Pol Who Conceived the Soul of Modern New York‘.

It’s worth noting that in this short period of time [24 hours?] I wasn’t able to locate a single link between Garvey and Baseball, besides the ‘coat of arms’ newspaper articles.

Even though he’s presented as a member of the Mutual Club, his name isn’t present on the baseball literature and newspaper boxscores consulted.

No other ‘art works’ known from Garvey other than his overpriced plastering jobs for Tweed.

Did the original work exhibited at the Mutual’s annual soiree survive?

How about any plaster copies made for sale?

Could a photograph of the original work be pasted on one of Chadwick scrapbook pages after the fact that one was received at the Daily Eagle’s office?

How about other copies of the photograph?

Again, too many questions that need to be answered.

The fact that a Tammany Hall crook, linked to the Mutual Club and Boss Tweed, was the one who tried to create one of the earliest pieces of Baseball Heraldry was too good to pass on.

Am I the only one picturing Boss Tweed handling Garvey a one thousand dollar check for his overpriced creation?

My gratitude goes to Baseball History heavy-hitters John Thorn and Tom Shieber for taking the time to respond to my emails and help with yet another obscure research subject.

Please drop a comment below or shoot me an email [here] if you have anything on Garvey’s Base Ball Coat of Arms… After a 3-month blog hiatus, I was desperate to publish this post with just a full day of investigation and might have missed a lot of stuff, so please excuse me.

July 25th, 2012 by Jimmy Leiderman

25th July 1857

The photographic career of the great Roger Fenton (1819-1869) lasted only eleven years, but one has to be thankful that 155 years ago, on this day, Fenton was able to capture what are considered to be the first photographs of a cricket match, when the Royal Artillery played the Hunsdonbury Club on the old Artillery Ground.

Let the following images serve as tribute to the great Roger Fenton.

June 12th, 2012 by Jimmy Leiderman

1859 Cricketers: Have you seen ‘em?

I have to admit that I have a fascination with the group of English cricketers that toured the United States and Canada in 1859.

Over the years I’ve tried to read as many accounts about their lives as possible and, heck, I’ve also been engaged in a project to locate their gravestones around England cemeteries [I'll write more about this next time] but this time I’ll use some blog space to talk about a couple of photographs that were taken while these guys were cricketing on this side of the world.

It is well known that the 1859 English cricketers tour to Canada and the United States was big news back in the day, so it should come as no surprise that many third parties tried to capitalize on its success.

Two products that come to mind are T. H. Henna and W.H. Mason’s photograph of the cricketers aboard the Nova Scotian and Edwin Ade’s commemorative belt. Both products proved to be pretty successful and were widely reproduced and even pirated in the old country.

1859 Cricketers - Hennah

Before getting into the main focus of this post, lets write a bit about Hennah, Mason and the famous cricketers photograph.

W.H. Mason - Hennah & Kent

Photographer Thomas Henry Hennah was born in London in 1826. By 1852, Hennah and William Henry Kent, a photographer from the Isle of Wight, purchased a license from none other than William Fox Talbot, the photography pioneer, to make portraits using the calotype process.

In 1854, the Hennah and Kent partnership established a Talbotype Portrait Gallery in William Henry Mason’s Repository of Arts at 108 King’s Road in Brighton.

Business must have been very good back then for Hennah, Kent and Mason.

According to a letter addressed to Fox Talbot in 1862, it was said that it took a waiting period of a week to 10 days for a sitting at the Hennah and Kent studio!

William Henry Goodburn Mason (1810-1879), was a well known printseller and publisher (also a cricketer!) and the proprietor of Brighton’s Repository of Arts where he exhibited engravings, lithographs, aquatints and other works of art.

Mason had already been dealing in cricket lithographs since the early 1840s and he was the publisher of what is believed to be the most popular cricket print of any age titled ‘A cricket match between the counties of Sussex and Kent, at Brighton‘.

As the great John Arlott wrote in 1980, “Despite its popularity it was almost the ruin of the unhappy Mason. During the 30 years the plate lay idle, the picture was constantly ‘pirated’, copied, misattributed and wrongly described, but it was, meanwhile, becoming the best-known of all cricket prints; and still is to be met with in cricket pavilions all over the world.”

Mathew Brady - CD Fredricks - Cricket

Hennah was sent to Liverpool to photograph the cricketers aboard the Nova Scotian on the afternoon of that memorable September 7th of 1859 and less than a month after, on October 2nd, the finished product was being published by Mason in conjuction with the firm of John Wisden, one of the celebrated cricket tourists.

And just like it happened with Mason’s Sussex-Kent lithograph, the ‘England’s Twelve Champion Cricketers’ picture -as it was titled-became an instant hit and yet again, photographers across England began to reproduce and copy the image in every format available. ‘Legal’ reproductions like the one sold in Carte de Visite format by the London Stereoscopic Company and even ‘cheap’ pirated copies without any credits are still being found today.

The cricketers were celebrities so it should come as no surprise that our good old American businessmen weren’t going to try and capitalize on the opportunity just like the folks across the pond were doing already.

Newspapers, merchants, restaurateurs and even the Astor House hotel that served as the English cricketers headquarters while in New York, did their best to attract customers attention and profit from the special occasion.

Noted photographers Mathew Brady [Click here for more on Mathew Brady and an early cricket ambrotype] and Charles DeForest Fredricks started advertising photographs of the celebrated cricketing visitors while the tour was still going strong.

So besides Henna’s photograph, -taken and published in England- the pictorial archive of the 1859 All England XI is very limited, and this is why I considered this an interesting topic to write about.

According to Brady’s ad, an “Imperial Photograph” of the group was being exhibited at his Broadway gallery and copies of  “a fine stereoscopic view of the cricket ground, with cricketers playing” were available for sale.

1859 All England Eleven - Engraving

On October 15th Harper’s published a couple of engravings, one of them [shown above] after an ambrotype by Brady and portraying the “Eleven of All England”.

It’s worth noting that John Lillywhite and John ‘Foghorn’ Jackson were not pictured with the rest of the cricketers for the occasion.

Brady’s ambrotype was most likely taken outdoors between October 3rd-5th and since John Lillywhite was nursing a “bad hand” and didn’t take part on the 3 day match, he officiated as an umpire and that’s why I assume he was left out of the picture. Don’t have a theory for Jackson’s absence, though.

But was this the “Imperial Photograph” of the cricketers that Brady mentioned in the newspaper advertisement as the one being exhibited in his Broadway gallery?

It could very well be the one but I can’t be sure.

1857 Mathew Brady Marketing

By the mid 1850s Brady had been advertising a ‘new’ process to create life-size portraits from original ambrotypes with “even superior accuracy” to his already well known imperial photographs.

I couldn’t pass on posting this newspaper clipping from the October 17, 1857 issue of Harper’s Weekly.

The ‘Prince of Photographers’ revolutionized the business of photography and helped invent modern advertising with his newspaper ads and elaborate credit lines.

“PHOTOGRAPHY was born in the United States, and the sceptre has not departed from us.”

Priceless.

What about the “fine stereoscopic view of the cricket ground, with cricketers playing”?

Right now I can just remember about two images, both engravings, of the 1859 cricket match at Hoboken.

The fist one, and the one I think was made after a Brady photograph is the other engraving published by Harper’s on October 15th, 1859.

It appeared on the top-half of a double page spread [pages 664 and 665] above the earliest known Harper’s baseball woodcut.

1859 Cricket Match Hoboken Harper's

I’m inclined to believe this is the same image after the photograph that was sold by Brady in stereoview format, but again, not sure.

I’ve asked a couple of sources, but they haven’t seen this particular stereoview, so the search has to continue.

The other image of the match was published in Leslie’s Illustrated Newspaper on the same date as the Harper’s engraving, and this one, I think, is the one made after Fredrick’s photograph and also the one that ultimately made it into the advertised lithograph.

