Blog Archives

Seeing Stars Through the Clouds: 1943-44 Navy Team Autographed Baseball

Writing about baseball artifacts is a pleasure and tedious considering the volume of research that is poured into each artifact and subsequent article that is published on ChevronsAndDiamonds.org and that is beginning to show with the backlog of posts that is growing (inside of my head, at least) with the recent additions to my collection. With my last article (My Accidental Discovery: A Photographic Military Baseball Holy Grail of Sorts), I spent a few weeks researching; gathering details about the DiMaggio photograph, comparing it with others, delving into other aspects of his time in the Army Air Force and then committing it to more than 3,400 words. I often ask myself, “How does one manage a full-time career, a marriage and family (an active life) and still maintain a research and authoring schedule like this?” in the midst of a research project.

Several weeks ago, I was able to acquire my second military baseball (my first, a 1956-dated, team-signed ball from the 36th Field Artillery Group) after it was listed in conjunction with among a spate of items (originating from the same collection) that were all related to military baseball teams the Central Pacific area, in and around the Hawaiian Islands during World War II. Judging by the number of bids and potential buyers who were watching the three other auctions compared to a few who were watching (and had submitted bids on) what was listed as an autographed Navy-team baseball from the 1940s. The ball (aside from the signatures) is a easily datable, official National League (“Ford C. Frick”) Spalding baseball from 1943. With a glance at the auction listing’s photos, (aside from the obvious coating of shellac covering the ball) I recognized a few names on the ball though several were hard to discern.I decided since the bid amount was so low that it was worth risking (based solely on the verifiable age of the ball). With only a few hours remaining, I set my bid amount and waited.

The two stars flanking “Official”denote that this ball dates from 1943. The golden toning of the ball is due to  (image source: eBay image).

I wanted to spend time investigating all of the signatures on the ball – to delve into each one to make an attempt to identify the names and thus, determine which team the ball was associated with but with so little time remaining, I moved ahead with submitting my bid with the hope that if I was unsuccessful with my plan to identify that I could turn around and re-list the ball. Hours later, the notification came that I was the highest bidder, much to my surprise. Hours following payment, I received notification from the seller that the ball was shipped and a tracking number was provided. Two days later, the ball was in my hands and that’s when it struck me that I was holding something that was connected to the players who participated in the legendary (at least, to me) games in the Hawaiian Islands during the War, that until now, was limited to scorecards and photographs.

I was elated to have a chance at this ball even though it was lacking signatures from the stars of the major leagues such as Pee Wee Reese, the DiMaggio brothers, Vander Meer, Hutchinson or my favorite, Ferris Fain. I wasn’t able to positively identify all of the signatures and two of them are almost completely faded or entirely illegible.  There are a few major league ball players and several minor leaguers that have been identified. Those with an asterisk (*) were located on the Navy versus Major League All-Stars: Weaver Field, Submarine Base, April 19, 1944 score book (the double asterisk indicates a possible correlation between the signature and a name listed on the score book).

Panel 1 (image source: eBay image).

Panel 1:

The first panel of signatures shows one name that I cannot positively identify (Charlie, the second from the top) and the one at the bottom is so heavily faded that I can’t make out a single character. Three of these players (Signalman and pitcher Anderson, Electrician’s Mate 2/c and shortstop Bishop and Chief Specialist and pitcher Masterson) all played in the major leagues. Catcher and Coxswain McCorkle and Torpedoman 1/c and pitcher Mozzali had minor league careers with the latter serving as a scout in the St. Louis Cardinals organization for 18 years followed by two seasons (1977-78) as a coach with the big league club. John Powell, listed on the April 19, 1944 program for the game between the Navy and the Major League All-Stars as a center fielder and an MS 1/c is still being researched.

Panel 2 (image source: eBay image).

Panel 2

  • Raymond Kerin (?)
  • Dutch Raffeis (?)
  • Illegible ….ski
  • Jim Brennen*
  • Bob Tomkins
  • Ed Quinn

This panel is one of the more challenging of the four with three names that either illegible in part or entirely. While Jim Brennen shows also on the April 19, 1944 program (listed as “J. D. Brennen,” EM2/c, pitcher), the other players require further research. My efforts to date have been unfruitful but it is possible that searching military records via Fold3 or Ancestry might yield positive results. Combing through the various rosters (on the known printed scorecards and throughout those online at Baseball in Wartime) is a seemingly futile venture but at present, it is all that is available. I hold out hope that in the months and year ahead, that there more artifacts will surface.

Panel 3 (image source: eBay image).

