MENDOZA, DANIEL, 1784‒1820:—
His style and skill, 71
His battles with Harry the Coalheaver, _ib._
〃 〃 Martin, of Bath, 72
〃 〃 Humphries, first battle, _ib._
〃 〃 〃 second battle, 73
〃 〃 〃 third battle, 74
〃 〃 Bill Warr, two fights, 76, 77
〃 〃 John Jackson, 78
〃 〃 Harry Lee, 79
〃 〃 Tom Owen, 81
Farewell benefit and death, 82
MENDOZA, AARON, 76
MIDAS, a Meddling, 146
MOLINEAUX, TOM, the Black, 1810‒1815:—
Born in Virginia, 278
His first battle, _ib._
Beat “Tom Tough” 279
He claims the championship, 280
Beaten by Cribb, first time, _ib._
Beat Rimmer, 281
Beaten by Cribb, second time, 282
His downward course, 283
A good wrestler, _ib._
Richmond arrests Molineaux, _ib._
Beat Jack Carter, 284
His passion for dress and women, 285
Beat Fuller, _ib._
Beaten by George Cooper, 287
Rencontre with Abe Denston, _ib._
Dies in Ireland, 288
MOORE, TOM, Lines to “the Nonpareil”, 365
“Tom Cribb’s Memorial to Congress”, 306
MOULSEY HURST, Lines on, 313
N.
NICHOLLS, GEORGE, 1812‒1818:—
His early battles, 444
Beat Tom Cribb, 445
His retirement to Bristol and death, 447
NOSWORTHY, WILLIAM, the Baker:—
His birth, etc., 455
Fight with Pentikin, 456
Beat Barnard Levy, _ib._
Beat Dutch Sam, 457
Beaten by Jack Scroggins, 460
Forfeits to George Curtis, _ib._
Death from excessive drinking, _ib._
O.
OLIVER, STEPHEN, “Death,” 1770‒1788, 51
O’DONNELL, JACK, 1802‒1806:—
Beat Pardo Wilson, 223
〃 Smith, 224
Beaten by Caleb Baldwin, 226
〃 by Tom Belcher, _ib._
Beat Emery, 227
〃 Wasdell, _ib._
〃 Smith, 228
His conviction and transportation, _ib._
OWEN, TOM, 1796‒1820:—
His birth, introduced to Mr. Jackson, matched with Hooper, 110
Apocrypha of “Boxiana”, _ib._
Fights with Houssa and Jack Bartholomew, 111
Battles with Mendoza, 81, 112
His judgment as a second, good fellowship, and death, 113
P.
PACKER AND MENDOZA, 76
PALMER, JOHN, see “Scroggins, Jack.”
PAYNE, JACK, the Butcher:—
Beaten by Jack Randall, 329
〃 by Josh. Hudson, see vol. ii.
〃 by Burke, 474
〃 by West Country Dick, twice, 474, 476
〃 by Aby Belasco, 482
PEARCE, HENRY, “the Game Chicken” (Champion), 1803‒1805:—
His brilliant qualities, 167
Comes to London and meets Berks and beats him, 167, 168
Beat Berks in the ring, 169
Pearce’s second indicted, 170
Challenges Bittoon, and beats Elias Spray, _ib._
Beat Carter, _ib._
〃 John Gully and becomes champion, 170, 175
Challenged by Jem Belcher, 175
Defeats Jem Belcher, 176
His bravery and humanity, 178
Verses on Pearce’s gallantry, 179
Attacked by pulmonary disease, 180
His early death, 181
PEARTREE, NAT., his defeat of Whitaker, 13
PERRINS, ISAAC, of Birmingham, 60
His fight with Tom Johnson, 59‒63
PETERS, SAM., of Birmingham, 1771‒1774, 52
Sell with Corcoran, 48, 53
PIPES AND GRETTING, Captain Godfrey’s account of, 14
POWER, JACK:—
His birth, 451
Beaten by Dogherty, _ib._
Beats Frere and Joel King, 452
Forfeits to Tom Belcher, 453
Beat Jack Carter, _ib._
Challenges Richmond, _ib._
His character, 454
Illness and early death, 455
PRUSSIA, FREDERICK WILLIAM, King of, patronises sparring, 100
PUGILISM, its advantages, 6, 7, 96
Its slanderers and defenders, 89, 90
Among the Greeks and Romans (Introd.), v
St. Bernard, a patron of (Introd.), xvi
Origin of the word Pugilist (Introd.), v
R.
RANDALL, JACK, “the Nonpareil,” 1809‒1821:—
His birth-place, 328
His early battles, 328, 329
His debut in the ring, 329
Beat Walton, “the Twickenham Youth,” and “Ugly Baruk”, _ib._
〃 “West Country Dick”, 330
〃 Harry Holt, 331
〃 Aby Belasco, 333
Glove-fight with Burke, of Woolwich, 335
Beat Joe Parish, the Waterman, 336
〃 Burke, of Woolwich, 339
Matched with Ned Turner, 340
Public excitement, 341
Beat Ned Turner, first time, 342
Becomes publican, 345
Randall and Burn, 346
Matched with Jack Martin, _ib._
The road to a fight in olden times, _ib._
Beat Jack Martin, first time, 348
Turn-up in Battersea Fields, 350
Challenged by Scroggins, _ib._
An adventure with “roughs”, _ib._
Comes from his retirement and challenges Martin, 351
Beats Jack Martin, second time, _ib._
“A Cantab’s” account of the fight, 353
Lines by Tom Moore to, 355
Forfeits to Martin, 356
A rencontre at Hampstead, 357
Randall and the Mayor of Canterbury at Hatton Garden, 359
His death, 360
Sonnets to Randall, _ib._
His “Farewell to the ring”, 361
“Jack Randall’s Ghost”, _ib._
Summary of Randall’s pugilistic merits; his charitable disposition,
362, 363
REID, Mr. FLETCHER, a patron of pugilism, lines on his death, 197
REYNOLDS, TOM (note), 483
RICHMOND, BILL, 1804‒1818:—
His birth in New York State, comes to England, and education, 289
First boxing match, _ib._
Early battles, 290
Beat Myers and Green, _ib._
Beaten by George Maddox, 291
Beat Youssouf, a Jew, _ib._
〃 Jack Holmes, the Coachman, 292
Beaten by Tom Cribb, _ib._
Beat Carter (countryman), 293
〃 Isaac Wood, _ib._
〃 George Maddox, 294
〃 Jack Power, 295
Becomes a publican, 296
The P.C. Club, _ib._
Beat Davis, the Navvy, 297
〃 Tom Shelton, 298
Retires and keeps sparring rooms, 299
Turn-up with Carter, 300
As a second, _ib._
His long life and lamented death, 301
RUSSIA, ALEXANDER, Emperor of, patronises the boxers, 100
RYAN, BILL, 1804‒1806:—
His qualifications, 228
Defeat of Tom Belcher, 229
Draw with Caleb Baldwin, _ib._
Beaten by Tom Belcher, _ib._
Beat Clarke, 230
His death, _ib._
S.
SAVILLE HOUSE, history of, 19
SCOTT, Sir WALTER, Lines on Shaw, the Life-guardsman, 443
SCROGGINS, JACK, 1803‒1822:—
His sobriquet, 412
His birth and early days, _ib._
His early fights, 413
Pressed and sent to sea, 414
Champion on board the Argo, _ib._
A turn-up at Woolwich, 415
Beat Jack Boots (Wilford), _ib._
〃 Dolly Smith, 416
〃 Nosworthy, _ib._
Matched with Bill Eales, 418
Beat Bill Eales, 419
Becomes publican, 420
Beat Whittaker, “the Oilman”, 421
〃 Church, 423
A draw with Ned Turner, 426
Beat Fisher (room fight), 427
Beaten by Ned Turner, 428
Second match with Turner, 429
Beaten by Turner, second time, _ib._
His imprudence, _ib._
Beaten by Jack Martin, _ib._
〃 by Josh. Hudson, _ib._
〃 David Hudson, twice, _ib._
Beat Harry Holt (room fight), 430
〃 Parish, the Waterman, 431
Receives forfeit from Parish, 432
Beaten by Gipsy Cooper, 433
His poverty and fate, _ib._
The moral of his death, 433
His epitaph, 434
SELLERS, HARRY (Champion), 1776‒1785:—
Fights with Corcoran, 49
〃 〃 Joe Hood, _ib._
〃 〃 Stevens, the Nailer, 50
〃 〃 Duggan Fearns, _ib._
〃 〃 Harvey, _ib._
His death, _ib._
SHAW, JOHN, the Life-guardsman, 1812‒1815:—
His youthful battles, 441
His boxing capabilities, _ib._
Beat Burrows, 442
〃 Ned Painter, 442
Challenges the championship, _ib._
Lines by Sir Walter Scott on, 443
His gallant conduct at Waterloo, _ib._
His death on the battle-field, 444
SHELTON, TOM, “the Navigator,” 1812‒1825:—
His birth and qualifications, 319
Beat Fitzgerald, _ib._
Origin of the term “Navvy” (note), _ib._
At the Fives Court, _ib._
Beaten by Harmer, 320
Beat Studd, the Farmer, _ib._
Beaten by Richmond, _ib._
Becomes a publican, _ib._
Beats Ben Burn, first time, 322
〃 〃 second time, 322
Forfeit from Benniworth, 324
Beaten by Tom Oliver, 325
〃 by George Cooper, _ib._
Receives forfeit from “Unknown,” _ib._
Beat Carter (turn-up), _ib._
〃 Josh. Hudson, _ib._
Received forfeit from Josh. Hudson, 326
Beaten by Big Brown, _ib._
Died by prussic acid, 327
SIDMOUTH, Viscount, his letter of thanks to the pugilists, 270
SILVERTHORNE, beaten by Tom Belcher, 450
Beat Dan Dogherty, _ib._
〃 Ben Burn, 451
A Sunday-school teacher, _ib._
SLACK, JACK (Champion), 1750‒1760:—
His style and character, 31
His first appearance and quarrel with Broughton, 32
His fight with Broughton, 33
〃 〃 Petit, the Frenchman, 34
〃 〃 Moreton, _ib._
〃 〃 Harris, _ib._
〃 〃 Bill Stevens, the Nailer, 35
His character and death, _ib._
SMALLWOOD, TOM, 1741‒1747, 17, 18
Captain Godfrey’s account of, 37
His fights with Harris, Willis, King, and Hunt, 38, 39
STEPHENSON, GEORGE, the great engineer, 1801, 439
Beat Ned Wilson, “the fighting pitman” of Callerton, 440
STEVENS, BILL, the Nailer, 36
Backed by the Duke of York, 35
His fight with Jacob Taplin, 36
〃 〃 Slack for the championship, 1760, _ib._
“Cross” with George Meggs, 35, 56
SUTTON, the Pipemaker, his fight with Fig, 11
SYMONDS, “the Ruffian,” 1791‒1795:—
His nickname, 130
His fights with Jackling (Ginger), and Gowlett, _ib._
Beaten by Firby, 130
Draw with George Maddox and with Ugly Baruk, _ib._
T.