1859 Cricket Engraving - Leslie's

From his ad:

Mr. C.D. Fredericks [sic], Photographer, in connection with Messrs. Bien & Turner will publish on SATURDAY NEXT, 8th inst., a photo-lithograph of the ALL-ENGLAND ELEVEN, with autographs of the players and a correct view of the Cricket Ground at Hoboken, forming a most valuable picture – size 15 by 20 inches.

Copies may be obtained on and after Saturday of either of the above named parties, at 50 cents each.

Fredricks was known to provide photographs for Leslie’s Illustrated, but again, no luck while searching for this particular photo-lithograph.

Considering that Julius Bien was one of the most talented lithographic artists in New York around that time, this particular piece must have been fantastic and of similar quality to Edincott’s 1856 “All United States Eleven” lithograph [Shown here: Mr. Cuyp]

And there’s another photograph of the whole group of cricketers sitting in a studio, but I wasn’t able to find much about it other than a mention on Stephen Green’s ‘Backward Glances‘ about it being presented to MCC Museum at Lord’s in 1972 by Professor Howard Comfort on behalf of the C.C. Morris Cricket Library.

1859 Cricketers - CC Morris Library

Unfortunately, Marylebone Cricket Club has no information regarding the photographer or the location of the studio where this photograph was taken.

SABR member Beth Hise, curator and author of ‘Swinging Away’ [go buy the book if you haven't already!] told me after an email contact [two if counting Tom Shieber's... Thanks Tom!] that she knew of the photograph, but guys at MCC were still cataloguing their photography collection when she was working on the book and exhibition and never came across the print from CC Morris there.

My research inquiry to C.C. Morris Library might yield some results after all. They don’t have information on the photographer/studio but they will try to remove the photograph from its old frame and see if there’s any imprint to be unearthed after all these years.

I just can’t wait.

Hopefully I’ll be able to update this post with new information in a couple of days.

Again, many questions and not many answers , but I just ran out of time, so shoot me an email or drop a comment below if you have something to share and would like to help with this research project.

Update [June 15, 2012]

Kathleen Burns from C.C. Morris Cricket Library went the extra mile and after removing the backing of the photograph, she sent the following information:

Unfortunately after removing the backing of the photograph, the photographer’s name was not available.

The following is the only writing on the back:

Parr’s Team of 1859

First English Cricketers to visit the United States.

Match played October 10th – 13th, 1859, versus Twenty-two Americans.

Englishmen won by seven wickets.

The writing on the mat is not very clear (G Sautter 4933?)

I need to search deeper but my first reaction is that the photograph was taken in a Philadelphia studio instead of a New York one.

The cricketers arrived in Philly on the midnight of October 9th and proceeded to the Girard House Hotel. (where they met Henry Chadwick)

They left the city on Saturday, October 15th.

G. Sauter Label

‘G Sautter’ must have been George Sauter, a “manufacturer of Looking Glasses, Picture Frames & Passe-Partouts, Also, dealer in Paintings, Engravings, Chromos, and other works of art, 138 South Eighth Street Philadelphia”. The previous information taken from a paper label found in a non-related miniature portrait.

According to the 1860 census, George G. Sauter (1837-?) was living in Philadelphia with his parents, Charles F. Sauter, who seems to have had a furniture store, and Caroline Sauter.

George gave his occupation as “manufacturer of P Partouts” with assets of $4000.

By 1870 he was married to Christina Sauter and they had a daughter Mary Sauter, aged 2, but by 1880 he was living only with his mother, and even later in 1900 he was living as a lodger and his occupation was art dealer.

To be continued…

Update [June 21, 2012]

Found some interesting things while researching the ‘Philadelphia’ photograph and Sauter.

It didn’t occurred to me that George Sauter’s business was located just a couple of blocks away from the Girard House Hotel were the cricketers stayed while in Philadelphia.

I’m including a couple of map captures showing both addresses on a 1858-1860 Philly Atlas’ map and a current 3D view from Google Maps, with point A being Sauter’s address and point B marking Girard House’s location.

George Sauter and Girard House Maps

The photograph could have been taken in a nearby studio, but more than a dozen were established near these two locations. Henry C. Phillips studio was located next to the Girard House Hotel and J.E. McClees’ and Wenderoth’s were on the same block. James Cremer studio was close to Sauter’s at 18 South Eight Street and John Lawrence Gihon’s studio was located just a block away from the Hotel on Chestnut avenue for what it’s worth.

I’ve been unable to find a newspaper account that mentions the cricketers’ photo session or any kind of advertisement where the photograph was made available for sale.

1859 Cricketers Arrival at Girard House

I did, however, find a neat newspaper clipping of the cricketers arrival at the Girard House Hotel.

As mentioned before, the group arrived in Philadelphia on the midnight of Sunday, October 9th of 1859.

Fred Lillywhite, the cricketers (Tom Hayward’s not mentioned) and 3 others (highlighted in green) in the group registered at the Hotel that midnight.

Harry Lillywhite, Fred and John’s brother, traveled with the group from New York, and although he didn’t play in Philadelphia, he did take the field in Rochester later on October 21.

More on Harry can be read here: http://thenewyorkclipper.com/my-name-is/

William Ellis, an english-born canadian engineer and cricket player, also stayed at the Girard House.

He took part of the match played at Montreal on September 24-27 between the All Englanders and the Twenty-Two of Lower Canada and served as an umpire on the Philadelphia match.

Ellis was born near London, England in 1826 and traveled to Canada in 1853. Records show he was already playing cricket in Canada by 1856. In 1864 he was elected mayor of Prescott. By 1875, he was the President of the Prescott Cricket Club in Ontario.

The third person traveling with the cricketers was G.P. Baker.

Godfrey Phipps Baker

Godfrey Phipps Baker was born August 25, 1822 in England.

Although some sources call him the ‘Father of cricket in Ottawa’, it was his father, George William Baker, the one who founded the Bytown Cricket Club in 1849, after arriving in Canada in 1832.

G.P. Baker accompanied the cricketers since they arrived in Montreal and was mentioned by Fred Lillywhite on various occasions on his tour book.

Here are some of the lines that Fred Lillywhite wrote about Baker:

“… a gentlemen to whose kindness and attention the cricketers owe a large debt of gratitude.”

“A more enthusiastic and true lover of the noble game of cricket never existed.”

Baker [picture shown at right] was was postmaster of the City of Ottawa for more than 25 years and was an active cricket player with the local club.

He died March 16, 1882.

The last name that got my attention was H. Sharp of New York.

Let me write a couple of lines on Henry E. Sharp, even though he deserves more than a full blog post just for him.

Sharp, a glass stainer by trade and then President of the New York Cricket Club had been an active and enthusiastic cricketer for many years.

Tom Melville wrote in ‘The Tented Field’ that he was probably the best recipient of the title of ‘Father of American Cricket.’ Couldn’t agree more.

In 1856 he tried to organize the first American vs English match, but unfortunately the affair was not successful.

He took the field on the Hoboken match and officiated as umpire in Philadelphia, where and according to some, one of his rulings marked international cricket’s first controversy.

Sharp inexplicably called a wide when English player Robert Carpenter was caught.

Jones Wister claimed that it had cost Americans the match when “the umpire declined to rectify his palpable error.”

Since I can’t stop writing about baseball, Sharp, who was also Wilkes’ Spirit of the Times cricket correspondent at some point in life, wrote that Jim Creighton’s fatal injury had occurred during a St. George’s vs Willow match.

Sharp was known for being -in the words of Melville- “Open minded and sympathetic towards baseball.

Time to stop writing and resume the search for more clues on the whereabouts of the Hoboken photographs and the identity of the Philadelphia photographer…

May 18th, 2012 by Jimmy Leiderman

A Massachusetts Game Daguerreotype

HOF - Richfield Springs Mercury 1944

The following is an article that appeared in the September 7, 1944 edition of the Richfield Springs Mercury.

WANTS EARLY PHOTOGRAPHS OF BASEBALL GAMES

A request for early photographs of baseball contests prior to 1912 has been issued by the Hall of Fame and National Museum of Base Ball in Cooperstown. 1912 is the earliest date of any recorded photograph in the museum and it is a picture of the Phillies vs. New York on Memorial Day, May 30, 1912.

The earliest known photograph of a baseball game is one taken in September 1860 of a match game played in Worcester, Massachusetts between the “Excelsior” club of Upton and the “Union” club of Medway. That was an interesting contest in as much as the some was for 100 points and was conceded to Upton on the beginning of the sixth day, with only 50 runs scored. It has been reported by Edward Francis Coffin of Worcester that a daguerreotype artist took pictures of this contest. The National Museum of Base Ball has no daguerreotype of this contest, or any photographs earlier than 1912 which can be authenticated.

Anyone having photographs of baseball games earlier than 1912 should get in touch with Miss Janet R. MacFarlane, acting director of the National Museum of Base Ball. Cooperstown, New York.

Let me start by posting a link to an article about Janet MacFarlane that the Hall of Fame recently published.

MacFarlane served as director and curator of the Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum from 1943 to 1946 and I think Baseball historians and researchers should know more about her and what she accomplished.

Here’s the link: Stepping Up – Janet MacFarlane

Now lets get into the HOF’s photograph request and Edward Francis Coffin’s story.

I’ve got to tell you that I’m a bit surprised that -assuming the information is correct- the Hall of Fame didn’t have any pre-1912 baseball ‘contests’ photographs in their collection back in 1944.

Also have to wonder about the photograph from the Phillies vs Giants Memorial Day 1912 game that the article mentions.

I’m not into early 20th century baseball photography, but I assume this is a well known picture among researchers.

Hopefully Tom Shieber will read this post and enlighten me (us) about this.

How about Mr. Coffin’s story about the daguerreotype artist taking pictures at the 1860 match played in Worcester?

Edward Francis Coffin, a respected art and book dealer in Worcester, was born in 1873. He served as Secretary of the Worcester Historical Society. Part of his correspondence is in the American Antiquarian Society collection.

The match between the Excelsior of Upton and the Union of Medway was played 13 years before Coffin was born, so his daguerreian artist story was either taken from an early printed account or directly from someone who attended the game.

Excelsior vs Upton 1860

Even though 1860 seems late for a daguerreian artist to be taking pictures, the story is interesting.

This 1860 match was no ordinary contest. The Excelsiors and Unions had been playing under the Massachusetts game rules for quite some time, and on that year they played for $1,000. A hefty sum back in the day.

Coffin was right. The match turned out to be a lenghty one due to continuous bad weather conditions.

An interesting bit I found while researching this match was that the Excelsior Club of Upton squared their accounts and disbanded upon arriving home from Worcester and presented all the property owned by the club to the Wide Awakes, another local nine.

Back to the ‘Daguerreotype’ story.

1860′s baseball ‘in action’ photographs are rare, let alone one showing a Massachusetts Game taking place.

I might be wrong, but the only photograph I know of that is presumed to show a scene of this kind of game, was one taken at Boston Common and published around 1865.

Boston Common Stereoview

Considering that by 1860 the daguerreotype process was rarely used due to the proliferation of easier and cheaper processes like the ambrotype and even the carte de visite, I find it difficult that a daguerreotype of the ‘Worcester Match’ was ever taken.

Calling the photographer a ‘Daguerreotype Artist’ would have been common back then even if not a practitioner of this art, so even though there was probably no daguerreotype taken of that match, I can only wonder if any photographic evidence of it was ever taken and if it might have survived after all these years.

I can only hope that Mr. Coffin was right.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox

Join other followers