CINCINNATI ---------------------------------------- Players. Games. Stolen Per cent. of Bases. Stolen Bases. ---------------------------------------- Latham 130 62 .477 Holliday 122 39 .320 McPhee 128 31 .242 Hay 128 30 .235 M. Murphy 76 5 .192 Canavan 160 15 .150 Vaughn 67 6 .097 G. Smith 128 12 .094 Merritt 66 5 .079 Totals 945 205 .217 ---------------------------------------- WASHINGTON ---------------------------------------- Players. Games. Stolen Per cent. of Bases. Stolen Bases. ---------------------------------------- Ward 89 36 .401 Cartwright 132 35 .269 Radford 106 26 .245 Seebach 96 23 .240 Joyce 98 23 .235 Mercer 43 10 .233 Abbey 129 30 .233 Hassamer 116 15 .129 McGuire 102 11 .108 Totals 911 209 .229 ---------------------------------------- LOUISVILLE ---------------------------------------- Players. Games. Stolen Per cent. of Bases. Stolen Bases. ---------------------------------------- Brown 130 74 .569 Smith 39 13 .333 Pfeffer 104 33 .317 Clark 76 24 .316 Twitchell 51 9 .176 Denny 60 10 .167 Lutenberg 70 10 .143 Grim 107 14 .131 Richardson 116 11 .095 Totals 753 198 .263 ---------------------------------------- It will be seen that the leaders of the six second division clubs aggregated a total of 337 bases, of which Brown is credited with 74, Lange with 71, and Latham with 62. In percentages, however, Lange led with .634, Brown being second with .569, and Latham third with .477, Stenzel, Ward (of Washington) and Dowd following in order. In total percentages, the Chicago nine led "by a large majority," Louisville being second and Pittsburgh third, Washington beating both Cincinnati and St. Louis, the latter club making a very poor show in base running figures in 1894. THE LEADING BASE STEALERS OF EACH CLUB. The following record shows the leader of each club in percentage of stolen bases, the names being given in the order of percentage figures: