CHAPTER I.
JEM BELCHER (CHAMPION)—1798–1809.
On the roll of fistic heroes to whom Bristol has given birth, the name of Jem Belcher may claim precedence. He came of a good fighting stock, being descended by the mother’s side from the renowned Jem Slack, the conqueror of Broughton, the former being the grandsire of the subject of this memoir.
On his first appearance in the London Ring, he was justly considered a phenomenon in the pugilistic art. Jem’s height was five feet eleven and a half inches; his weight under twelve stone. Though graceful and finely proportioned, he had none of those muscular exaggerations in his form when stripped, and still less when attired, which go, in the artistic as well as the popular notion, to make up a Hercules. Jem was formed more after the sculptor’s Apollo than the not-very-accurate classical idea, derived from bronze and marble, of a gladiator. In horse, as in man, this antique blunder is laughed at by those who have read and seen something more than Greek and Latin books or monuments can teach them. The horses of the Parthenon might do for Pickford’s vans, “a black job,” or a man in armour in my Lord Mayor’s show (and they would not carry him well); while Jem Belcher, Henry Pearce, Tom Spring, Jem Ward, or Tom Sayers, could thrash all your shoulder-tied, muscle-knotted, chairman-calved Milos that ever didn’t do the impossibles which ancient poets and fabulists, called historians, have attributed to them in verse and prose. But this is digression, and we return.
JAMES BELCHER, of Bristol (Champion of England), 1798–1809.
James Belcher struggled into the battle of life in St. James’s Churchyard, Bristol, on the 15th of April, 1781. He there, for some time, followed the occupation of a butcher, and early signalised himself by feats of pugilism and activity at Lansdown Fair.[[80]] At twenty years of age his skill with the gloves was the talk of the town, and he baffled the cleverest professors of the old school on their visits to Bristol, which were then neither few nor far between. His method appeared so peculiarly his own that it looked like intuition, and some of the “ould ’uns” who were sceptical as to his prowess, would not believe in it until they had experienced in their own persons the irresistibility of his attack and the cleverness of his almost invulnerable and ever-varying defence. Gaiety and intrepidity were combined in Jem’s style with curious felicity, and the rapidity with which he “got in” upon his opponent, the skill with which he retreated, armed at all points, and the masterly manner in which he “got out of trouble,” to the surprise of his assailant, were truly astonishing—in two words, Jem Belcher was a “natural fighter,” perfected by the practice of his art.
The first recorded fight of Belcher was with Britton, a pugilist of some notoriety, who afterwards contended with Dutch Sam; the contest took place near Bristol, on the 6th of March, 1798; it was a sharp and severe contest, in which Belcher, the boy of seventeen, disposed of his antagonist in thirty-three minutes, Britton being beaten to a stand-still, to the utter surprise of the spectators.
Our hero now came up to town, where his reputation accompanied him; being introduced to old Bill Warr, who then kept a house in Covent Garden, the “ould ’un” had a mind to judge personally of the merits of the young aspirant for pugilistic fame, and accordingly put on the gloves with him for a little “breathing” in his (Warr’s) own dining-room. The veteran, who in his best days was no Belcher, was so astounded at Jem’s quickness in hitting and recovering guard, that he puffed out, as he reeled against one of his tables, impelled thither by a “Belcherian” tip, “That’ll do; this youngster can go in with any man in the kingdom!” Jem quietly observed, during the discussion after dinner, “I could have done better, sir, but I was afraid I might hit you too hard, and that you would be offended.”—“Oh!” cried the undaunted veteran, “I was never afraid of a crack, my boy, and am not now; we’ll have a round, and you may do your best.” So saying, they instantly set-to, when Jem, almost at the request of his host, quietly hit him down several times, despite of the “ould ’un’s” attempts at stopping or countering. Warr was fully satisfied of Belcher’s talents; they sat down sociably, and Bill offered to back the young Bristolian against anything on the pugilistic list.
Tom Jones, of Paddington, whose career closed the final chapter of the Second Period, was selected as the trial-horse of the new competitor in the race for fame and its more substantial rewards. The battle took place on Wormwood Scrubbs, on the 12th of April, 1799, for 25 guineas aside. The peculiar features of Belcher’s science were well displayed; and although Jones contended for victory with desperate determination, unflinching courage, and no small amount of skill and readiness, he was doomed to “pale his ineffective fires” before the rising luminary of Belcher’s fame. Thirty-three minutes of courageous and determined fighting placed the future champion’s star in the ascendant.