Panel 3

The third panel held signatures that were far more legible and hadn’t suffered fading though I didn’t fare much better in determining who the men are who signed this side of the ball. Two of the names, Snider (right fielder and signalman) and Simione (a center fielder and boatswain’s mate, 2nd class), are also listed on the April 19, 1944 scorecard (linked in the previous paragraph). Rengel, White and Patrick are still to be determined. In revisiting this article after discovering more names while conducting research for an upcoming article, I stumbled across Ray Volpi (previously thought to have been “Volp.” as an abbreviation of his name), a minor league pitcher in the Yankees organization. Ray last pitched professionally with the double-A Kansas City Blues (of the American Association) during the 1942 season. By 1943, Volpi was in the United States Navy and stationed at Norfolk and hurling for the Norfolk Naval Training Station Bluejackets (see: WWII Navy Baseball Uniforms: Preserving the Ones That Got Away) alongside Fred Hutchinson, Walt Masterson and Dutch Leonard. Chief Specialist Volpi would be in the South Pacific, playing in the Hawaii Leagues with several of his Bluejackets teammates by 1944. Five of these six names will have to be researched as service members while I believe that Snider went on to play four seasons of class “D” professional baseball, having played in 1942 with the Dothan Browns (of the
Georgia-Florida League).

Panel 4 (image source: eBay image).

Panel 4

The last panel (which, in this case consists predominantly of the “sweet spot” of the ball) contains four very legible signatures and three of them are located on printed rosters within scorecards from the Central Pacific wartime baseball leagues. Also, (potentially) three of the men all had professional baseball careers following their service. One of these men, James J. “Jim” Gleeson, an outfielder who spent five seasons in the major leagues (1936 with Cleveland, 1939-40 with the Cubs and 1941-42 with Cincinnati) before joining the Navy. Following his war service, Gleeson returned to the game he loved, playing for six more seasons, but only at the minor league level. After 1951, his playing days were done, Jim continued his baseball career, serving as a scout, coach, and manager in the minors and spent many years as a coach with the Yankees on fellow Navy veteran, Yogi Berra’s 1964 Yankees-pennant-winning staff. Third baseman and Pharmacists’ Mate 3/c John “Hubie” Jeandron  recommenced his professional career in 1946 at the class A level, bouncing around through class C and B levels until finishing his baseball career after the 1953 season. Gunner’s Mate 3/c and first baseman Frank T. Hecklinger (incorrectly listed as “E. T.” on the scorecard roster) also restarted his professional career but played in only 234 total games between the 1946 and 1947 seasons at the class C and B levels in the minors.

The prominent Spalding logo with Jim Gleeson’s signature easily discernible (image source: eBay image).

To many collectors, having a ball with signatures from a handful of minor leaguers and three non-star major leaguers wouldn’t merit much interest or be featured in a collection. Nevertheless, this ball is significant as it originates from games that were, to many men and women serving during WWII, distractions from the rigors and monotony of war giving them a fun departure from the harsh reality and a taste of the normalcy of home. This ball is a cherished addition to my collection and will serve to demonstrate how men from the highest levels of the game competed alongside of average Joes demonstrating unity in the fight against a common enemy in the cause of freedom from tyrants and oppression.

A Propeller, Wings and a Baseball: A Diamond from Bolling Field

Brick walls. Dead ends. Regardless of the term one employs to describe fruitless research, the end result will always be disappointment.

A while ago, I located a fantastic jersey for a very reasonable price and despite the cursory research and due diligence not yielding specific results, I moved ahead with making a bid to purchase the artifact. What initially drew my attention to this jersey was that it was a departure from my norm in terms of the armed forces branches that were already represented within my collection (which, at the time, consisted of one Navy, two Army and three Marines baseball uniforms or jerseys).  In nearly ten years of actively searching for military baseball items, I hadn’t yet seen anything from the Army Air Forces (or Air Corps).

World War II or earlier) Bolling Field, US Army Air Force jersey. This uniform jersey is made of gray road) wool flannel with athletic felt lettering. The soutache is black rayon.

The online listing showed a rather simple, road gray wool flannel jersey with thin black soutache on the placket, around the collar and located about one inch from the edge of each sleeve. What sets this jersey apart from others is the the application of the lettering. Spelling out “BOLLING FIELD” are athletic felt, two color (gold over navy blue), large block characters. Each letter consists of a gold piece of felt centered over a larger one of blue felt with color-matched stitching that give a illusion of three-dimensional appearance. The careful placement of the “E” (in FIELD) ensured that the button hole alignment wouldn’t interfere with a tasteful alignment of the team name.

