Cobb (61 page)

Wood and myself are considerably disappointed in our business proposition, as we had $2,000 to put into it and the other side quoted us $1,400 and when we finally secured that much it was about two o'clock and they refused to deal with us, as they had men in Chicago to take the matter up with and they had no time, so we completely fell down and of course we felt badly about it.

Everything was open to Wood and he can tell you about it when we get together. It was quite a responsibility and I don't care for it again, I can assure you.

With kindest regards to Mrs. Leonard, I remain, sincerely,

Ty Cobb

These rather vague references would not have identified Cobb as a gambling man and possible fixer, had he not mentioned two thousand dollars and Joe Wood as partner in a “business proposition.” Wood's letter to Leonard was more specific, reading:

Cleveland, O., Friday

Enclosed find certified check for sixteen hundred and thirty dollars ($1,630).

Dear Friend “Dutch”:

The only bet West could get up was $600 against $420 (10 to 7). Cobb did not get up a cent. He told us that and I believed him. Could have put some at 5 to 2 on Detroit, but did not, as that would make us put up $1,000 to win $400.

We won the $420. I gave West $30, leaving $390, or $130 for each of us. Would not have cashed your check at all, but West thought he could get it up to 10–7, and I was going to put it all up at those odds. We would have won $1,750 for the $2,500 if we could have placed it.

If we ever get another chance like this we will know enough to try to get down early.

Let me hear from you, “Dutch.”

With all good wishes to yourself and Mrs. Leonard, I am, always,

Joe Wood

When Cobb was summoned to explain himself, he appeared at Landis's office with two costly Detroit and Chicago lawyers. But Landis did not allow them to interrupt his rapid-fire interrogation. A transcript of the Cobb questioning, in main part, reads as follows:

Q. What is your full name?

A. Tyrus Raymond Cobb.

Q. And your residence?

A. Augusta, Georgia.

Q. And you were connected with the Detroit club in 1919?

A. Yes, sir; I was.

Q. In what capacity?

A. As a player.

Q. Who was manager of Detroit through 1919?

A. Hughie Jennings.

Q. You became manager?

A. 1921.

Q. You managed the team from 1921 to 1926, inclusive?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Mr. Cobb, I hand you a document, dated Augusta, Ga., Oct. 23, 1919, addressed to “Dear Dutch” and signed, “Sincerely, Ty,” which will be marked Exhibit One. And I ask you to look at that document and tell me if you wrote that letter.

A. It is my letter.

Q. I call your attention to the letter which you have just identified as having been written by you and ask you if you recall the occasion of having written that letter.

A. Yes, I wrote the letter.

Q. And what was it about?

A. It was in response to a request by Leonard that I ascertain from Wood [Joe Wood] the amount of money that was wagered on this game in question.

Q. The amount of money that was wagered on what?

A. On the game in question.

Q. That is the game of Sept. 25, 1919?

A. Yes, sir. He stated—you want me to relate what he said?

Q. Yes.

A. He stated that he was leaving and wanted to check up on the amount that had been wagered.

……

Q. Give me the conversation, as near as you can remember it, just what was said.

A. Well, he was leaving, could not be there after the game, and he wanted to find out as quickly after the game as possible—he wanted me to ascertain from Wood, the amount that was paid. That is, to the best of my knowledge.

Q. When did you first hear that a bet was to be put on the ball game?

A. Leonard came to me and wanted to know who would be a man they could trust, and that is where I figured that the—

Q. What was your answer to him?

A. I told him I would get a man for him.

Q. And what did you do along that line?

A. I pointed out West, a man that was employed at the park.

Q. Where was West at the time you pointed him to Leonard?

A. Well, to the best of my knowledge, he was either close to the edge of the playing field or was inside the field.

……

Q. What did you understand Leonard to mean when he asked you the name of somebody he could trust, or you could trust, whichever it was?

A. Well, I figured that he wanted to bet on the game.

Q. What made you think so?

A. Well, that is the only inference that I could gather from what he said.

Q. Had you any conversations with him before about betting on ball games?

A. No, sir.

Q. Was there anything else in his inquiry to you that you have not mentioned here that would indicate to you the kind of trust he wished to repose in somebody?

A. Well, there might have been other conversations. I am only relating what I can remember—away back there. And there might have been other things. For instance, he talked about ascertaining what amount of money would be put up by Wood, see? He wanted me to inquire.

Q. Did you have any conversation with Wood about this bet?

A. I did not. I did not until after the game. That is—wait a minute. I did not until I asked him concerning the amount of money bet.

Q. Did you have any conversation with Speaker about this game?

A. None whatever.

Q. Betting on the game?

A. No.

Q. Did you bet any money on the game?

A. Positively did not.

Q. Did you intend to?

A. I did not.

Q. Did you have any conversation with anybody whatever about betting on the game?

A. I did not.

Q. You played in that game?

A. I must have. I have never seen the box score yet.

Q. I now hand you the box score, taken from a paper of Sept. 26. Does that box score refresh your memory as to whether you played in that game?

A. It indicates I must have played in the game.

Q. Well, after this conversation with Leonard, if you had not played in the game, you probably would remember you had not been in the game, wouldn't you?

A. At this time, I would not. I don't know anything about it; I don't remember any of the details concerning the game.

Q. You have no recollection of the game?

A. No.

Q. How it was played?

A. No.

Q. It appears from this box score that Detroit won, 9 to 5.

A. Yes.

Q. I wish you would look at your letter, and, calling your attention to the language of that part of the letter starting with “Wood and I.”

A. Yes, “Wood and myself.”

Q. Now, make any statement you desire to make respecting the language which you used in that letter to Leonard.

A. In writing this letter to Leonard, it is apparent that I, in a way, tried to veil the betting end of it as a betting proposition. I stated to Leonard just what Wood had told me. The amounts of $2,000 to $1,400 quoted by the other side was entirely different from the information that Wood conveyed to Leonard in his letter, which indicated I was not in on the betting proposition, that Wood merely put me off by giving me the wrong information and a fictitious amount.

Q. Now, in this statement that Leonard made to me in California and which I have read into this record, he tells of a conversation under the stands after the game played the preceding day. Was there any such conversation between you, Wood, Speaker and Leonard?

A. Positively no. If such a frameup were true, why should we stop for a few minutes under the stands and arrange such an important matter? The players—both sides—come to the field through a dugout from their respective club houses. Where would we have the time and where could we go for just a few minutes, as Leonard has stated, to frame up such an important matter?

Q. Do you remember what the position of the Detroit club in the pennant race was at the time?

A. From memory, no. Indications were that it was in third place.

Q. That is, you were fighting for third place?

A. Yes, that is the indication. I don't remember the details.

Q. Why was it you mentioned West to Leonard as a man he could trust?

A. He is the only man that I knew of that was handy, and I figured he could be trusted.

Q. What made you think West was familiar with this sort of thing?

A. No other reason in the world except as I have stated.

Q. Had you ever had West place any bets for you on anything?

A. No, sir.

Examination of Joe Wood, by then the head baseball coach at Yale University, brought out the admission that he had written the letter dated “Cleveland, O., Friday,” addressed to “Dear Friend ‘Dutch'” and signed “Joe Wood.”

Q. Now just tell me all about that bet.

A. The day before the ball game Leonard came to me and said, “Boland is going to pitch against you fellows tomorrow; we are fighting for third place; you fellows' position
in the race is settled; you can't move up or down. Now the Detroit ball club is fighting for third place money, and it looks like a good bet. You want to go in on a bet with me?”

I thought it over and I asked him how much he wanted to bet. He said he wanted to bet about $2,500. I told him I didn't feel as if I wanted to put up that much money, but I said: “I have a friend here. I will mention it to him. If we can split that bet three ways, I would be willing to go in that way.”