TAYLOR, GEORGE (Champion), 1734‒1756:—
Battles at his booth, 17
His fight with Boswell, _ib._
〃 〃 Tom Faulkner, 19
His death, 1758, 20
TENNIS COURT in the Haymarket, 35
“TOM TOUGH,” see Blake.
TRING, TOM, his person, battles, and character, 67
TURNER, NED, 1814‒1824:—
His birth and calling, 364
Beat Balch, _ib._
His minor battles, 365
Goes to Scotland, _ib._
Returns to London, 366
Battle with George Curtis (fatal), 367
Inquest on Curtis, 369
Trial and defence of Turner, 371
His sentence, 373
Matched with Scroggins, 374
Draw with Jack Scroggins, 375
Beat Scroggins, 377
Turner visits Wales, 381
Third meeting with Scroggins, _ib._
Beat Scroggins, second time, 383
〃 Cy. Davis, 385
Matched with Jack Martin, 387
Jack Scroggins’ estimate of Turner and Martin, _ib._
Beat Jack Martin, 388
Tom Belcher challenges Turner, 390
Beaten by Cy. Davis, _ib._
〃 by Peace Inglis, _ib._
Beat Peace Inglis, 391
His last illness, 392
His death and funeral honours, 393
His character as a boxer, 394
TURNUS, King of the Rutuli (Introd.), xii
TYNE, TOM, “the Tailor,” 1788‒1792:—
His merits, 127, 128
Battles with Jones, Earl (fatal), and Elisha Crabbe, 128, 129
Defeated by Firby, 129
Doubtful defeat by Mendoza, _ib._
U.
UPPER-CUT, the (note), 194
V.
VIRGIL, his account of the prize fight of Dares and Entellus (Introd.),
x, xi
W.
WALES, FREDERICK, Prince of, patron of George Taylor, 19
WALES, GEORGE, Prince of, a ring patron, 52, 94, 126, 128
WARR, BILL, of Bristol, 1787‒1792:—
His battles with Tom Johnson and Will Wood, 120
Defeated by Mendoza, twice, 76, 77, 120
Convicted of manslaughter, 121
Beat Stanyard, of Birmingham, _ib._
Becomes a publican; his death, 122
WATSON, BOB, of Bristol, 1788‒1791:—
His battles with Elisha Crabbe, Bill Jones, and Anderson, 126
His battle with Hooper, 127
Beaten by Davies, _ib._
Theatrical sparring, _ib._
His death, _ib._
WEST-COUNTRY DICK, the Navigator, 1816‒1820:—
His birth, 474
His fights with Grabbler, Reeve, Jack Curtis, Jack Payne, and Charley
Martin, twice, 474, 475
Beat Street, 475
〃 Jack Payne, 476
Beaten by David Hudson, 478
Beat Davis, _ib._
Turn-up with Abbott, 479
〃 〃 Parsing, _ib._
Beaten by Gipsy Cooper, _ib._
Beat Parsing, 480
〃 Redgreaves, _ib._
〃 Mason, _ib._
〃 Hellick, 481
WHITAKER, BOB, 1733:—
His fight with the big Gondolier, 13
His defeat by Nat. Peartree, 14
WHITEHEAD, PAUL, the Poet, 19
WILLIS, WILLIAM, “the Fighting Quaker,” 18
WINDHAM, Right Hon. WILLIAM, his defence of pugilism, 90, 91
WOOD, WILL, the Coachman, 1788‒1804:—
Fights with Will Warr, George the Brewer, Hooper the Tinman, and Jack
Bartholomew, 122, 123
His fight with Isaac Bittoon, 124
His death, _ib._
Y.
YORK, Duke of, patron of Stevens, 1760, 85
END OF VOLUME I.
PRINTED BY
OLIVER AND BOYD
EDINBURGH
-----
Footnote 1:
Pietro Torrigiano’s history has an English interest. He was certainly
a “fighting man.” While serving as a volunteer in the army of Pope
Alexander VI. he modelled some bronze figures for some Florentine
merchants, who invited him to go with them to England. Here he was a
favourite with “bluff King Hal,” who employed Torrigiano to execute
the tomb of his father, Henry VII. in Westminster Abbey, for which he
received the then large sum of £1,000. Employed to execute a
sarcophagus for Cardinal Wolsey—the Ipswich butcher’s son—his work
(once intended to enclose the coffin of Henry VIII. at Windsor) by the
“irony of fate” was destined to enshrine the remains of a greater
English hero. Nelson lies beneath the dome of St Paul’s in the
sarcophagus sculptured by Torrigiano for Wolsey, his inner coffin
being made from a piece of the French flagship _L’Orient_, blown up at
the battle of the Nile. Torrigiano died in Spain in the prisons of the
Inquisition, having been condemned as a sacrilegious heretic for
demolishing a “statue of the Virgin,” which having been paid
inadequately for by a niggardly nobleman, the Duke of Arcoss, he broke
in pieces with his mallet. The incensed grandee had him arrested, and
Torrigiano, to avoid being roasted at an _auto da fé_, refused food
and so perished, A.D. 1522.
Footnote 2:
See Apollon., Argonaut.; Theocritus, Idyll. 22; Apollodorus, b. i., c.
9.
Footnote 3:
Statius, Thebais, vi., v. 893; Lucan, Pharsalia, iv., 598; Juvenal,
Sat. iii., 88.
Footnote 4:
The inquiring reader will find the _sex_ of “the Trojan horse” settled
in some humorous scholia to Pope’s “Dunciad,” book i., line 212,
quizzically attributed to Richard Bentley, the famous critic, under
the _alias_ of Martinus Scriblerus. And at this present time of
writing we may note that the axe-wielding ex-premier, the Right Hon.
W. E. Gladstone, in his great speech on introducing the Reform Bill
(March 19, 1866), borrowed a metaphor from this ancient fable with
eloquent propriety—
“Scandit fatalis machina muros
_Fœta_ armis.”
Footnote 5:
Forsyth’s “Remarks during an Excursion in Italy,” p. 117.
Footnote 6:
In Blaine’s “Cyclopædia of Rural Sports,” art. _British Boxing_, p.
1219. Longmans 1860.
Footnote 7:
An intelligent correspondent of _The Sporting Life_ newspaper, in a
series of letters from Germany, written in July, 1863, gives a graphic
and blood-tinted picture of “How the Students fight at Heidelberg,”
which we would commend to the perusal of the pedagogues of our public
schools. We have space for no more than a few fragmentary sentences,
but the whole is worth serious thought on the part of those who “teach
the ingenuous youth of modern nations.” The writer says:—“I will now
describe to you three duels, out of many I have witnessed. The first
with the sabre, the other two with _schlagers_. The first was between
the _præses_, or head man of one of the principal corps, and an
officer in the German army. It appears that the officer was at one
time a student in the University of Heidelberg, which he quitted to
enter the German service. Being quartered at Mannheim, which is close
to Heidelberg, he determined to revisit the place, when, for some
reason or other unknown to me, he was at once drawn into a duel by the
_præses_ of the corps. Allow me to remark, _en passant_, that an
unfortunate student was killed here in a sabre-duel some three or four
months ago. A court of inquiry was held, and it was proved by the
medical men that the deceased had a remarkably thin skull, which would
easily have been fractured by the slightest blow, a fall, or anything
of that sort. The result was that all parties were acquitted. But I
must return to my sabre-duel. While I was passing through Heidelberg,
Old “Puggy” came and told me there would be a sabre-duel early the
next morning in the _Ingle Suisse_, or “Angels’ Meadow,” a small
meadow up in the mountains, surrounded by trees, and where all the
_sabre_ and _pistol_ duels came off. The “Angels’ Meadow” is about ten
minutes walk from the _Hirsch Gasse_. I suppose it has derived its
name from its extreme beauty, but I think the “Devil’s Meadow” would
be a more appropriate name, for during the last twenty years no end of
fatal duels have taken place there. I took care to be on the ground
early, in order to get a view, which I did by mounting a tree. The
attendance was very small, as only a limited number are allowed to be
present at a duel which is likely to be attended with loss of life.
Each man arrived on the ground in a carriage, the student being
accompanied by the University doctor, while the officer had a medical
friend. While the seconds and umpires were arranging preliminaries,
the men were prepared by their respective doctors. The combatants in
this case were prepared as follows:—A leather pad to protect the
stomach, and a woollen one guarded the lower parts. The sword arm was
covered as usual, and a leather apron put on. The whole upper part of
the body was left open to attack. The ring was made, the seconds,
umpire, and referee took up their respective positions, and the two
doctors undoing their cases of instruments, laid them on the ground
ready for any emergency. The terms were that the men, if able to
scratch, were to fight fifteen minutes, not including rests and
stoppages. The umpire of the student (the student being the
challenger) now prepared to give the word. Previous to this, a sabre,
with schlager handles, was handed to each man. At the word
_Silentium_, you might have heard a pin drop. _Gebunden_, or the order
to bind them, was then given, and a silk handkerchief was tied round
the wrist, and fastened to the handle. _Gebunden ist_ was the reply,
which means, “bound it is.” _Auf de mensur_, “go into position and
scratch,” _Faretz_, “ready,” and _Los_, “go at it,” were called, and
at it they went with a will, the guard used being the
_schlager_-guard, and not the English sword exercise. Two or three
rounds were fought, when the officer got a fearful wound on the side
of the head. The round was of course over, and after a few
restoratives had been administered, silence was again called. I may as
well state here, once and for all, that this was the only wound the
officer got; not so with the student, the wounds he received about the
head were of a fearful character, and round after round he came up.
The time having expired, the student was carried to his carriage; and,
owing to the injuries received, he could not leave his room for
several months. When he left his room, he went to the seaside. It is
needless for me to say that both of them will carry the marks of this
contest to the grave.
“It was on April 10, during vacation, and while there were scarcely
any students in Heidelberg, I was sitting at my window, and saw four
or five students go towards the _Hirsch Gasse_; I followed them, and
when I arrived there the men were stripping. All being in readiness,
they were led out of the house, each arm being carefully supported by
the seconds. One of these gentlemen was a student from Munich, the
other was a Heidelberger, and the men were placed opposite to each
other. Silence was called, and the fight began. The first round
occupied considerably less than half a minute, and was finished by the
seconds springing in and terminating the round, because one of the
_schlagers_ was bent. The second round followed without any result.
The combatants are never allowed to be in _mensur_ more than
three-quarters of a minute—scarcely ever half a minute: these short
rounds are done to rest the arm. In the third round, the Munich man
got a cut on the cheek, a _Bluticher_, or “a blood,” was the cry. The
seconds cried “halt!” and “a blood” was scored to the Heidelberg
student. The fourth round was a teazer for the Munich man, for he got
his nose divided clean in two. No surgeon could have done it better:
you could have laid one half back on one cheek, and the other half on
the other. After this, the Munich man lost his nerve, and every round
he only came up to be receiver-general. At last he got a fearful cut
behind the head, dividing an artery. Seeing this, the surgeon
immediately stopped the duel, after they had been at it seven minutes
(fifteen minutes was the time they had to fight). The wounded man was
taken inside the inn, where every necessary attention was paid him
which his condition required. I never saw the man again.