Though it is difficult to discern in this image, the base material has become brittle and is separating at the top of the propeller, leaving a break in the gray flannel.

On the left sleeve, a two-piece athletic felt (similar to the lettering) winged-propeller emblem, complete with accenting embroidery (adding feathers to the wing and a baseball at the center of the prop) denoting the Air Forces mission of the base. The back of the jersey is plain and without numerals. The style of the jersey and the overall design is representative of those from the early 1940s which coincides with the what the seller described as being a World War II baseball jersey.

Attempting to determine the age of the jersey or when it was made isn’t necessarily an easy task however there isn’t really anything substantive that can be used to pinpoint the age. The team name provides an era (1918-1948) when the base existed as an airfield (rather than an Air Force Base following the establishment of the U.S. Air Force). Bolling Field was established after the Defense Department’s property was divided between the army and the navy for each branch’s aviation operations in the Washington D.C. area. Named for Ranar C. Bolling, a colonel who, having been recently appointed (by General Pershing) as the chief of air service for II Corps when he was killed (on  March 26, 1918), during Operation Michael while he was scouting in the early days of the offensive. A thirty-year window of age possibilities hardly provided me with specificity so I had to look at the jersey’s other elements.

A commonality among the majority of the military jerseys that I have seen and certainly within my collection is the absence of manufacturer’s tags. Most of the uniforms and jerseys worn by service-member ball players have just a lone size tag. the Bolling jersey has a tag that until I acquired this jersey, I had not seen before.

This jersey was most-likely made by Wilson but sold through their wholesaler and retailer, Lowe and Campbell, as indicated by the tag. Also present in the collar are hand-written digits that could be the a portion of the airman’s laundry number.

If the jersey was made by Spalding or Goldsmith, the tag would be very useful in determining the age (see: Early Baseball Uniforms Manufacturer Tags Database: 1890 – 1942). These two manufacturers employed a measure of consistency (even as the logo changed, it did so in specific periods) over the course of manufacturing an immeasurable volume of baseball uniforms for professional and amateur teams. However, the manufacturer of the Bolling jersey, Lowe & Campbell, has a more murky history in terms of label usage and available, pinpoint-dated examples to draw comparisons. I was able to find a handful of L & C label examples but when attempting to use them as a basis for dating, there is considerable challenge, especially considering the company’s history.

Lowe and Campbell (L&C) was founded in Kansas City, Missouri in 1912 by George C. Lowe and Keedy Campbell during a period of massive growth in the sporting goods industry that was already being dominated by companies (Spalding, Rawlings and Wilson) that, today remain the leading manufacturers and suppliers of sports equipment. L&C’s early years in the industry found their principle customers in schools, colleges and universities and within the the realm of athletic teams sponsored by private industry. Throughout their first decade, the company experience growth, opening up offices throughout the Midwest but by the early 1930s, had become a target of one of the larger sporting goods giants who were seeking to rapidly expand into markets via acquisitions, as was the common practice, rather than expending effort and resources to develop into these areas. Wilson Sporting Goods entered into a merger agreement with L & C in 1931, but rather than to absorb the smaller company, Wilson positioned themselves as the wholesale supplier and retained their acquisition, L&C became a division of the giant as retailers of their products.

Maintaining this corporate alignment well into the next few decades, Wilson expanded the L&C offices into new markets and continued to produce products that carried the company’s logos. The catalogs throughout this era reveal that Lowe and Campbell expanded their product lines to include a greater variety of sport. As with the practices of many sporting goods retailers, their product offerings were predominantly manufactured by different sporting good companies with L&C adding their own tags and company markings. Even prior to the merger, Lowe and Campbell sold re-branded products supplied by manufacturers such as Hillerich and Bradsby, the makers of Louisville Slugger bats.

“After the merger the Lowe & Campbell brand of baseball bats disappear from the catalogs. Wilson baseball bats are added to the catalog by 1940, but they continue to sell Louisville Slugger bats, which dominate the catalogs. Wilson continued to manufacture baseball gloves under the private Branded Lowe & Campbell name. Because of the lack of catalog information it is not clear when Louisville Slugger began to make the Lowe & Campbell brand of baseball bats They do appear in the 1922 Lowe & Campbell catalog along side Louisville Slugger.” – KeyMan Collectibles

Following World War II, Wilson’s growth had continued as they acquired additional small sporting goods companies. Lowe and Campbell’s retail operation was eliminated as they were transformed into a wholesale operation their parent, Wilson functioning as both the manufacturer and wholesaler. The shift away from retail diminished the L&C brand and by 1960, Wilson eliminated it all together, shuttering the division and even closing down the Kansas City facility where Lowe and Campbell began.

Today, the remnants of the sporting goods brand exist via collectors who preserve the artifacts that produced and sold by Lowe and Campbell. However, a re-birth of the L&C brand is in process and the owner, Thomas Martin, whom acquired the brand, shared with me (via the company’s Facebook page) that Lowe and Campbell‘s 2018 fall launch will be headlined with American manufactured sports apparel.

Attempting to chronologically trace the progression of the company’s label history seems to be a futile attempt, especially in determining the of date the Bolling Field jersey. I found various (dates known) L&C branded garments and checked the labels in an effort to piece together a timeline and was unsuccessful at narrowing down transitional patterns.

 

Desiring to tap into the expertise of the new owner of the Lowe and Campbell brand, I asked Thomas Martin about the logos and tags, sharing some of the samples (shown above) in an effort to gain some insight. “No one,” Martin stated, “kept historical dated records of the brand,” but, in his experience with the vintage garments themselves, is able to determine the age, having seen countless products that were made and sold by Lowe and Campbell during the company’s first incarnation. Mr. Martin’s assessment of the label in the Bolling jersey was that it dated from the 1930s, “L&C only used  two logos,” Martin wrote, “the one you have was used in the 30’s.” Martin discussed the logo change as a result of being acquired (in 1931 by Wilson). Garments made by the company in the 1940s began to receive a new logo (see the two bottom-right examples, above) on their tags.

My next research step will be to search through newspaper archives from WWII in the Washington D.C. area seeking any box scores or news articles regarding the Bolling Field team’s game-play. My hope is that the Army Air Force public relations personnel was as open in terms of publicizing the competitiveness of their base team. In my estimation, this team had to have competed against other service teams within the region including the Norfolk Naval Training Station and Norfolk Naval Air Station teams. The only baseball-specific lead (with a possible connection) that I have discovered regarding Bolling centers on Hank Greenberg.

In Hank Greenberg: The Hero of Heroes, author John Rosengren states, “A friend of Hank’s, Sam Edelman, wrote on his behalf to have Hank promoted to the rank of captain and assigned as an athletic director in the Air Corps (sic) at Bolling Field. Two brigadier generals carried the request to the War Department, lobbying for the educational qualifications (for an officer’s commission) to be waived for Greenberg. The Adjutant General denied the request on the grounds that it was ‘contrary to the policies of the Secretary of War.'” No mention is made (within the book) regarding Sergeant Greenberg’s ball-playing at Bolling Field. However, according to Rosengren, Greenberg would eventually be assigned as a director of the physical training program at MacDill Field in Tampa, Florida and would subsequently be assigned to the Orlando Air Base baseball team for an exhibition game against the Washington Senators at Tinker Field. I would love to discover anything that would connect such a legend to the Bolling team.

A recurring statement often read on Chevrons and Diamonds is that further research and time are required to break through the mystery, pushing beyond the dead-ends and brick walls that I have reached with my efforts up to this point.

Resources:

Lowe and Campbell vintage sports uniform examples:

 

Theresa Dischler and her WAAC baseball team at Bolling Field in Washington, D.C. Dischler is in the back row, second from the left image source: Wisconsin Veterans Museum).

(Postscript: Sometimes, my research uncovers fascinating facts that while contextual with my interests, further energy would take me into a different direction. What I discovered appears to be the only piece of Bolling Field baseball history that is available online. This fantastic snippet regarding a Women’s Army Auxilliary Corps veteran, Sergeant Theresa M. Dischler, who also played for the WAAC baseball team at the air field during her time in the service of her country.

Struck Out Swinging: Pee Wee Reese, Johnny Mize and Fred Hutchinson on Tinian

Missing out on pieces that would fit perfectly with what I collect is becoming too common of an occurrence for me lately. I am not one who spends my weekends scouring garage and estate sales in search of these precious artifacts but perhaps there might be something to that activity. The problem with taking that approach is that there is a considerable time commitment required just to make it worthwhile and to afford chances to find such treasures. Another challenge is that these military baseball artifacts are so hard to find due to the small population of service members who played the game during their time in the armed forces. I find that it is best to take my chances with the collections, personal items – pieces that are listed by veterans, family members, collectors and pickers.

It is not secret that my tendencies in collecting, both with militaria and in military baseball are towards the Navy and I work harder to land those related items that surface within the marketplace. Often, there are pieces that are of little interest to other collectors or they are listed in such a manner that they elude people who might be using a few different (yet limited or too specific) search criterion or formulas. Even I have missed out on pieces because I was too lazy to search beyond my normal, standby perfunctory methods.

Sometimes, I make discoveries of items that perfectly fit my collection and line up with everything that interest me but are discovered because I was exploring a tangential interest. One example of this was when I was seeking a specific rating badge (a WWII-era bullion Radarman version), I discovered a binder filled with shipyard modernization work orders that belonged to a Chief Electrician (a warrant officer) who used for the heavy cruiser, USS Vincennes (CA-44) that would later be sunk in the Battle of Savo Island in August of 1942.

My collection of Navy baseball artifacts, despite my best efforts, are scantily few. It seems that besides the there being so few pieces in existence, the competition for those items can be quite fierce.

Vintage military photographs are something that I collect. In addition to my naval ship and military baseball photograph archive, I also have several images that were part of a veteran’s photo scrapbook from his service in the 20th Air Force. Among those images of ground activities, bombing missions, wrecked aircraft and airmen enjoying downtown between missions, there are images of several B-29s and their nose art.

This rare color photograph of the B-17 “Going My Way” with Bugs Bunny is very typical of what was seen on many WWI bomber aircraft.

Nose art, especially what was seen on B-17 an B-29 bombers, has considerable following for collectors and historians alike. When the number of just these two types of aircraft (12,731 B-17 and 3,970 B-29 bombers) are considered coupled with the notion that the majority of them (that were deployed to their respective theaters of the war), there would be thousands of differing paintings and illustrations to be documented. In recent years, there have been several undertakings by historians who are seeking to locate photographs of every example of nose art for each aircraft. If the photograph exists, these folks want to have it.

This jacket, combined with the above image of the Goin’ My Way nose art photo would work together for a fantastic display.

In terms of collectors, those who pursue painted bomber jackets in particular, to possess both the jacket and photographic artifacts from the same ship help to make a great display. I have never actually purchased a vintage photo of a bomber or other Air Force aircraft.

A few days ago, while I was browsing through some listings of B-29 photographs taken on Tinian and Saipan (the two principle bases of operation for bombing missions to the Japanese homelands during the latter years of the War), I spotted a vintage photograph that was listed as a “nose art” image. In the thumbnail of the photo in the listing, I could see that there was a large gathering of men posed beneath the aircraft, which wasn’t unusual. What was out of the norm from what I have seen in other images was the sheer number of people lined up in multiple rows. Something about the men also caught my eye as it appeared different from all the photos that I had seen. The Superfortress looked normal though the nose art, from what I could tell, was quite diminutive compared to what was commonly applied to these massive planes.

In this undated photo, the U.S. Navy team poses with airmen in front of the Superfortress known as “Flag Ship” (serial number BA 42-63504). Among the players in the image are Pee Wee Reese, Fred Hutchinson and Johnny Mize. Flag Ship would be damaged on July 24, 1944 by a crashing “Thunderin’ Loretta”(serial number 42-24913) when she went down on take-off, killing 10 men. The crash damaged seven other parked B-29 bombers (serial numbers 44-69841, 42-63506, 42-93992, 44-69844, 44-69972, 42-63504, and 44-69859).
Flag Ship has the distinction of being the first B-29 to land on the Island of Tinian (source: eBay image).

I decided to open the auction listing and I was immediately astounded. There, in the formation ranks were a few recognizable faces – Johnny Mize, Pee Wee Reese and Fred Hutchinson to name a few – among the 43 visible service members. Twelve of the men in baseball uniforms were wearing the road gray navy flannels while 14 were decked out in the pinstripes and blue home togs. Other men posing in the image are in the Army Air Forces and Navy military uniforms. The image appears to be a type-1 (defined as first generation photograph, developed from the original negative, during the period – within approximately two years of when the picture was taken) and the clarity is impeccable. It is obvious that the photograph was snapped by a professional war correspondent, judging by the exposure and composition, regardless of the cropping out of men on the edges of the group.

I really wanted to land this photograph. Not wanting to risk being outbid, I set my amount for more than twice the highest price that I have ever paid for a vintage photograph. I could see that there were some new-to-eBay folks (those who place bids very early after an item is listed) which gave me a little bit of concern as these people tend to drive prices unnecessarily high (my bid won’t show until just prior to the close of the auction). I waited the remaining five days for the close of the bidding and hoped for the best.

I wish that I could say that my bid amount was enough to bring this photograph home to me but someone else with deeper pockets and, very obviously in possession of the knowledge of the significance of this rare photograph took the same actions as I did and placed a higher bid at the same time (just seconds before the auction’s close) that mine was made. Losing and missing out on this image was a painful lesson to learn. If the item matters this much, I had better step up to the plate and take a real swing.