Jack Bartholomew, a pugilist whose victories over the gluttonous Firby (known as the “Young Ruffian”), Tom Owen, and others, had placed him high in the estimation of “the fancy,” was now picked out as a customer very likely to try the mettle of Belcher. Bartholomew was in high favour among the ring-goers, his weight between twelve and thirteen stone, his qualifications considerable, and his game of the first order. The stakes in the first instance were small, being but £20 a-side, owing to the affair arising out of a longing desire on the part of Bartholomew to try his skill with the Bristol “Phenomenon,” he himself feeling no apprehension as to the result. He accordingly challenged Jem for this sum, offering to “fight him for love,” rather than lose the opportunity of a “shy.” The mill came off, almost extemporaneously, August 15, 1799, at George’s Row, on the Uxbridge Road, and was so severely and evenly contested (Belcher was declared to be out of condition), that neither could be declared the conqueror. Towards the end of the fight Bartholomew was so completely exhausted that he fainted away, and could not come to time; and Jem so much done up, that it was with difficulty he was got up to the scratch. In fact, both men were out of time. Bartholomew, in the interval, recovering a little from his weakness, insisted upon renewing the combat, when the ring was again made; but he staggered about without command of himself, and appeared literally stupid. His game was so good, but his state so pitiable, that Cullington,[[81]] feeling for his bravery, exclaimed, “For heaven’s sake, Jem, don’t hit him!” upon which Belcher merely pushed him down; in fact, he was himself so exhausted as to be unable to make an effectual hit. The umpires pronounced it a drawn battle; and the stakes, which were held by Bill Gibbons’s brother, were drawn the same night at Cullington’s.
As Bartholomew possessed pluck of the first order, it was not to be supposed the matter would rest here; accordingly the world pugilistic was soon on the qui vive for another match, which was arranged for 300 guineas. This was fought upon a stage on Finchley Common, on Thursday, May 15, 1800. Bartholomew was at this time 37 years of age, Belcher just turned 20.
The combatants mounted the stage at half-past one o’clock, and little time was lost in preliminaries. Bartholomew had determined that sparring should avail Belcher but little, and ding-dong rushes were the game he had resolved on. Belcher, even in the early rounds of the fight, exhibited the tactics, afterwards conspicuous in some of Cribb’s battles, of “milling on the retreat;” but Bartholomew would not be denied, and seconded by his great strength and weight, he got in, planted upon Belcher, and hit him clean down with such violence, as to induce his over-sanguine friends to start off an express, per pigeon, to London, with the intelligence of their man’s victory. They were, however, premature, for Jem, taught by experience, did not give Bartholomew a chance of thus stealing a march on him; after pinking Bartholomew once or twice, he warded off his lunge, and catching him cleverly, threw him so dreadful a cross-buttock, that he was never entirely himself again during the fight. The odds now changed. Yet Bartholomew bravely contended, disputing every round with unyielding firmness, till the close of the seventeenth round, and the expiration of twenty minutes, when Belcher floored him with so terrific a body blow that all was U-P. The contest, considering the shortness of its duration, was considered the most desperate which had been witnessed for many years, and the loser was severely punished. It is erroneously stated in “Boxiana” (p. 129, vol. i.) that Belcher and Bartholomew fought again; but no date or place is mentioned, nor did any such battle ever come off. “Immediately after the fight,” says the report, “Bartholomew was taken into custody on a judge’s warrant, for breaking the peace before the expiration of his bond. He was brought to town in a coach, but bailed out immediately.”
Andrew Gamble, the “Irish champion,” was now backed by several influential amateurs to enter the lists with Belcher. Accordingly a match was made for 100 guineas, to be decided on Wimbledon Common, on Monday, December 22, 1800; and on that day vehicles of all descriptions, and crowds of pedestrians, flocked to witness this combat.
The journals of the day give on many occasions a sort of Morning Post list of “fashionables” on these occasions. On the present we find enumerated Lord Say and Sele, Colonels Montgomery and Ogle, Captain Desmond, Squire Mountain, Messrs. Cullington, Lee, Kelly, Aldridge, etc.; and among the professionals, John Jackson, Paddington Jones, Bill Gibbons, Caleb Baldwin, etc.