“The second _schlager_ duel which I saw was between a Prussian and a
Schwabian: both fine men. The morning was a wet one, so they fought in
a cart-shed. Having gone into a detailed account of two other duels,
it will not be necessary for me to do so in this one; suffice it to
say, the surgeon made them fight out the full time (fifteen minutes),
and the Prussian got no less than six ugly cuts about the head;
fearful gashes they were. He had to keep his bed; and, like most of
these duellists, will carry the marks to the grave. As he was led out
of the shed, he presented a piteous spectacle; and I only wish some of
the detractors of the P.R. could have seen him as I did. These two
_schlager_ duels are good average samples.”
The writer adds, after some sensible remarks on these sickening and
murderous savageries, “I write thus strongly, because I cannot and
will not believe that any one who has the good of his country at heart
can decry a well-conducted P.R., as it might be if legalised, or at
the least winked at and tolerated.” As to the fatal encounters with
knife, rifle, and revolver in the Transatlantic States, they stain
almost every sheet of their journalism.
Footnote 8:
As it would overload the page with notes to give authorities for these
remarks, we may observe that the opinions upon pugilism of the
celebrated Mr. Windham, Mr. Harvey Combe, Sir Henry Smith, the Duke of
Hamilton, Francis Duke of Bedford, Lord Yarmouth, Mr. Barber Beaumont,
Sir John Sinclair, the first Lord Lowther, and other legislators of
both Houses, will be found under the periods with which they were
contemporary, together with the dicta of justices and judges as
occasion called them forth. Anecdotes and extracts from the writings
or speeches of Dr. Johnson, Dr. Parr, Dr. Drury, Adam Smith, Sir
Walter Scott (in _Paul’s Letters to his Kinsfolk_), Professor Wilson,
Lord Byron, Tom Moore, Sir Robert Peel (the late), and other admirers
of the pugilate, are scattered in the places where they appropriately
occur.
Footnote 9:
On this point the Hon. Grantley Fitzhardinge Berkeley, M.P. for
Gloucester, has expressed himself with outspoken candour in “A Letter
on the Sports of the People, and their Moral Effects,” which is
invaluable as the testimony of one who has shared in the sports and
studied the customs of his countrymen. He says:—“Looking at a mere
prize-fight got up by the backers and friends of each party, it seems,
in its abstract position, to be an useless brutality for two men,
having no personal cause of quarrel, to bruise each other for the
possession of gold; but, regarding it in another light, as the
necessary display of a fair standard of combat, by the rights and
regulations of which, throughout the country, all quarrels determined
by personal conflict are to be settled, in this light it assumes a
character of safe and wholesome public example, which its most
strenuous opposers cannot with justice deny. In my mind, then, the
prize fight and fair boxing-match are the means of teaching the people
to become advocates for honest and gallant decisions in all cases of
quarrel, and that the encouragement of the use of the fist is the
greatest antidote that can be offered to the revengeful and dastardly
resort to the assassin’s knife.
“In freedom from war, in the retirement and blessings of the country,
there are no gallant deeds to keep alive the emulation and courage of
the English peasant; then I hold that _any amusement_ which tends to
the display of personal gallantry, is calculated to be beneficial to
the human mind. In spite of all the outcry raised by self-dubbed
humane societies, and the abuse to which they often stretch the power
vested in them for better purposes; in spite of the sickly preachings
of diseased and over-sensitive minds, there is no set of people more
angry with the fact of two armies being in presence of each other
without fighting, than those whose health or inclinations confine them
to the tea-table and fireside, and who would faint at the mere sight
of their own blood.
“It is the man who cannot leave home, that cries out for war; it is
the man who has no chance of bleeding, that calls for blood. A paper
on the breakfast-table, which brings a return of thousands slain, is,
to the appetite of those sickly sophists, an agreeable stimulant.
‘Humanity’ makes a capital banner for a cavilist, ignorant of the
matter of the subject he condemns, to march under; and ‘no cruelty’ is
a cry like the ‘no popery’ cry, which gathers together hosts of
unthinking people ready to arraign and pull down they know not what.
“The shrivelled penman, whether clerk or layman, whose thews and
sinews have wasted through inactivity, sits at his desk and condemns
recreations, pastimes, and pleasures, the value of which he has never
known, and the loss of which, in consequence, is immaterial to him;
while hosts of others, conscious of their own more secret mental
deformities, are zealous to hang charges of immorality on any
superficially available corner of the characters of their neighbours,
for the sole purpose of sustaining one reputation on the ruins of
another.”
Footnote 10:
Vide Mr. Henry Mayhew’s admirable pen and pencil sketches of “London
Labour and the London Poor.”
Footnote 11:
It is a curious statistical fact that of twenty murders, accompanied
with brutal violence, committed in 1862‒3‒4, the writer traced no less
than eleven to inhabitants of England not native born. A more recent
atrocity, the railway murder of Mr. Briggs, we owe to a German
immigrant; the five preceding ones (out of eleven) to Irishmen, who
bear a proportion to Englishmen as 5 to 150, or 1 in 30 of the
population. Then comes in close sequence, the brutal assassination and
mutilation of a German (Fuhrup) by his countryman Karl Kohl; and later
we find recorded a knife and shillalah fight between Italians
(Gregorio Mogni and Serafino Pelizzioni), who among them stabbed
several persons and killed an Irishman, one Michael Harrington, the
initiatory feud being the merits of Garibaldi on the Italian side, and
his Holiness Pio Nono on the Irish.
Footnote 12:
This shows that the professors of gymnastics were numerous at the
time.
Footnote 13:
“To Fig and Broughton he commits his breast,
To steel it to the fashionable test.”
And in Bramstone’s _Man of Taste_ we read:—
“In Fig, the prize-fighter, by day delight.
And sup with Colley Cibber every night.”
Footnote 14:
The “Ring” in Hyde Park (not the drive so called) was formed in 1723,
by “order of his Majesty,” and encircled by a fence. It was situated
about 300 yards from Grosvenor Gate. The area is still visible—a
circle of very old trees belted by a plantation of younger ones. It
was the scene of many impromptu conflicts, especially among the
“chairmen” and “linkmen” of the two first Georges’ reigns, and the
early part of the third. Fights were stopped here by the “Bow-street
myrmidons” towards the close of the last century, and the ring itself
obliterated in 1820.
Footnote 15:
This assertion is found in contemporary writers, and in _Pancratia_,
p. 34. The ponderous Doctor himself was not only an advocate, but a
practitioner of the fistic art. His strength and personal courage were
undoubted, as well as his humanity. We have the authority of his
biographers for his knock-down of Davies, the bookseller, in
King-street, Covent Garden, and among the anecdotes of the day current
and printed, is one of his successfully “instructing” a bullying
drayman who was beating a cripple; as for his humanity and strength,
we have the well-known and oft-repeated fact of his carrying
pick-a-back (despite his prejudice against Scotchmen,) a disabled
Scottish beggar to the hospital in Crane-court, Fleet-street.
Footnote 16:
“Boxiana” in two or three places says 1740. That was the period when
George Taylor, the proprietor of the Tottenham Court booth, was beaten
by the renowned Broughton.
Footnote 17:
The residence of George the Third, wherein he received the address of
the Corporation of London on his accession (June 16, 1727); and also
the mansion of his son Frederick, Prince of Wales, above-mentioned,
who died in his father’s lifetime. Here were held the glove matches
above alluded to. Here, too (afterwards called Saville House), George
the Third was proclaimed, on the 26th October, 1760, and received the
great bodies of the State. Its subsequent history—as Miss Linwood’s
Gallery of Needlework, rooms for sparring and fencing exhibitions,
conjuring, etc., _cafe chantant_, casino, and restaurant—brings us to
its fate by fire in the month of March, 1865, and its proposed
resuscitation in 1879, as “The Alcazar” theatre, concert-room, and
hotel. _Sic transit_, etc.
Footnote 18:
This was written in 1747. It had been well had the Captain’s friendly
caution been remembered.
Footnote 19:
Richard Humphries, “the gentleman boxer,” who beat Mendoza in 1788, is
here alluded to. He was five feet nine inches. We suspect Broughton
was an inch or two taller (Slack was five feet eight and a half
inches); but his bulk, in old age, took off his height.
Footnote 20:
“Pancratia,” p. 46, edit. 1811.
Footnote 21:
This clumsy, inefficient, and easily stopped blow has later claimants
to the _honour_ of its invention. It is simply the most dangerous to
the boxer who tries it, and the most awkward delivery of the fist.
Footnote 22:
A provincialism for crushing and rubbing.
Footnote 23:
This conduct would, of course, have lost the Frenchman the fight in
modern times. There are some odd points of resemblance in Pettit’s
fighting and that of Heenan in his Wadhurst fight with Tom King,
although one was fought on turf the other on a stage. Heenan did not,
however, “rogue” it like the Frenchman, and walk off, but “took his
gruel” till beaten out of time.
Footnote 24:
George Meggs, the collier, was from the pugilistic nursery of Bristol.
After this surreptitious seizure of the championship, he returned to
his native place, we presume, for in July, 1762, we find him fighting
“a pitched battle for a considerable sum (“Fistiana” says £100) with
one Millsom, a baker, of the rival city of Bath.” This came off at
Calne in Wiltshire, when, after a fierce battle of forty minutes,
Millsom was acknowledged the conqueror. In the next month (August,
1762), Meggs, having challenged Millsom to a second combat, was a
second time beaten.
Parfitt Meggs, noticed hereafter, a noted west country boxer, also
surrendered to Millsom. Parfitt afterwards beat a namesake of the
retired champion Slack (whose Christian name was John, not Jem), in
the year 1765, at Lansdown, near Bath, which has made a mess in more
than one “history.” In “Fistiana” (1864 edit.), under Meggs (Parfitt)
are several fights, including two defeats by Tom Tyne (1787) and a
victory over Joe Ward in 1790, about all which history is silent,
while under Tom Tyne we are told he was twice beaten by Mendoza; when
and where we know not. He was, however, beaten by Bill Darts
(afterwards champion) at Shepton Mallett, in 1764, which does not
appear under Meggs’ name.
Footnote 25:
Pierce Egan alters this to eight stone and a half, to agree with his
statement that he fought men _double his weight_.
Footnote 26:
The reporter’s statement shows that, according to the modern practice,
Taylor had lost the fight.—He was merely fighting for an off-chance, a
foul blow, or a wrangle. ED.
Footnote 27:
Pancratia, pp. 52, 53.
Footnote 28:
“Tom Juchau, the paviour,” once bid fair to seize the championship—on
June 20th, 1764. His name in pugilistic circles was “Disher;” how
derived, we might in vain inquire. His first fight of importance was
with Charles Cohant (or Coant), a butcher, who had fought several
severely-contested battles. Cohant, being the best known man, was the
favourite, and the contemporary account says, “During the first
twenty-five minutes ‘Disher’ was scarcely able to give him a single
blow, but was knocked down several times. At thirty-five minutes odds
were so high that money was offered at any rate. At this time Disher
(Tom Juchau) changed his mode of fighting, and giving Cohant a most
tremendous blow, by which he fell; the odds immediately changed in his
favour. After this they fought but four rounds, when Disher, having
played in several dreadful blows, Cohant yielded, acknowledging
himself to be vanquished. The fight lasted forty-seven minutes.” There
is a Spartan brevity, an heroic simplicity, and a simple trust in the
reports of these olden fights, which is truly “refreshing” (we believe
that is the tabernacle phrase) in these days of prose-showering and
persiflage.