At least I was able to grab a digital copy (albeit, low resolution) for posterity.

 

Moving Past Last Year’s Wins and Losses: Goals for 2018

With nearly a month already completed for this new year of 2018 and 84 days since the heartbreaking end to “my” Dodgers amazing season with their loss to Houston in a subpar performance in Game Seven of the World Series. The offseason has been decidedly quiet following the sweepstakes for several teams vying for Giancarlo Stanton from the Marlins (there had been talks of bringing the slugger to the confines of Chavez Ravine). Alas, the Yankees and their wild-spending, wheeling and dealing as they continue their trend of pillaging the rosters of the “have-nots” (the teams with pittances of budgets, incapable of keeping their home-grown talent once those initial player contracts are fulfilled) and stocking their roster with the biggest names in the game, the winter months have been somewhat quiet. The player-transaction-silence for this Dodgers fan is somewhat golden as the Los Angeles talent pool is full, requiring minimal free-agent transactions in order to field a contending team for 2018.

In looking back on 2017 and not just the articles that I wrote, but also the pieces that I was able to add to my military baseball collection (not every new acquisition of 2017 made it into an article).  I have been very selective and cautious to ensure that I what I acquire is genuine. Regardless of whether I am able to validate the artifact against a specific service member (ball-player), I want to be certain that the piece is correct. This isn’t to say that sellers are intentionally misleading with their listings of their family heirlooms but rather they make assumptions that because the item was in that veteran’s home (and he was a war veteran), it’s very existence is the authentication that is used when they draw their conclusions.

This heavily soiled baseball uniform dates from the early 1950s and is lacking any supporting documentation or photos. The lone black felt “A” could legitimately be from an Army team (source: eBay image).

In reading a recent article in the San Jose Mercury regarding the current issues many people of my generation are dealing with: households (predominantly belonging to our aging parents) filled with a lifetime of treasures (and not-so-treasured items) and being in a position to liquidate the contents that we aren’t keeping for ourselves. Some people are shocked by the prices that people are wiling to pay (which is usually significantly lower than expectations):

What matters hardly at all in valuations are: how much you paid for the item; how much you love it; how much it is selling for on eBay. “There’s a lot of sentimental value out there,” says Neiheisel. “People get really upset when something they treasure isn’t worth much. … When everyone wants that one thing, that is where the … power is.”

Other people turn to listing items within online auctions, believing that the artifacts are priceless while they are also charged with raising money to care for their elderly family members (as was the case with this post-war baseball uniform group listed last fall). Sentimentality doesn’t translate into intrinsic value. As a collector and someone who strives to educate others, I sometimes try provide sellers with knowledge in attempt to reset their expectations…yes, I am that bad guy.

There were several listings over the course of the year of uniforms (or just simply, jerseys) that were listed as being from World War II or that they were connected to the U.S. armed forces when there was no evidence to support the sellers’ claims. One uniform in particular was clearly from the 1960s (my assessment based upon the materials, design and construction) and the team name seemed to indicate that it was from a high school (I can’t recall the specifics). I contacted the seller asking for markings, photographs or anything that could prove that it was used by a service member as part of a service team. The seller responded that he was merely a “picker” and didn’t recall where he got it and that he assumed it was WWII military. I provided the seller with some of my expertise and references to show what it was and he never responded. Of course the seller never changed his auction and some unsuspecting buyer overpaid for a school jersey believing it to be from WWII and a service team.

This wool flannel jersey shares design and construction with the grey and red uniform that launched my military baseball collecting. The blue cap with yellow “M” is seen the jersey.

The items that did come home and subsequently I did cover in articles were some of the most significant discoveries since I have been collecting baseball artifacts from the armed forces. From the only white home Marines baseball jersey that I have seen in a decade to the two Marines baseball caps that landed here within a month of each other and then the Midshipman Fenno naval academy baseball medal, some of my favorite pieces were all acquired in 2017.

As for this site and whether it is worth the effort for me to continue to write and share my discoveries the endorsement seems to come from the nearly 500% increase in visitors and page views over the previous year. Considering that I launched this site in December of 2015, the increase in viewership is relative. So few people visited in 2016 which suggests that the readership growth is nothing to get too excited about.

One accomplishment that I was proud of was in creating the uniform and jersey archive for this site. I still have more work to get it to where it needs to be (in order for me to call it a successful launch) but it is off to a great start and it seems, judging by the visitor-analytics, that the information is valued by readers. I promise that I will get the remainder of the uniforms that I have come across added to the archive.