Belcher entered the ring about twelve o’clock, accompanied by his second, Joe Ward, with Bill Gibbons as his bottle-holder, and Tom Tring as an assistant. Mendoza was second to Gamble; his bottle-holder, Coady; and old Elisha Crabbe as deputy. Messrs. Mountain, Lee, and Cullington were chosen umpires; the latter also was stakeholder.
Notwithstanding Gamble had beat Noah James, the Cheshire champion, a pugilist who had been successful in seventeen pitched battles, and whose game was said to be superior to any man in the kingdom, still the bets from the first making of the match were six to four in favour of Belcher; and Bill Warr, before the combatants stripped, offered twenty-five guineas to twenty. On stripping, Gamble appeared much the heavier man, and his friends and countrymen offered five to four on him; but that was by no means the opinion of the London cognoscenti. A few minutes before one the fight commenced.
THE FIGHT.
Round 1.—After some sparring, Gamble made play, but was prettily parried by Belcher, who, with unequalled celerity, planted in return three severe facers: they soon closed, and Belcher, being well aware of the superiority of his opponent’s strength, dropped. (The Paddies, in their eagerness to support their countryman, here offered five to four.)
2.—Belcher, full of spirit, advanced towards Gamble, who retreated. Jem made a feint with his right hand, and with his left struck Gamble so severely over the right eye, as not only to close it immediately, but knock him down with uncommon violence. (Two to one on Belcher.)
3.—Gamble again retreated, but put in several severe blows in the body of his antagonist with some cleverness. Belcher, by a sharp hit, made the claret fly copiously; but Gamble, notwithstanding, threw Belcher with considerable violence, and fell upon him cross-ways. (The odds rose four to one upon Jem.)
4.—Belcher, full of coolness and self-possession, showed first-rate science. His blows were well directed, and severe, particularly one in the neck, which brought Gamble down. (Ten to one Belcher was the winner.)
5th and last round.—Gamble received two such blows that struck him all of a heap—one in the mark, that nearly deprived him of breath, and the other on the side, which instantly swelled considerably. Gamble fell almost breathless, and when “time” was called, gave in. It is reported that not less than £20,000 changed hands on this occasion. The Irish were full of murmurings at Gamble’s conduct, who was beaten in five rounds, and in the short space of nine minutes! Gamble fought very badly. From his former experience much was expected, but he appeared utterly confused at his opponent’s quickness. Belcher treated Gamble’s knowledge of the art with the utmost contempt.
It may be worth noticing that the “Pride of Westminster,” in after years known as Caleb Baldwin, described in the report as a “dealer in greens,” polished off a big Irishman, named Kelly, in fifteen minutes, twelve rounds, for a purse of 20 guineas, in the same ring.
While Belcher was witnessing the battle between Bittoon the Jew and Tom Jones, on Wimbledon Common, on Monday, July 13, 1801, Joe Berks, who was excited and quarrelsome, made a disturbance in the outer ring,[[82]] and offensively called out, “Where’s young Jem Belcher? where’s your champion?” Jem went up to him and asked him what he wanted; the reply to which was a blow, cleverly warded off. A fierce set-to followed, for Jem was semper paratus, when Berks displayed so much courage and strength, that the spectators did not know what to think about the finish of this impromptu affair. The combat lasted nineteen minutes, and although Berks was beaten, an opinion became prevalent that had not Belcher applied all he knew of the science, and Berks fought, as it was termed, “hand over hand,” there was great probability of Jem’s falling before the resolute onslaught of the Shropshire man.
Berks having shown so much game under such evident disadvantages, Lord Camelford determined to back him for a second combat in a more regular manner, for 100 guineas. He was accordingly put out to nurse; a teacher appointed to initiate him into the mysteries of the science; and it was reported of Berks that he was a promising child—took his food regularly, minded what his master said to him, and, for the short time that he had taken to study, great improvement was visible. Berks ultimately turned out one of the most troublesome customers, and the hardest to be disposed of, that ever entered the lists with Belcher.
On Saturday, September 12, 1801, Belcher met Berks, at the Cock, in Sun Street, Spitalfields, when Jem accepted his formal challenge for 100 guineas, and seven days after, on the 19th, they met at the same house, to proceed to the battle-field—a rare instance of promptitude and eagerness on both sides; but the police having scent of the affair, a magistrate’s warrant was issued, and the battle postponed to the 12th of the next month. As there is no trace of these proceedings in “Boxiana,” and they are amusing as well as curious to the ring-goer, showing the disappointments and modus operandi of the ring in the olden times, we reprint the account from a contemporary newspaper; and as a specimen of what then was thought smart writing in the fashionable world.