The next report is equally commendable for its brevity. “On August the
27th (1765), Millsom, who had defeated the two Meggs (see _ante_),
fought a battle with Thomas Juchau, the paviour, at Colney, near St.
Alban’s, in which he failed to enjoy his usual triumph, Juchau proving
his conqueror.” After half a page of undated rigmarole, headed “Tom
Juchau,” Pierce Egan says, vol. i., p. 74, “The paviour was now
considered a first-rate man, and soon matched himself against some of
the most distinguished pugilists.” We cannot find that he ever fought
again.
Footnote 29:
Lyons (champion, 1769) has no mention of his exploits, except his
conquest of the heroic Bill Darts, June 27, 1769, for the
championship. For twenty-five minutes Darts had it all his own way,
and ten to one was laid upon him, when Lyons recovered second wind,
and in forty-five minutes wrested the championship from him. The
battle took place at Kingston-upon-Thames. No other notable fight is
credited to Lyons.
Footnote 30:
_Daily Advertiser_, May 17, 1771, and _Monthly Register_ for May of
the same year.
Footnote 31:
“Boxiana,” vol. i., p. 83.
Footnote 32:
Joe Hood, see _post_, p. 53.
Footnote 33:
“Historical Sketches and Recollections of Pugilism.” 1 vol. London,
1803.
Footnote 34:
Elisha Crabbe, though a professor of some notoriety, does not take
much rank by this conquest over a boxer of upwards of fifty years of
age. His next fight was with Bob Watson, of Bristol, June 9, 1788 (see
Appendix to Period II., in the memoir of WATSON), wherein he was
beaten, but not disgraced. His last fight was with Tom Tyne (see
TYNE), wherein he was also defeated. Elisha, who was in height 5 feet
8 inches, was a man of great muscular power. For many years he filled
the responsible position of a peace officer at the Mansion House of
the City of London. He resigned this and became a licensed victualler
in Duke’s Place. He was a civil, obliging man, and always an object of
popular attraction among the people of his own persuasion. He died
suddenly on board the Gravesend packet, June 9, 1809, on his return to
London, and was buried with Jewish tokens of respect.
Footnote 35:
The following shows that police interference was occasional, even in
these early times. “May 11, 1773, a boxing match took place at the
Riding School, Three Hats, Islington, between John Pearce and John
White, both shoemakers, for £10 a-side. At the commencement of the
combat White seemed to have somewhat the advantage, but Pearce having
recovered his wind, and given White several severe falls, was on the
point of winning, when the high constable and his attendants mounted
the stage, and put an end to the contest.”—_Daily Advertiser_, May
13th.
Footnote 36:
“Pancratia,” p. 63.
Footnote 37:
Bath’s name appears as BOOTH in “Fistiana,” under HOOD, but his
battles are omitted in their alphabetical place. The most important
were—beat William Allen, 40 min., Barnet, Aug. 20, 1776; beat Joe
Hood, £50, 20 min., Maidenhead, Sept. 8, 1778.
Footnote 38:
Life of Johnson in “Historical Recollections of Boxing, etc.” 8vo.,
1804; copied in “Pancratia,” (1811), pp. 65, 66.
Footnote 39:
As even an opponent of so good a boxer, Love’s name deserves a line or
two. On January 14, 1788, after the fights of Johnson and Ryan and
Mendoza and Humphries had brought back to pugilism the highest
patronage, Bill Love and Denis Ketcher, an Irish boxer, fought for 20
guineas. Love was seconded by W. Savage, and Ketcher by his brother.
“There were not less than 10,000 spectators of this fight, who were
highly surprised and gratified by the dexterity of Ketcher. In size
and strength Love was superior, but in forty-five minutes he was
obliged to yield the laurel to the superior adroitness of his
opponent.” (“Pancratia,” p. 77.) Love’s next appearance was more
successful. On January 22, only eight days after his defeat by
Ketcher, Love fought George Ring (generally misprinted King), the Bath
baker, a well-known pugilist, whose defeat of Edwards, on his first
arrival in London, had made him much talked about. Love beat him
cleverly in thirty-seven minutes, in “the Hay Fields, Bloomsbury.”
Footnote 40:
Called Bill Ward in “Recollections” and in “Pancratia.” His name is
correctly given in “Fistiana.” Warr beat Wood (Captain Robinson’s
coachman) at Navestock, Essex, December 31, 1788; was twice beaten by
Mendoza (see MENDOZA); beat Stanyard, “a pugilist of celebrity from
Birmingham,” for 100 guineas, in ten rounds, thirteen minutes, at
Colnbrook, October 26, 1792.
Footnote 41:
It would be injustice to omit a short sketch of what our Yankee
friends would call so “tall” a boxer as Isaac Perrins. His immense
strength was “yoked with a lamb-like disposition.” In Birmingham,
where he had long followed his occupation as foreman of a large
manufactory, he was respected by his employers, and beloved by the
workmen under him. Perrins was far from an illiterate man. In his
general conversation he was intelligent, cheerful, and communicative,
and possessed of a considerable share of discernment, which, after he
quitted his calling as a coppersmith at Birmingham, and became a
publican at Manchester, was of great service to him in business. His
house was well attended by customers of a superior class. Isaac, too,
had a natural taste for music, and, at one period of his life, was the
leader of a country choir in psalmody. In company, Perrins was
facetious, full of anecdote, and never tardy in giving his song; and
was a strong instance in his own person, among many others which might
be cited, if necessary, that it does not follow as a matter of course
that all pugilists are blackguards! The following anecdote from a work
entitled “The Itinerant,” not only places the good temper and amazing
strength of Perrins in a conspicuous point of view, but exhibits one
of the peculiar traits of an erratic histrionic genius, whose reckless
riot ruined and extinguished his higher gifts. “It happened that
Perrins, the noted pugilist, made one of the company this evening. He
was a remarkably strong man, and possessed of great modesty and good
nature; the last scene took such an effect on his imagination, that he
laughed immoderately. Cooke’s attention was attracted, and turning
towards him with his most bitter look, ‘What do you laugh at, Mr.
Swabson, hey? Why, you great lubber-headed thief, Johnson would have
beat two of you! laugh at me! at George Cooke! come out, you
scoundrel!’ The coat was soon pulled off, and, putting himself in an
attitude, he exclaimed, ‘This is the arm that shall sacrifice you.’
Perrins was of a mild disposition, and, knowing Cooke’s character,
made every allowance, and answered him only by a smile, till
aggravated by language and action the most gross, he very calmly took
him in his arms as though he had been a child, set him down in the
street, and bolted the door. The evening was wet, and our hero without
coat or hat, unprepared to cope with it; but entreaty for admission
was vain, and his application at the window unattended to. At length,
grown desperate, he broke several panes, and, inserting his head
through the fracture, bore down all opposition by the following
witticism: ‘Gentlemen, I have taken some _panes_ to gain admission,
pray let me in, for _I see through my error_.’ The door was opened,
dry clothes procured, and about one o’clock in the morning we sent him
home in a coach.” Despite the second-hand wit, the credit remains with
the pugilist.
In the “Annual Register,” under date of December 10, 1800, we read,
“Died at Manchester, aged 50, Mr. Isaac Perrins, engine-worker. This
pugilistic hero will ever be remembered for the well-contested battle
he fought with the celebrated Johnson, in the month of October, 1789.
Perrins possessed most astonishing muscular power, which rendered him
well calculated for a bruiser, to which was united a disposition the
most placid and amiable. His death was occasioned by too violently
exerting himself in assisting to save life and property at a fire in
Manchester. He was sincerely lamented by all who knew him.” Perrins
needs no further epitaph than this tribute of _one_ who knew him.
Footnote 42:
The account does not say whether blows had been exchanged, but we
presume there had.—ED.
Footnote 43:
Those who witnessed the memorable third fight between Caunt and
Bendigo (at Sutfield Green, Oxfordshire, Sept. 19, 1845), so unfairly
reported at the time, may think they are perusing an account of it. So
does pugilism, like history, under like circumstances, “reproduce
itself.”—ED.
Footnote 44:
This seems to have been such a hit as that with which the Tipton
closed accounts with Tass Parker in their last fight, or Tom King gave
Mace at the conclusion of their second meeting. Those hits, when a man
is “shaky,” are receipts in full.—ED.
Footnote 45:
Jacombs, whose provincial triumphs are unrecorded, was a strong rough,
with an Englishman’s heirdom, unyielding pluck. We find only one other
notice in the journals of the time. “March 10 (1790). A desperate
contest was fought at Stoke Golding, near Coventry, between Jacombs,
the Warwickshire boxer, and Payne, of Coventry. At setting-to Jacombs
was the favourite, but after a most severe conflict of two hours, in
which the combatants contested ninety-five rounds, and during which
both the combatants were several times thrown from the stage, Payne
was declared victorious. The conduct of Payne was cool, but admirably
courageous, whilst that of Jacombs seemed brutally passionate. He
seemed to depend more upon driving and bruising his opponent against
the railings than fair and open fighting with the fists.” We regret to
say that Jacombs has had too many successors in this unmanly art, even
with the less dangerous ropes and stakes of the modern ring.
Footnote 46:
Tom Tring in person, but not in physiognomy, resembled the late burly
and clumsy boxer Ben Caunt. He was, however, a civil, inoffensive, and
mild looking giant. He was the original of several Academicians’
drawings and paintings of Hercules. “He challenged all England”
(_except his friend_ Tom Johnson—a judicious exception), “for one
thousand guineas;” so do the advertising hair-dressers: but when
Pierce asks us to believe that poor Tring’s “qualities as a pugilist
were of a most tremendous nature, and few men appeared who were
capable of resisting his mighty prowess,” and of his being “clad in
the rich _paraphernalia_ (which of the princesses married him?) _of
royalty_,” we begin to ask ourselves whether we are reading the
history of Tom Thumb. To support this magniloquent introduction, we
are told he beat Tom Pratt, “a very formidable man,” in 1787, a guinea
to four shillings, “Pratt ran away, leaving Tom in possession of the
ring.” We find, instead of this, under date of August 19th, 1787, that
“a boxing match was contested on Kennington Common, between Jacob
Doyle, the Irish boxer, and Tom Tring, which the latter won with ease.
Tring is said to be the finest made man in England, and the talents of
several of the first artists have been employed to delineate the
symmetry of his person. As a boxer he possessed little science, but
good courage.” (Quoted in “Pancratia,” p. 72). A terrible “street
fight” with one Norfolk, a bricklayer, is here improvised, to
introduce his thrashing by Big Ben. Poor Tring was another of the
victims of the heartless dandy and unprincipled egotist miscalled “the
first gentleman of Europe,” without a particle of the gentleman in his
whole composition. Tring obtained a precarious living as a model to
Sir Joshua Reynolds, Hooper, Sir William Beechey, and others, and
earned a crust as a street porter. He was a civil inoffensive fellow;
in height six feet two inches, and weighing fifteen stone in prime
condition. He died in the pursuit of his humble calling in the year
1815.
Footnote 47:
“Fighting for darkness,” a few years since, became a sort of
calculated “off-chance,” to save bets among the “down the river”
second-class pugilists of the London ring.—ED.
Footnote 48:
Rather too small for big men.—ED.
Footnote 49:
The distribution of duties of seconds, and a third party in care of
the water, etc., in modern times, is noted elsewhere.—ED.
Footnote 50:
_Daily Advertiser_, January 22, 1790.
Footnote 51:
Mendoza’s last ring battle may be considered as that with John Jackson
in 1795. His return to the ring to fight out a quarrel with Harry Lee,
in 1806, and the foolish exhibition in 1820 with old Tom Owen, are
solecisms, and do not disturb the arrangement by Periods.
Footnote 52:
A contemporary writer, in 1790, says of him: “Mendoza is a pugilist
better initiated in the theory of boxing than perhaps any of his
cotemporaries, and has produced some exceedingly expert pupils. In his
manner there is more neatness than strength, and it has been said,
more show than service; his blows are in general deficient in force,
but given with astonishing quickness, and he is allowed to strike
oftener, and stop more dexterously, than any other man; he is
extremely well formed in the breast and arms, but his loins are very
weak; his wind is good, and he possesses excellent bottom.”
Footnote 53:
This would have lost Mister Packer the battle by the modern rules.—ED.
Footnote 54:
See notice of WARR in Appendix to Period II.
Footnote 55:
1— Thomas Wilson
2— John Horn
3— Harry Davis
4— John Lloyd
5— Thomas Monk
6— John Hind
7— William More
8— John Williams
9— Richard Dennis
10— George Cannon
11— A. Fuller
12— T. Spencer
13— William Taylor
14— John Knight
15— John Braintree
16— William Bryant
17— John Matthews
18— Tom Tyne
19— Ditto
20— George Hoast
21— George Mackenzie
22— John Hall
23— William Cannon
24— George Barry
25— George Smith
26— William Nelson
*27— Martin (the Bath Butcher)
*28— Richard Humphries
*29— Ditto
*30— Ditto
*31— William Warr
*32— Ditto
*33— John Jackson
*34— Harry Lee
*35— Tom Owen.
Such is the list; see “Boxiana” (Vol. iii. p. 489). There is “a
curious felicity” in the selection, as, with the exception of Tom Tyne
(Nos. 18, 19), whose two defeats by Mendoza are unrecorded, and those
with an asterisk, not one name ever figures as fighting anybody else
on any discoverable occasion.
Footnote 56:
Mendoza was at that period fifty-seven years of age, while Owen was
nearly six years younger; an important difference—supposing all other
circumstances equal—at such an advanced (we had almost said absurd)
time of life for a fistic exhibition.
Footnote 57:
Tempora mutantur, et nos mutamur in illis.—VIRGIL.
Footnote 58:
Sam Martin, known as the Bath Butcher, fought many good battles in
“the West Countrie.” On his coming to London, however, he was unlucky
in being pitted against such masters of the art as Humphries and Dan
Mendoza. To Sam’s battle with Humphries, the author of “Pancratia” (p.
68), attributes “the revival of pugilism, and its high patronage.” The
result is related in the text.
Martin was next matched against Mendoza. His defeat, April 17, 1787,
will be found in that boxer’s biography. His last battle of importance
was with Bligh, “the Coventry Champion,” a riband weaver of that town.
It came off at Evesham, in Oxfordshire, on the 7th of April, 1791, for
50 guineas a side. George Ring, the Bath Baker, seconded Martin; a
local boxer (Brooks), picked up Bligh. Martin’s two defeats, and
Bligh’s local fame, made the latter the favourite, at six and seven to
four. After a severe contest, Martin was hailed as conqueror.
Footnote 59:
This was an unjustifiable interference on the part of the second.—ED.
Footnote 60:
As a matter incidental to the history of pugilism, we cannot omit a
short notice of Colonel Aston. The story has a spice of romance, and
“points a moral” in favour of the principles we are advocating. We
copy the “News from India” in the _World_ for 1799. “Colonel Aston
being for a short time absent from his regiment, a misunderstanding
occurred between Major Picton[171] and Major Allan with a lieutenant.
Immediately on the return of the colonel, he was made acquainted with
the affair, and wrote his opinion, in a private letter, that the
behaviour of the two majors was somewhat ‘illiberal’ to their
subaltern officer. The letter being shown, Majors P. and A. demanded a
Court of Inquiry, which was refused by the commander-in-chief, as
calculated to destroy ‘that harmony among officers so essential to the
support of discipline in regiments on foreign duty.’ Major Picton now
called upon Colonel Aston to demand an explanation of the term
‘illiberal.’ Colonel Aston ‘did not think himself bound to account for
his conduct in discharge of his duty as Colonel to any inferior
officer; but if Major Picton had anything to reproach him with, as a
private gentleman, he was prepared to give him any satisfaction in his
power.’ This brought it into the domain of a private quarrel (!), and
the next day they met by appointment, accompanied by their seconds.
Major Picton had the first fire: his pistol snapped, which was
declared equal to a fire by the seconds. Colonel Aston immediately
fired in the air, declaring he had no quarrel with the major.” Would
not a rational man think this punctilious foolery was settled; but no!
We continue our quotation. “Notwithstanding the kindly manner in which
this affair had been apparently settled, to the reciprocal
satisfaction of the code of the duello, Major Allan the next day
demanded satisfaction for the private opinion expressed by the colonel
of his conduct. A similar answer was returned, that the colonel denied
his right to call upon him to explain any act of his official duty;
that he was at all times ready to vindicate his private conduct, but
at the same time was unconscious of having offended Major A. The
latter, however, assumed a tone of vehemence and authority, which
rendered the meeting on the part of the colonel unavoidable. Major
Allan fired the first shot—the seconds did not perceive the ball had
taken effect. The colonel, having received the fire, appeared unhurt,
stood erect, and with the greatest composure levelled his pistol with
a steady hand, shewing he had power to fire on his antagonist. He then
leisurely drew it back, and laying it across his breast, said, ‘I am
shot through the body; I believe the wound is mortal, and therefore
decline returning the fire: for it never shall be said that the last
act of my life was dictated by a spirit of revenge.’ He sat down on
the ground, was carried home, where he languished in excessive agony
for several days, and without a murmur expired.
“Colonel Harvey Aston was brother to the pretty Mrs. Hodges, well
known in the sporting world. He married Miss Ingram, the daughter of
Lady Irwin, and sister to the Marchioness of Hertford, Lady William
Gordon, Lady Ramsden, and Mrs. Meynell, whom he left with a young
family to deplore this melancholy accident.” The chivalrous honour,
manly forbearance, and moderation of this staunch patron of pugilism
shines through every phase of this deplorable case of manslaughter. We
call things by their right names.
Footnote 61:
Fewterel is said by Mr. Vincent Dowling, in his obituary notice of
John Jackson, to have been a Scotchman; we think it probable from what
we here give.
The only other contest of Fewterel’s, worth preserving, is his battle
with a Highlander, on the Leith Ground, Edinburgh, March 23, 1793. The
Highlander, whose calling was that of an Edinburgh chairman, was
reputed a phenomenon among his brethren of the Scottish capital.
“Fewterel, when stripped, appeared very corpulent, and by no means in
the condition in which he fought Jackson. The Highlander was by far
the finer and stronger man, and was reported to possess wonderful
readiness and courage. They set-to at about eight o’clock in the
morning, and the first knock-down blow was given by Fewterel, who sent
his antagonist a surprising distance, there being no roped enclosure.
The next round he also brought down the Scot by a severe blow in the
chest. In the next round the Highlander got in a well-hit stroke under
Fewterel’s right eye, which cut him severely. He, however, stood firm,
and kept cool. The next blow Fewterel got in, he again brought him
down, and this so enraged the Highlander, that during the remainder of
the contest he never recovered his temper. This gave Fewterel a
decided advantage, and though he afterwards received many severe
blows, he constantly reduced the strength of his antagonist. At length
he put in a hit under the Highlander’s jaw that laid him senseless on
the grass. Thus terminated the contest, after thirty-five minutes. The
Scot soon, however, recovered, but was unable to walk home. The match
was 50 guineas to 30 guineas. The odds were given to Fewterel, who
generously gave the man he had beaten 10 guineas, the sum he
(Fewterel) was promised if he won the battle.”—“Pancratia,” pp. 111,
112.
Footnote 62:
“The second boxing match was between Elisha Crabbe, the Jew, who beat
Death (see _ante_) and Watson of Bristol; won by the latter. The third
between two outsiders.”
Footnote 63:
That the everyday use and familiar handling of deadly weapons lead to
their reckless use, we may quote a few recent instances from the
history of our descendants in America. The horrible assassination of
the great and good President Abraham Lincoln, and the ferocious use of
a “billy” and a bowie-knife upon the helpless and prostrate Mr.
Secretary Seward, his son, Major Frederick Seward, and an attendant,
are offsprings of a familiarity with daily outrages by lethal weapons,
and the general resort to them to redress injury or resent insult. The
death of the assassin Booth is the culmination.
Footnote 64:
_Eheu fugaces anni_—not only have the men departed, but their local
habitations have vanished. The spacious hotel, once Wallace’s, now the
Alexandra, and palatial mansions, cover the ground extending from Hyde
Park Corner (on the side of St. George’s Hospital), towards St. Paul’s
new Puseyite pinnacles at Knightsbridge. Even “the Corner” itself—the
world-famed “Tattersall’s” has migrated. It will be known only to the
remainder of the present, and the next rising generation, as the
splendid club-room and spacious horse-mart at the junction of the
Brompton and Kensington Roads.
Footnote 65:
About 1790, Lord Barrymore was in the hey-day of his riot and
“larkery” at Brighton, where the Prince of Wales had just finished
that grotesque kiosk known as the Pavilion, once the scene of royal
orgies, now a cockney show-shop of London super mare. The Lord
Barrymore, who was Hooper’s patron, was the head of the family firm
nicknamed Newgate, Hellgate, and Cripplegate, from colloquial,
acquired, or personal peculiarities. On hearing these elegant
sobriquets, the Prince is said to have objected to the omission of the
lady sister of the trio from this nomenclature, and ungallantly
suggested the name of “Billingsgate,” as a fourth of the family.