In just the first few weeks of this year, a few pieces have landed (that will be covered in upcoming posts) that are wonderful additions to the photos and ephemera areas of my collecting. Sadly, one that I was working diligently to land before the holidays didn’t materialize as I had hoped leaving me wondering if the seller changed his mind or sold it offline to another collector. I am refraining from providing details about the artifact in hopes that another opportunity arises with this seller so that I can bring it home (where it truly belongs) and preserve it in my “museum.” I am always seeking materials that are connected to players who served or servicemen who played (while serving) and both of the additions fit into these categories. Stay tuned for these and other articles regarding some other pieces that I am, at present, working on adding to my collection.

Now that I am back in the swing of things with this new year, I am ready to pursue, albeit with caution, patience and purpose, my collecting will be hyper-focused keeping me away from distracting pieces and locked in on those that truly align with my interests. I am also going to be better at curating, organizing, documenting and properly storing my collection along with rotating what I have on display.

What are your goals and objectives for 2018? I’d love to hear from you (comment below).

WWII Veterans Honored on the Diamond: Ruptured Duck Patches for Baseball Uniforms

In the midst of researching for an article I was writing, I noticed search results that had a recurrent theme that pulled me away from the subject of my study and onto something that I knew nothing about. It isn’t saying much in regards to experiencing discoveries in terms of militaria or baseball as I am a relative newcomer to this area of collecting. What caught my attention was an image of three Chicago Cubs players wearing uniforms with a patch bearing a familiar military design that is affectionately known as the “Ruptured Duck.”

Like many returning World War II veterans, this sailor’s uniform was adorned with a ruptured duck patch (the small yellow patch located on the right breast) indicating that he had been discharged from active duty.

The patch emblem, for a collector of WWII military uniforms is one that is very familiar. However, unlike the regulation sized patch that was sewn onto the uniforms of discharged veterans returning from war service, this patch was several times larger and was sewn onto the players’ baseball uniform sleeves (on the left). My first encounter with the Ruptured Duck insignia was when my grandfather showed me his navy uniform when I asked about his time in the service during the war. I remember him smiling as he dragged it out from the closet and recalled some of the good, light-hearted stories. Having seen my grandparents’ wedding photos, I knew that he wore it on their wedding day. The first time I heard the Ruptured Duck term from him while describing the rating insignia and ribbons, for some reason, I never questioned why something that clearly looked like an eagle carried such a disparate nomenclature.

War-weary veterans returning home from service had only their uniforms (and any souvenirs they may have acquired) in their duffle bags. Upon their discharge, veterans were issued the Ruptured Duck patch to sew onto their uniforms which afforded an easily recognizable mark to indicate that they were no longer on active duty. Recalling my own time in service, a sailor, marine, soldier or airman is always on duty and therefor available for any ad hoc work detail that may arise. Imagine waiting for a standby seat aboard a military transport when a sergeant happens by to collect men to carry out a task and draws upon the idle men in the waiting room. Those wearing the Ruptured Duck could (if they chose) disregard the orders of the sergeant as they were no longer service members. There were other, more administrative reasons for the patch.

Veteran Ballplayers. Three Chicago Cubs catchers, Aaron Robinson, Mickey Livingston and Paul Gillespie wearing their ruptured duck patches in 1945. This photo clearly shows blue-backed version #2)

Upon seeing to photo of (a significantly larger version of) the patch sewn to a Chicago Cubs player’s uniform I was intrigued by what it could possibly indicate. I was intrigued to discover that the patch was an acknowledgement of the veteran status of this player – that he had served his country during the war to bring about an end to global fascism and tyranny – was authorized by Major League Baseball for wear on the field.

Through some tedious and careful searching, it appears that very view returning veterans opted to don the Ruptured Duck on their uniforms. According to The Story of the Ruptured Duck (on MLB.com) only four men (all Chicago Cubs) chose to display the patch: Harry “Peanuts” Lowrey (3b/OF) and three catchers, Aaron Robinson, Mickey Livingston, and Paul Gillespie. Further searching also reveals that a few players on the Milwaukee Brewers (of the AA International League) also donned the patch. “Each player returning from a stint in the armed service in 1945 received the Ruptured Duck patch on his jersey’s left sleeve,” Authors Rex Hamann and Bob Koehler wrote in The American Association Milwaukee Brewers (Images of Baseball). “

Notice the players in his 1945 image of the Milwaukee Brewers club with the ruptured duck patch affixed to their left sleeves.