Q. Did you have any conversation with Speaker about a bet on this ball game?

A. I never had any conversation with Speaker about a bet on this game. I had a little conversation with Cobb about this ball game when he stopped me and asked, “How much did you bet on this game today?” I didn't think it was any of his business, I gave him an anonymous reply. I said I had an opportunity to put up $2,000 against $1,400 but didn't get it up in time.

Landis then questioned Cobb further:

Q. Mr. Cobb, have you in mind any possible reason why Leonard should have made this statement to me about you and Wood and Speaker and Leonard being together under the stands and framing up this ball game?

A. I cannot imagine a human being with any sort of honor or ideals having the spleen that Leonard has for me. The fact of the matter is, when I became manager of the Detroit ball club, I believe at that time he was under suspension; either then or later he was under suspension and I did everything I could with Mr. Navin to have that suspension lifted; I got him back to the Detroit ball club because its pitchers were very weak and we needed all the help we could get.

I gave him every possible break that a veteran pitcher could expect. I gave him his rest, we were down in the race, and were fighting our way up again. We had 12
games of ball in six days. I called a meeting of the pitchers and told them we had a real hard test facing us and that I might have to call on them out of turn.

Cobb then told of asking Hooks Dauss to pitch out of turn, and said he then called on Leonard and that Leonard flatly refused to go to the mound after being ordered.

Continuing under oath, Cobb added:

A. I had a talk with Mr. Navin and it was decided we would get rid of Leonard. The whole team was upset over it and he had the reputation in the past of being a bolshevik on the club.

I released him to Mr. Navin. Mr. Navin asked waivers and did all the other things. It was the only thing in my whole acquaintanceship with Leonard that I would figure would make him do such a thing as this.

Cobb, coolly, did not admit to anything more heinous than acting as an intermediary in laying a bet. Landis took his testimony under advisement. Cobb demanded that Leonard come to Chicago from his California home to face him directly. Leonard declined. He said that he feared a physical attack from “that wild man” or that the gun Cobb was known to carry might be pulled on him.

THE BASEBALL
world now awaited Landis's verdict. Cobb reminded fans, “I could buy myself a major-league franchise right now. Why should I bother with a few dollars gained through a damned fool bet?”

Another point: Leonard claimed that Speaker's Cleveland Indians had agreed to let Detroit win (which the Tigers did, 9–5); if so, would not Speaker have gone easy with the bat, and Cobb been fed some soft pitches? In actuality, Speaker tripled twice and singled, while the Peach produced just one scratch single.

Lawyers retained by the two advised them to sue Landis and organized baseball for a sum in the six figures.

THROUGH HIS
White House connections, which dated back to the presidencies of Woodrow Wilson and Warren Harding, Cobb arranged a
meeting with Charles Evans Hughes, former U.S. Supreme Court justice and recent secretary of state. Several wealthy men in Georgia offered to meet Hughes's fee for handling Cobb's libel and slander suits, in which he sought $100 million in damages. Some law experts felt that Cobb's case could be won on the strength of his unmatched playing record alone. National newspaper columnist Will Rogers was caustic, writing, “I want the world to know that I stand with Ty and Tris. I've known them for 15 years. If they have been selling out all these years, I would like to have seen them play when they wasn't selling.”

Babe Ruth had something to say. His attitude surprised some people—normally the Babe would just as soon punch Cobb's nose as not—when he spoke from a vaudeville stage in San Francisco: “This is a lot of bull. I've never known squarer men than Cobb and Speaker. Cobb doesn't like me and he's as mean as [
censored
]. But he's as clean as they come.”

Ruth, observed New York journalist Henry L. Farrell late in December, was a beneficiary of any dirty work that had gone on. He wrote, “You hear it in the streets here, in the subways, on the trolleys, in the clubs of drinkers and from the Park Avenue aristocracy: ‘Well,' the general comment runs, ‘Cobb is in a big jam, worse than usual, but Babe never would do that. Babe has human frailties. But never would you find him involved in anything as messy as this.'”