One anecdote is too characteristic of the actors to be lost. “In one
of his wild freaks, his Lordship, from his lofty phaeton, struck with
his driving whip a Mr. Donadieu, a respectable perfumer of Brighton,
who was driving in his gig, for not getting quickly enough out of his
impetuous Lordship’s way. Mr. Donadieu drove after him, but his
lordship’s terrible high-bred cattle soon distanced him. The next
morning Mr. D., perceiving Lord Barrymore upon the Steyne, in company
with several sporting men, went up to him and remonstrated upon the
ungentlemanly usage he had experienced the previous day. His Lordship
replied insultingly, and struck the perfumer. The tradesman was an
Englishman, and at once returned the blow. A smart rally convinced the
eccentric peer that his credit as a boxer was at stake, for his
resolute opponent drove him before his attack. Lord Barrymore tried to
take an unfair advantage, when the Prince of Wales, who had witnessed
the whole fracas from a window of the Pavilion, called out in a loud
voice, ‘D——e, Barrymore, _fight like a man_!’” In the Hon. Grantley F.
Berkeley’s volumes, “My Life and Recollections” (London, Hurst and
Blackett, 1865), vol. i., pp. 49‒78, is a curious sketch of Brighton
at the close of the 18th century, with anecdotes of Colonel Hanger,
Lord Barrymore, John Jackson, etc., and the ladies whom the heir
apparent delighted to honour. The specimen of the Prince’s style, in
the anecdote of the Royal Harriers, pp. 70, 71, will show that the
“first gentleman of Europe” was _facile princeps_ in the then
fashionable accomplishment of swearing. Grantley Berkeley makes a slip
in the closing lines of his notice of Lord Barrymore, which it may be
worth while to correct. He says: “A rapid career of reckless
extravagance was brought to a sudden close whilst marching with a
detachment towards Dover: _the musket of one of his men went off,
eventually causing his_ (Lord Barrymore’s) _death_.” We must acquit
the Berkshire militia of this charge of clumsy or intentional
homicide. We extract from the memoir of a contemporary: “Lord
Barrymore was a lieutenant of the Berkshire militia stationed at Rye,
and was marching a party of French prisoners to Deal. They marched
through Folkestone to the top of the succeeding hill, and halted at a
small public-house to refresh his men and the prisoners. Admiral
Macbride and General Smith met his lordship there; he was in high
spirits, and accepted an invitation to dine with them at Deal. Lord
Barrymore had marched at the head of his party from Rye; he now
ordered his _valet-de-chambre_, who drove his curricle in the rear, to
procure him a pipe of tobacco, saying, ‘I’ll ride and smoke while you
drive.’ He was in high glee, counted up the score with chalk on a
slate, _à la_ Boniface; imitated Hob, from ‘Hob in the Well,’ a farce
he was very partial to; treated all about him; gave the landlady a
kiss, and leaped into the curricle. He gave the fusil to his servant,
who placed it carelessly between his legs and drove off. They had
scarcely proceeded fifty yards when the piece went off. The contents
entered his lordship’s right cheek, forced out the eye, and lodged in
the brain: he was pointing to the coast of France at the moment. He
lived forty minutes, groaning heavily, but never spoke again. The
fusil was loaded with swan shot; he had been killing gulls and rabbits
on his way from Rye to Folkestone. An inquest was held on the 8th of
March, the verdict ‘Accidental Death.’ He was interred on Sunday,
March 17, 1793, in the chancel of the church at Wargrave.”
Footnote 66:
In “Fistiana,” Wright is, by a slip, called “Lord Barrymore’s man.”
Cotterel’s fight is also omitted under HOOPER.
Footnote 67:
This battle does not appear under Hooper’s name in “Fistiana.”
Footnote 68:
There not being time for the second contest between Stanyard, of
Birmingham, and Andrew Gamble, the Irish champion, it was postponed to
the next day. See GAMBLE, in Appendix to Period II.
Footnote 69:
Maddox will find his place under CRIBB’S period. His first fight was
in 1792, his last with Bill Richmond in 1809.
Footnote 70:
See Wood’s memoir, Appendix to Period II., _post_.
Footnote 71:
“Fistiana” misprints it _sixteen_ minutes.
Footnote 72:
A memoir of this well-known boniface, whose memory yet lives with old
ring-goers, (he died at his house at Plumstead, Kent, in 1843), will
be found in its chronological order.
Footnote 73:
“The Historian” inflicts a second thrashing by his hero and pal “Ould
Tom Owen” on poor Hooper, ten weeks afterwards, at the same place,
under similar circumstances. We suspect “Ould Tom,” as Pierce Egan
calls him, who had a lively imagination, to say the least, must have
narrated a dream to his “philosopher and friend.”
Footnote 74:
These exceptional events are out of ring chronology, properly
speaking. Owen and his opponent, old Dan Mendoza, belonged, as
pugilists, to a previous generation.
Footnote 75:
There was a boxer at this period, Bill Jones, who fought Dunn, Tom
Tyne, and Bob Watson, who has been confounded with Paddington Jones.
Footnote 76:
See Life of JEM BELCHER in Period III.
Footnote 77:
“Boxiana” and “Fistiana” date this fight in June. January is the
correct date; see “Pancratia,” p. 123, and the _Daily Advertiser_ of
the date.
Footnote 78:
“Boxiana” confounds him with Tom (Paddington) Jones.
Footnote 79:
Though Anderson was not, or pretended not to be, good enough for
Watson, Lord Barrymore, who saw the fight, matched him for 50 guineas
against Tom Tight, an Oxford bargee. They fought on Wargner Green,
Berks, January 4, 1790, when Anderson knocked the bargeman almost out
of time in the third round, six minutes only having elapsed.
Footnote 80:
See Life of GULLY, _post_.
Footnote 81:
Cullington was a sporting publican, landlord of the Black Bull, in
Tottenham Court Road, a personal friend and backer of Jem Belcher,
then called “The Bristol Youth.”
Footnote 82:
Pierce Egan says, “a man of the name of Bourke, a butcher.” Much
confusion has been occasioned by the absurd penchant of “the
historian” (as Pierce was wont to style himself) to Hibernicise and
appropriate to Ireland the names and deeds of fistic heroes. Teste his
twist of “the Streatham Youth” into O’Neale, his ludicrous
magniloquence in the case of several Irish roughs in “Boxiana,” on
whom he has expended his slang panegyric (see CORCORAN, GAMBLE,
HATTON, O’DONNELL, etc.), and his thousand and one claims of “Irish
descent” for most of his heroes. Joe Berks (spelt Bourke or Burke in
“Boxiana” and “Fistiana”) was a native of Wem, in Shropshire. He was a
powerful heavy made man, a little short of six feet high, and weighing
fourteen stone. His career was unfortunate, from being pitted against
such phenomena of skill as Jem Belcher and Henry Pearce, for his game
and strength were unimpeachable. From “Pancratia,” p. 126, under date
of September, 18, 1797, we learn that Joe Berks was a cooper, and that
at that date he fought one Christian, a shoemaker, and much fancied as
a boxer by the sons of Crispin, a severe battle in Hyde Park. The
contest lasted fifty-five minutes, during which there were twenty-two
rounds of hard boxing. Berks, despite a wrangle for a “foul,” was
declared the conqueror. Berks’ subsequent pugilistic career will be
read in the memoirs of his conqueror. His successive defeats by
Belcher, Pearce, and Deplige, and his violent temper, lost his
patrons, and he sunk into poverty. A dishonest act, under the
influence, as it was urged in his defence, of liquor, led to his
imprisonment. Here one firm friend of the unfortunate stepped forward,
John Jackson, who, by petition, procured his liberation. Berks
enlisted, and when his kind benefactor last heard of him he held the
position of non-commissioned officer in the Grenadier company of a
regiment serving under the Duke of Wellington (Sir Arthur Wellesley)
in Spain.
Footnote 83:
Alluding to the treaty of Amiens with Napoleon I., the preliminaries
of which were signed October 1, 1801.
Footnote 84:
The old city house of detention and correction was so called; its
successor, the “Giltspur Street Compter,” is now also demolished, and
its prisoners sent to Holloway.
Footnote 85:
These are the exact words of the original report.
Footnote 86:
Another of the _hors d’œuvres_ of a casual turn-up. Tom’s last battle,
properly speaking, was in 1813, with Dogherty, see _post_, p. 160.
Footnote 87:
A silly exaggeration of the “Aquila non gignunt columbæ.” We know
eagles don’t beget doves, or the reverse; but though a healthy or
unhealthy constitution may be transmitted, neither poets,
philosophers, preachers, or pugilists, are begotten hereditarily.
Footnote 88:
“Son of the _renowned_ Michael Ryan,” says Pierce Egan, who devotes to
him a biography. Michael’s “renown” consisted in being twice beaten by
Tom Johnson, which was no disgrace, and then by Mike Brady, an Irish
rough, in twenty minutes, which was. Bill, who was a drunken Irish
braggadocio, after winning his first fight with Belcher, wrangled a
battle with Caleb Baldwin (see BALDWIN), and beat Clarke, June 17,
1806.
Footnote 89:
See Appendix to Period IV.
Footnote 90:
Pearce was in his twenty-sixth year, and the senior of Belcher by
nearly five years; but his constitution was undebauched, and his fame
matured. Belcher began his fighting career at seventeen years with
Britton, two or three years too early.
Footnote 91:
Isaac Bittoon had beaten Tom Jones, and made a draw with George
Maddox, and at this time was in good repute as a boxer. See APPENDIX.
Footnote 92:
It may be as well here to note that wherever practicable, the best
contemporary report has been used of these earlier fights, which will
account for discrepancies between some of them and the embellished
accounts in “Boxiana.”
Footnote 93:
He was born August 21, 1783, at Bristol.
Footnote 94:
A bit of slang for the King’s Bench Prison, afterwards called Abbott’s
Priory, Tenterden Park, Denman’s Priory, etc., from successive C. J.’s
of the K. B. It is now abolished, and its site a barrack.
Footnote 95:
This would now lose the fight.—ED.
Footnote 96:
Gin. The name of a celebrated distiller (Sir John Liptrap) at
Whitechapel. As “Hodges” is now sometimes used for the same spirituous
“blue ruin.”
Footnote 97:
Successively in the occupation of Ned Baldwin, Young Dutch Sam, Johnny
Hannan, and the late Ben Caunt.
Footnote 98:
This is the contemporary report. That in “Boxiana,” and copied into
“Fights for the Championship,” is a re-written version.
Footnote 99:
From the contemporary report. A perusal of merely the first round in
“Boxiana,” or its copyists, will show the unfaithfulness of the
_vamped_ reproduction in these cases.
Footnote 100:
_Bell’s Weekly Dispatch_, May 14, 1808.
Footnote 101:
See CROPLEY, Appendix to Period III.
Footnote 102:
There is some obscurity about this, as to whether the fight with Tom
Jones, July 13, 1801, is attributable to Dutch Sam, or to Isaac
Bittoon. (See BITTOON.) “Boxiana,” “Fistiana,” etc., give it to
Bittoon, we suspect erroneously; for we find in a contemporary
newspaper the following:—“Monday, July 13, 1801.—A boxing match was
fought on Wimbledon Common, between Elias, a Jew, and Tom Jones. In
the first twenty minutes Tom evidently had the advantage, and during
this time great sport was afforded to the amateurs by the science
displayed. Elias, however, put in a hit so forcibly behind Tom’s ear,
that Tom immediately fell, and gave up the contest.” And see
“Pancratia,” p. 136, where the battle is given in chronological order
under this date.