There is some speculation as to why more players did not wear the patch on their sleeves. One prevailing notion is that by virtue of veterans wearing the patch, those who did not serve (either by choice or not being qualified for service) might have faced ostracization by the fans or even teammates or opposing players.  In a July 17, 1945 letter from the American League president that was sent to representatives of the four western American League ballclubs, Will Harridge wrote, “(the patch) may attract too much attention to players who, through no fault of their own, did not enter the service.” Harridge made mention that the Chicago Cubs had already moved forward with having players wear the emblem while leaving the decision to do so in the hands of each team.

Regarding the patch itself, there has been a lot of preliminary discussion among collectors surrounding what was initially thought to be an existence of a few versions. My oft-repeated caution regarding collectibles that lacking provenance, one should never take a seller’s word as truth or fact (even if you trust that person). In the absence of supporting evidence, sellers may make whatever claims they want in order to sell the piece. In regards to these large ruptured duck patches, the same guidance applies.

Baseball Ruptured Duck Versions and Variations

  • White-backed
    • Version 1 – The white wool base is embroidered with gold stitching. The features of the design appear to be more flattened and the patch’s backing seems to be of a canvas material. The width of these patches measures 5-1/2 inches.
    • Version 2 – This patch also has a white wool base however the backing material consists of a broad cheesecloth. The base material extends well beyond the gold embroidered outline and the details of the ruptured duck pattern appear more raised and contoured.
  • Yellow-backed

    • Version 1 – This patch is smaller (2-1/4 inches tall by 3 inches in width) than the three other versions. The overall design consists of a yellow canvas with a large-opening, cheesecloth backing. The image is embroidered in navy blue thread.
  • Blue-backed

    • Version 1 – The blue canvas base shares the same dimensions as the white-backed versions and has a white cheesecloth backing. The embroidery is a combination of both navy blue and gold thread forming the familiar eagle-shape and outline. The gold embroidery is employed as the base pattern with the blue embroidery providing the detail in the feathers and edges. This is THE ONLY version that has photographic evidence of major and minor league use following the end of WWII.
    • Version 2 – This patch is very similar to the previous blue version with the most apparent differences being most discernible when comparing them side-by-side. The fronts of each has very similar embroidery work. However this second variation seems to be slightly more rudimentary as if it is an overseas-made copy. In my opinion, it this is a knock-off of the very rare version one of the blue (read: most-authentic) baseball ruptured duck patch.
  • Cooperstown Collection – This patch is about 25% smaller than the other patch variations and is fully-embroidered (rather than embroidered onto a backing material); by computer-aided embroidery equipment. It was made for the commemoration of the original (blue-backed) patch that was worn on major league baseball uniforms in 1945. The patch bears very few similarities to the original. They were affixed to the information cards when they were distributed.

    Beware that there are, on occasion, online action listings of these reproduction patches that have been separated from the collector card. The accompanying printed card provides a history of the insignia.

The availability of these large (baseball uniform) patches varies but the most commonly listed (online auction) are the white-backed version 2 ruptured duck patches.

One of my militaria collector colleagues worked relentlessly to research and document the history (manufacture, usage, etc.) of these over-sized ruptured duck patches reaching out to the Baseball Hall of Fame (in Cooperstown, NY) and to a manufacturer that was making these patches at the end of the war. In his conversation with the Hall, the archivists there indicated that the only type of the “baseball ruptured duck” in the collection was the blue-backed version. It is speculated that the white versions were made to be worn on the home (white) uniforms as the blue version was designed for the road (gray). However, photos show the ball players in their home whites with the blue ruptured duck.

Others (including my colleague) have concluded that the white patch has nothing to do with baseball due to the evidence at hand. I, however, do believe that the white version was manufactured for the home white uniforms if, for nothing else, in anticipation of major league baseball requesting home and road differentiation.  Perhaps the idea was set aside as the patches were unpopular and some clubs were not in support of their war veteran players standing out from those who didn’t or couldn’t serve?

My colleague had a conversation with one of the online sellers of the white version 2 patches who disclosed an interesting fact regarding their stockpile of ruptured duck patches, “the box that they came in was an original World War II issue box with the original stock number.” However, the box has since been thrown out so I cannot get any manufacturer information from it.” The presence of a war department stock number indicates that they were most-likely made for the armed forces rather than for professional baseball.

Unfortunately, there is no evidence to support the other versions as having ties to the game.

In the absence of conclusive research and documentation, the questions surrounding the variations will continue in perpetuity. In my own pursuit of these elements of military baseball history, I will acquire what I believe to be authentic and make every attempt to provide evidence as to the validity of the artifacts. At present, I only have a single version

%d bloggers like this: