• The Pennsylvania Supreme Court reversed a lower court decision regarding second baseman Nap Lajoie

• A year ago the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas ruled that Lajoie, along with pitchers Chick Fraser and Bill Bernhard were not bound by contracts they had signed with the Phillies in 1900 and were free to play for the Athletics in 1901

• The Philadelphia court based their decision on two factors: that the players in question did not provide a unique and irreplaceable service to the Phillies and that the contracts lacked “mutuality” because they allowed the team to dismiss the players on ten-days notice while not affording the players the same option

• In this new decision, the Supreme Court said that Lajoie’s skill set made him unique among players and hard to replace and said that mutuality did not require a precise 1:1 relationship between sides

• The court accepted the Phillies argument that the salary ($2,400) offered to Lajoie was sufficiently high to compensate him for the lack of an out clause

• Following the decision, Athletics president Ben Shibe and manager Connie Mack withheld comment until they could consult with the team’s lawyers

• Other Athletics players thought to be possibly affected by the ruling were pitcher Bill Duggleby, third baseman Lave Cross, shortstop Monte Cross, and outfielders Topsy Hartsel and Elmer Flick

• In less exalted matters, the team beat the University of Pennsylvania, 12-8, in the final game of spring training

• The school had a standing rule prohibiting their students from competing against pro teams and they had to arrive at the ballpark under a mantle of stealth