Footnote 103:
See BALDWIN (Caleb), Appendix to Period III.
Footnote 104:
This is the first distinct notice we find of administering the
“upper-cut;” the most effective blow in a rally, most difficult to
guard against, yet so generally missed by the less-skilled boxer.
The “chopper,” or downward blow, of which our forefathers talked,
can only be administered to an incapable off his guard, or a
“chopping-block.”—ED.
Footnote 105:
“Pancratia,” p. 237.
Footnote 106:
“Boxiana” (vol. i., p. 323), and the Chronologies, say at “Moulsey
Hurst.” This is from the contemporary account.
Footnote 107:
As in the interval between these two battles, Mr. Fletcher Reid, a
great patron and backer of the Belchers, paid the “debt of nature,”
this seems the right place for a brief obituary notice which we find
in the journals:—“On Thursday morning, January the 24th (1807), died,
at Shepperton, Surrey, where he had resided for the last two years,
Mr. Fletcher Reid, well-known in the sporting world, particularly as
one of the greatest patrons of gymnastic genius. The evening preceding
he had spent jovially amongst some select companions, and retired to
rest at rather a late hour. In the morning his servant found him dead.
Mr. Fletcher Reid was a native of Dundee, in Scotland, near to which
he had succeeded to estates, by the death of his mother, which
afflicting intelligence he had received only two days previous to his
decease. He left a wife and two children, who for some time past had
resided with his mother.” The following lines, rather questionable in
taste, appeared in a monthly publication some time afterwards:—
“In the still of the night, Death to Shepperton went,
And there catching poor Fletcher asleep,
He into his wind such a finisher sent,
That no longer ‘the time’ could he keep.
“Thus forced to give in, we his fate must lament,
While the coward, grim Death, we must blame,
For if in the morn he to Shepperton went,
He feared Fletcher’s true science and game.
“Then repose to his ashes, soft rest to his soul,
For harmless was he through life’s span,
With the friend of his bosom, enjoying the bowl,
And wishing no evil to man.”
“_February, 1807._”
Footnote 108:
“Recollections of an Octogenarian,” 8vo., London, 1812.
Footnote 109:
Pierce Egan says, “Seabrook was so completely frightened out of all
his conceit, that he _almost bolted_ from the spot.” What that may
mean we cannot explain.
Footnote 110:
Coady’s other exploit was being beaten by Bill Treadway, in
twenty-seven minutes March 16, 1798, in Hyde Park.
Footnote 111:
This is what modern reporters would call “forcing the fighting.”
Footnote 112:
This decision is utterly at variance with the rules of the ring. The
cool _non-sequitur_ of the reporter that, as Coady _refused_ to
appear, the battle was declared a drawn one, is not the least amusing
incident. Mr. Vincent Dowling has booked it as a victory to Maddox,
which it undoubtedly was. See “Fistiana,” _voce_, MADDOX.
Footnote 113:
The memoir of Caleb Baldwin in “Boxiana,” vol. i., pp. 301‒314, omits
all mention of this fight.
Footnote 114:
Copied in “Pancratia,” p. 136, from the _Oracle_ newspaper. This
battle is also overlooked by “the historian,” in his life of Caleb.
Footnote 115:
Jack Lee was then thought a rising pugilist; his previous battle was a
draw with Solly Sodicky, a Jew. He must not be confounded with Harry
Lee, who was beaten by Mendoza.
Footnote 116:
In the travels of Pallas in Tartary, he describes himself, after a
weary sledge journey through snowy steppes, as coming in sight of the
corpse of a malefactor swinging on a gaunt black gibbet as a warning
to “land pirates.” He congratulates himself on this mark of having
arrived on the “confines of civilization.”
Footnote 117:
Blows in the short ribs are so called by the older ring reporters.—ED.
Footnote 118:
Stephenson had been beaten by Jack Carter. (See CARTER, Period IV.)
Robinson was an old stager, fourteen stone weight; his fights, not
worth detailing, are chronicled in “Fistiana.”
Footnote 119:
Massa Bristow seems here to have fought his best fight; despite the
tuition of Richmond and his Fives Court practice, he merely beat an
unknown (Little Tom) for 20 guineas in a clumsy fight at Holloway,
July 19, 1817, and was then thrashed by a fourth-rate pugilist, Pug
M’Gee, at Shepperton Range, September 30, 1817, in sixty-five minutes,
40 rounds.
Footnote 120:
This proved to be the afterwards renowned Jack Randall.
Footnote 121:
Ben Stanyard, who is stated to have been the victor in seventeen
battles in the midland and western counties, does not figure in the
chronologies; this draw and his defeat by Bill Warr (see WARR),
October 26, 1792, are all that appear to his name.
Footnote 122:
Noah James, a discharged trooper, appears to have been a bruiser of
Gamble’s own stamp. He is stated in “Fistiana” to have beaten Smith at
Navestock, December 31, 1788, and Solly Sodicky, the Jew (a cross), at
Hornchurch, Essex, February 13, 1793; but these battles were fought by
one James, a waterman. See “Pancratia,” pp. 82 and 111. There was also
a Joe James, beaten by Faulkner, the cricketer. (See FAULKNER,
_ante_.)
Footnote 123:
In “Fistiana,” under O’Donnell, Harry Holt is stated to have defeated
him in 1817. It was another boxer of the same name, said to be a
relative of the subject of our sketch.
Footnote 124:
The account in “Boxiana” deserves transferring, as a model of accuracy
and diction:—
“_O’Donnell_, the celebrated Irish hero, fought TOM BELCHER for a
subscription purse of 20 guineas, at Shepperton Common, Surrey.
Considerable _science_ was displayed by BELCHER upon this occasion;
and _O’Donnell_ showed himself also entitled to respectable attention;
but who was completely _satisfied_ in fifteen rounds, when BELCHER was
proclaimed the conqueror.”
Footnote 125:
The paragraph runs thus in the papers of the day:—“July 13 (1801). A
boxing match was fought on Wimbledon Common, between Elias, a Jew, and
Tom Jones. For the first twenty minutes Tom evidently had the
advantage, and during this time great sport had been afforded by the
excellent science displayed on both sides. Elias, however, put in a
hit so forcibly behind Tom’s ear, that he immediately fell and gave up
the contest.” And see “Pancratia,” p. 144., where the paragraph is
reprinted. The Elias was, doubtless, Dutch Sam.
Footnote 126:
Bittoon’s name is spelt with a P (Pittoon) in the contemporary
reports.
Footnote 127:
See TOM TOUGH (Blake), in this Appendix.
Footnote 128:
The battle would have been over, and Bittoon the victor, with a modern
referee.—ED.
Footnote 129:
The site of the present Harley Street, Oxford Street. The report
states the spot differently. “On Tuesday morning, February the 18th
[1794], a battle was fought between Jack Holmes, the hackney coachman,
and a manufacturer of _à-la-mode_ beef, in a field behind Gower
Street, Bedford Square. After four or five tolerably good rounds, the
contest was put an end to by the cry of a foul blow. The seconds chose
an umpire, Captain Hamilton, who, greatly to the disappointment of the
kiddies who lacked more fun, decided it in favour of the beef-eater.
This very much discomfited the son of Jehu, who certainly had held the
whip-hand over his antagonist the whole time, and he voluntarily
offered to renew the battle for another guinea, but his opponent
declined.”
Footnote 130:
As “Boxiana” is scarce and out of print, a specimen of the inflated
bombast of its author may be amusing. The memoir of Gregson (who
occupies six lines in the Chronologies), _all his recorded fights
having been defeats_, is thus headed and introduced, with a profusion
of capital letters:—
“BOB GREGSON, P.P.,
_One of the most distinguished Champions of Lancashire_,
and
POET LAUREATE
TO THE HEROIC RACE OF PUGILISTS.
I dare do all that may become a man;
Who dare do more, is none.
“In recording the most prominent traits of the celebrated pugilists,
from the earliest professors of the gymnastic art down to the present
milling æra, when passing in review, ‘Boxiana’ has found none more
entitled to peculiar attention than the hero of the present sketch.”
Said sketch then starts off from Fig, glances at Broughton, George
Taylor, Slack, the ‘prodigies of valour performed by Corcoran as a
bruiser;’ and refers to Humphries, Mendoza, Bill Warr, Hooper,
Jackson, Pearce, the Belchers, and Berks. Gully, Cribb, and Molineaux
too are dragged in as foils to Bob Gregson! The proëmium thus
concludes:—“But, notwithstanding the above variety of qualifications,
it has been reserved for Bob Gregson alone, from his union of pugilism
and poetry, to recount the deeds of his brethren of the fist in heroic
verse (like the bards of old, in sounding the praises of their warlike
champions), whose pretensions to the former are beyond all dispute,
and respecting the latter, one of the most distinguished works of
sporting celebrity has given place to the poetic effusions of his
muse.”
Footnote 131:
To many who have not the opportunity of perusing the writings of “the
author of Boxiana,” as he was wont to call himself, this criticism may
appear unduly harsh: this imputation we should be sorry to lie under.
While writing these pages, two well filled volumes have been published
by the Hon. Grantley Berkeley, entitled “My Life and Recollections,”
embracing reminiscences of the first half of the present century, and
of persons and events in society. The writer is happy to have so
thoroughly competent a confirmation of his condemnation. He may
premise also, that the very argot of which Pierce Egan proclaimed
himself a professor was not radically English, but the low slang of
Irish ruffianism. Mr. Grantley Berkeley says (vol. i., pp. 107,
108):—“The extravagances and absurdities of ‘Tom and Jerry’ were
brought into vogue by a low-caste Irishman, known as Pierce Egan,
sometimes a newspaper reporter [only in his later day] of fights,
etc., and sometimes a low comedian in third-rate Dublin and London
theatres. [He was a compositor in Smeeton’s printing office in St.
Martin’s Lane.] His ‘Life in London’ was very popular, and he
dramatised it at the Adelphi [this was done by Billy Moncrieff] with
marked success. He brought out a similar play in the Irish capital,
called ‘Life in Dublin,’ and a third in the flourishing commercial
port on the Mersey, called ‘Life in Liverpool.’ His ‘Boxiana’ was
considered as a text-book on fights and fighting men; and his
elaborate and exaggerated descriptions of ‘a mill,’ as prize-fights
were designated, were stuffed full of slang, the delight of a large
circle of male readers. He assisted in starting a sporting newspaper,
the still flourishing _Bell’s Life in London_ [this is totally wrong],
and subsequently an opposition one, with a similar title. It failed,
and he long outlived his reputation as an author, for he was totally
destitute of literary invention: the characters in his stories were
thoroughly conventional, and his style never rose above that of an
ordinary penny-a-liner. He was a coarse-looking man, who seemed only
to have associated with the very lowest society in England and
Ireland. Indeed, he used to make boast of his familiarity with the
riff-raff of both capitals. The intense vulgarity of his writings grew
distasteful; and though he produced several works of imagination, all
have sunk into oblivion. Indeed they predeceased their author a good
many years. He died totally forgotten by his once innumerable patrons,
and the literature of the ring died with him.” The last phrase rounds
a period; but a second thought would have told Mr. Berkeley that the
really good ring reports which, from about 1824 to a late period, at
intervals filled the columns of the _Morning Chronicle_, _Bell’s Life
in London_, _the Weekly Dispatch_, and other papers, were none of them
from the coarse and illiterate pen of “the historian,” but from those
of George Kent, Mr. G. Daniels; and principally from those of Mr.
Smith, Mr. V. G. Dowling, the writer of this work, and other qualified
reporters. Whether the ring itself is dead is another question, which
we may now answer in the affirmative with Mr. Grantley Berkeley.
Footnote 132:
In Tom Moore’s satirical squib, entitled “Tom Cribb’s Memorial to
Congress” (p. 38), he thus ironically glances at Gregson’s pugilistic
laureateship:—
“A pause ensued—till cries of ‘Gregson’
Brought Bob, the poet, on his legs soon—
(My eyes, how prettily Bob writes!
Talk of your Camels, Hogs, and Crabs,
And twenty more such Pidcock frights—
Bob’s worth a hundred of these dabs:
For a short turn-up at a sonnet,
A round of odes, or pastoral bout,
All Lombard Street to nine-pence on it,
Bobby’s the boy would clean them out!)”
Footnote 133:
The accounts in “Boxiana” and “Fights for the Championship,” are
verbal reprints of each other. The above is the contemporary report.
Footnote 134:
This would by the modern rules be illegal.
Footnote 135:
The unreported rounds in this and other places, are supplied in
“Boxiana” and its copyists; as well as a great quantity of vamping up,
the details of which Pierce Egan must have imagined.
Footnote 136:
See Life of “MOLINEAUX, _post_, Chapter II.”
Footnote 137:
These, as in several other instances, are _resumés_ of the principal
reports of writers who witnessed the fight itself. Where worth
preservation we have preferred the _ipsissimis verbis_ of the
reporter.
Footnote 138:
Shakespere tells us “losers have leave to rail.” Among other things
Molineaux declared he was “sold.” A weekly print had the following
“impromptu,” of course “_fait à loisir_”:—
AN IMPROMPTU,
_On its being said, in allusion to the late battle, that Molineaux had
been “sold.”_
The Black, to say at least, is bold,
That in the battle he was sold:
If so—by _Auction_—for ’tis known,
When he was sold, Cribb _knocked him down_!
Footnote 139:
See note A., Appendix to Period IV. Captain BARCLAY, Allardyce of Ury.
Footnote 140:
In “Boxiana,” this house is elegantly metamorphosed into “The Prad and
Swimmer,” the original name not being thought sufficiently
incongruous.
Footnote 141:
“_On the Champion’s quitting his trade of coal-merchant for that of
victualler, at the sign of the King’s Arms._
“Black Diamonds adieu! Tom’s now took to the bar,
The fancy to serve with new charms—
For a ‘chop’ or a glass, to mill or to spar,
They’ll be at home to a peg at the Arms!
The lovers of truth, without crime, may here fib,
On the pleasures of sporting can sing;
Then ye swells give a turn to gallant TOM CRIBB,
That he may ne’er quit the ‘Arms of his King.’”
Footnote 142:
This speech was thus poetically paraphrased in a weekly journal, from
which we quote a few of the lines:—
“THE CHAMPION’S RETIREMENT.
“‘Every puny whipster gets my sword.’—SHAKSPEARE.
“No so with our champion of Britain’s proud throng,
He still rears his crest for the fight or the song;
‘Bout friendship or fighting he can’t make a speech,
O’ the latter he’d much rather practise than preach.
A lapse of ten years or more soon roll’d away,
Since Afric’s brave bully proclaim’d it Tom’s day;
He then, like a game cock, retired with his pickings,
In peace to provide for his old hen and chickens;
When, lo! a cock crow’d on his walk in the west,
Supposing ‘Old Tom’ of Old Tom had the best;
But Tom left his ‘Hodges,’ gout, crutches, behind,
Reducing his belly, increasing his wind:—
The fight was proclaim’d, and some money put down,
To see who’d best claim to their country’s renown.
Cribb came to the scratch, like a hero, to meet
His man, but he back’d out;—now wasn’t that NEAT?
“AN OLD MILLER.”
Footnote 143:
This has since been done, as is shown in our engraving.
Footnote 144:
This fight is omitted from “Fistiana,” and the name of Burrows given
as Molineaux’s first opponent.
Footnote 145:
Pierce Egan makes it “Sturton” Island in this and other places.
Footnote 146:
This is the newspaper report. Pierce Egan, in his diffuse life of
Richmond, passes it over entirely, until he comes to Richmond’s
victory (in August, 1809) over Maddox, when he alludes to it as
“turn-up five years previously.”
Footnote 147:
Jack Holmes was for many years a well known public character. In
“Fistiana” he is described as beaten by Tom (Paddington) Jones in
1786. This was another Holmes, not “the Coachman.” The latter’s only
recorded battles are, that with Tom Tough (Blake), and that with
Richmond reported above.
Footnote 148:
“Boxiana” says, in an undated and unplaced line and a half, “Richmond
now entered into an unequal contest with Tom Cribb.”
Footnote 149:
This is a blunder in “Boxiana” (if ever the battle did take place),
for 1808, and is so corrected in “Fistiana.”
Footnote 150:
See Tom Moore’s Poem, “Tom Cribb’s Memorial to Congress.”
Footnote 151:
“The Fancy,” a selection from the Poetical Remains of the late Peter
Corcoran, of Gray’s Inn, Student at Law.—Pseudonymous.
Footnote 152:
The term “navvy” or “navigator,” now applied to the labourers who do
the earthworks, embankments, and excavations of our railways, seems
anomalous; it, however, was derived from the fact that the early
canals, which these men dug, were called “navigations,” not only in
common speech, but in legal documents and Acts or Parliament. Those
who worked on the “navigation” were called “navigators.” The name has
remained, though a viaduct has taken the place of an aqueduct.
Footnote 153:
This is Pierce Egan’s report. Shelton was 5 feet 10 inches; Burn (who
is always by him called Burns) 6 feet 1 inch. Johnson was a trifle
under 5 feet 9 inches, Perrins 6 feet inches in his stocking feet.
See _ante_, p. 61.
Footnote 154:
He was a backer of pugilists, and kept the Goat, in Lower Grosvenor
Street.
Footnote 155:
This term perhaps may not be generally understood. To “hocus” a man is
to put something into his drink of a narcotic quality, that renders
him unfit for action. On the morning alluded to, Randall, in company
with some “friends,” partook of a bottle of red wine mulled, into
which, he asserted, the sleepy potion must have been introduced by
some scoundrel of the company.
Footnote 156:
He vanquished the great black, Molineaux, and a wonderful old man,
Richmond, who was a fighter at the age of nearly 60.
Footnote 157:
See “Boxiana,” vol. ii., 135.
Footnote 158:
This may serve to settle a disputed point as to the colour of “the
Belcher,” which has been wrongly said, in a reply to a correspondent
in a leading sporting journal, to have been “a blue bird’s-eye.”
Principal and seconds were here Bristol men.
Footnote 159:
Death’s Doings.
Footnote 160:
Another of the too-late battles. Martin closed his real ring career,
in 1824, by a drawn battle with Jem Burn.
Footnote 161:
Mr. John Jackson.
Footnote 162:
Now the Victoria, in the Waterloo Road.
Footnote 163:
Poet Laureate to the Fancy.—ED.
Footnote 164:
See Note A, p. 258.
Footnote 165:
Egan says, “Pentikin, a Scotch baker.” Certainly Scotchmen have almost
a monopoly of London baking, but the reporter of the day makes
Pentikin a Cornish man.
“By Pol, Tre, and Pen,
Ye shall know the Cornish men.”
Footnote 166:
This is set down in “Fistiana” as a victory to Nosworthy.
Footnote 167:
Since the above lines were penned, Alfred Henry Holt, after several
years’ service on the _Morning Advertiser_, _Bell’s Life in London_,
and latterly on the _Sportsman_, has fallen in the struggle of an
exciting and laborious profession, at the early age of thirty-nine
years. He died of heart disease somewhat suddenly on the 20th of
November, 1865, and lies buried in Nunhead Cemetery, leaving a widow
and a son (Henry), who follows the profession of his father and
grandfather, and now holds the trustworthy position of Secretary and
Scorer to the International Gun Clubs of Brighton, London, and
Mentone, or Nice.
Footnote 168:
Tom Reynolds, born at Middleton, county Armagh, Ireland, 1792, was
brought up in Covent Garden Market, where, in after years, he was a
potato merchant. “Boxiana,” vol. ii., pp. 429-441; vol. iii., pp.
458-462, gives the usual number of victories to the youthful “Tight
Irish Boy,” over “big” unknown men, and a turn-up in the Fleet Prison
with George Head, (in which Reynolds was defeated in nine minutes,
says “Fistiana,” while Pierce Egan says he was victorious). Tom’s
greatest exploit, however, was his conquest of Aby Belasco in one hour
and twenty minutes, at Moulsey, July 23, 1817. It was a game battle on
both sides. His next battle was with Church, in September of the same
year, at the same place, which he also won in half an hour. His
subsequent affairs were a draw with Johnson (the broom-dasher), at
Canterbury, November 11, 1817; beat J. Dunn, fifty-four minutes,
twelve rounds, Kildare, July 4, 1820; beat Simmonds, seven rounds,
Macclesfield, August 21, 1820; fought a draw with Dick Davis, £200
a-side, Manchester, July 18, 1825. Reynolds died in Dublin, May 15,
1832, in his forty-first year.
Footnote 169:
Mr. John Jackson.
Footnote 170:
Dick Curtis, his brother.
Footnote 171:
Afterwards the renowned cavalry officer under the Iron Duke in the
Peninsula, and slain at Waterloo.—ED.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
TRANSCRIBER’S NOTES
1. P. vi, changed “un grande punizone del naso” to “un grande punzone
del naso”.
2. P. viii, changed “ourselves the Homeric description” to “ourselves
to the Homeric description.”
3. P. xiii, changed “Bronzi dei Museo Kircheriano” to “Bronzi del Museo
Kircheriano”.
4. P. 66, changed “convinced the spectators of quality” to “convinced
the spectators of his quality”.
5. P. 90, changed “ars puginandi” to “ars pugnandi”.
6. P. 101, inserted missing anchor for the first footnote on that page.
7. P. 155, changed “A chip of the old block.” to “A chip off the old
block”.
8. P. 170, changed “désagrémen” to “désagrément”.
9. P. 186, changed “posse commitatus” to “posse comitatus”.
10. P. 501, added missing “A.” subheading.
11. Silently corrected typographical errors and variations in spelling.
12. Retained anachronistic, non-standard, and uncertain spellings as
printed.
13. Footnotes have been re-indexed using numbers and collected together
at the end of the last chapter.
14. Enclosed italics font in _underscores_.
End of Project Gutenberg's Pugilistica, Volume 1 (of 3), by Henry Downes Miles