“On Monday (12th October, 1801), as had been agreed upon, the long expected battle between James Belcher and Joseph Bourkes (Joe Berks) was to have taken place at Enfield, but much to the chagrin of the amateurs and lovers of the pugilistic art, it was prevented by the interposition of Mr. Ford, the magistrate of Bow Street, who, having received information of the intended combat, issued a warrant against Belcher, and on the Sunday night previous Townsend took him into limbo. Many circumstances combined to excite a most extraordinary degree of expectation, and produced a multitudinous attendance on this attractive occasion. The late ratification of peace had tended to annihilate fighting;[[83]] conversation which had been so lively supported by the race of two famous horses, Sir Solomon and Cock-fighter, had now become exhausted in the sporting circle; the combatants being of the highest renown in the science, could not fail to animate every amateur; and, to add still greater numbers to the assembly, a violent thunder-storm on the Saturday night had kept the heroes, who on that evening enjoy themselves, altogether inactive. All the loose cash, all the turbulence that had been amassed that night, now prompted by curiosity, broke forth with increased avidity. The ‘fight’ was the very goal of attraction; it consolidated every vagrant wish, every undecided mind, and every idle hope.
“This match first became the subject of contemplation from an accidental skirmish during the fight between Bittoon and Tom Jones, at Wimbledon, in which, although Berks seemingly had the worst of it, the amateurs considered it as a matter of surprise; and no previous training having taken place on either side, much consequence was not attached to the defeat, nor was it considered decisive of the merits of the rival heroes. Many knowing ones indeed conceived that Berks got thrashed in this contest only through his own rashness, and entertaining flattering hopes of his powers, took him into private nursing. Raw eggs to improve his wind, and raw beef to make him savage, were the glorious non-naturals that composed his regimen, and in all his exercises he topped even expectation’s self. All this was done in the anxious trust that Belcher would be backed with great odds, as he was thought to be the favourite with all, excepting those in the secret. They, however, did not manage with all that address which experience proves so requisite to gull the world; it soon spread that Berks had been in training, and had considerably improved in his sparring. Odds then took a contrary direction, but when the amateurs who con o’er these sublime subjects began to consider that Belcher, although not in training, had lived temperately, was in good condition, and full of stiff meat, he again became the favorite, and on the ground six to four were the standing odds.
“The hours appointed in the articles for the decision of the contest were between twelve and two. At about one o’clock Berks appeared on the stage, stripped, and began to show play for the amusement of his friends, who did not forget to make the welkin ring with their plaudits; however, Belcher not ascending the stage as expected, he dressed himself again, amidst cries of ‘Where is Belcher?’ Berks immediately assumed the attitude, not of a fighter, but of an orator, and in the following eloquent manner addressed the multitude:—
“‘Gemmen, I com’d here, d’ye see, to fight Jim Belcher. I’m here, and he isn’t. I wish he had; for, on the word of a butcher, I’d have cleaved his calf’s head, and given him such a chop in the kidneys, as would soon have brought him on his marrow bones.’
“The cry of ‘Where is Belcher?’ still continued, when Gamble, the Irish bruiser, came forward—‘Where is he? why at Bow-street, to be sure; he was grabbed on the road.’ This was not the fact, but something near it. The suspense, however, was not of long duration: two friends of Jemmy’s arrived with the sad and melancholy tidings of the ‘queer tip’ he had met with the last night.
“Bill Warr, Gamble, Lee, Jackson, many amateurs, and the usual number of pickpockets, were present.”
On Wednesday, November 25th, 1801, this oft postponed contest was brought to a decision. The greatest secrecy was observed, and “it was only on the Tuesday afternoon that the field of battle was precisely determined on. A stage was erected at Hurley Bottom, four and a-half miles from Maidenhead, between the Henley and Reading roads, thirty-two miles from Hyde Park turnpike.
“At ten minutes after twelve Belcher made his appearance, accompanied by his second, Joe Ward, and by a Bristol youth, as his bottle-holder, who was unknown to the London bruisers. He immediately began to strip, and when prepared, took the precaution of particularly examining the stage, lest any roughness or nail might do him an eventual injury. Shortly after Berks appeared, attended by Harry Lee, as his second, and George Rhodes, his bottle-holder.
“The combatants shook hands, and immediately set to. Bets, seven to four and two to one on Belcher.”
THE FIGHT.
Round 1.—Several severe blows were exchanged. Berks showed in better style than usual. He put in a well directed hit under his antagonist’s right eye, who staggered. The men closed, and both fell.
2, 3, and 4.—During these rounds neither combatant displayed science, notwithstanding some good blows were reciprocally given and received.
5.—Belcher made a feint with his left hand, and with his right put in so sharp a hit on the nose of his opponent, that he laid it open, and brought him down with great violence. (Bets ten to one offered, but refused.)
6.—Much shy fighting, Berks keeping out at distance. Belcher at length struck Berks over the forehead, and cut him again severely; the blood now issued so freely from his wounds, that Lee could scarcely find handkerchiefs sufficient to keep him clean.
7 and 8.—Little done; Belcher propped Berks, who fell.
9.—Berks being the stronger man, rushed in, got a hold, and threw his antagonist with great violence.
13.—This was the best contested round throughout the battle, and was truly desperate fighting.
16.—At the conclusion of this round Berks was quite exhausted, and it is but justice to his gallantry and courage to record that, although in so dreadful a state, he refused to give in, and the yielding word was uttered by his second.
Remarks.—“The battle, which undoubtedly was the most desperately contested of any since that of Big Ben and Johnson in the year 1791, lasted twenty-five minutes; but although it displayed the height of courage on both sides, it was by no means so gratifying to the scientific amateur as many battles of the old school; very few straight blows were struck, but both the combatants fought round, and made a hugging fight of it.
“Berks was much cut and dreadfully bruised in the body. During the fight he displayed wonderful activity and bottom, but not an equal portion of skill. At the conclusion he was immediately put into a post-chaise, but very cruelly left there until after the decision of another battle, and then conveyed to town.
“Belcher appeared not the least hurt, and declared he never felt a blow during the whole of the battle; he was very highly elated by having gained the laurel, and still more perhaps the stake. He challenged Mendoza, who was present, and offered to fight him in a month for 300 to 200 guineas. To this bravado, Mendoza, greatly to his commendation, calmly answered, that he had given up the pugilistic profession; that he supported by his exertions, as landlord of the Lord Nelson, in Whitechapel, a family of six children. There was only one man he would fight, which was Jackson; his unhandsome and unfair conduct in a prior contest having excited his greatest indignation.” Dan ended a wily speech by declaring he would fight Jackson for 100 guineas, with a proviso that he should not avail himself of what he called the “base and cowardly advantage” of holding the hair of his antagonist. See Mendoza, ante, p. 79.
Caleb Baldwin, on this occasion also, added a second fight to the day’s proceedings, his antagonist being Lee, the butcher, whom he beat in twenty-three minutes.—See Life of Caleb Baldwin, Appendix to Period IV.
Lord Say and Sele, the Hon. Berkeley Craven, Sir Thomas Apreece, Colonel Montgomery, Captain Taylor, and other distinguished amateurs, were among the spectators.
We read in the newspapers of the day that “Lord Radnor, as Lord Lieutenant of the county of Berks., soon after the fight, issued warrants for the apprehension of James Belcher and Joseph Berks, as combatants, and Harry Lee and Joe Ward, the seconds, ‘for unlawfully assembling and publicly fighting at Hurley, in the county of Berkshire.’ They were taken into custody, and on Friday, January 29th, 1802, Belcher, Lee, and Ward, appeared at Bow Street, before Mr. Bond, and Mr. Reed, of Chelsea, with their bail (Mr. Brown, and Mr. Evans, an oyster merchant in Hungerford Market), where they entered into sureties for their appearance to answer this charge in the county of Berks., themselves in £200, and their bail in £100 each. Poor Berks was most shamefully deserted and neglected by all his friends, in this hour of need, and not being able to procure bail, remained ‘in durance vile’ at the common gaol of Reading.”
The then chief magistrate of Bow-street seems to have been particularly busy in the proceedings of Belcher, for we find, in the interim between his bail and surrender, that he stopped even a sparring match. “On Tuesday, April 6th, 1802, Belcher had announced a display of the art of self-defence, at a public-house called the Peahen, in Gray’s Inn Lane. Gamble, Belcher, and several pugilists of fame set-to, and highly diverted an immense concourse of persons until about ten o’clock, when Mr. Bond having received information, despatched officers, who very kindly paid them a visit, and took into custody not only the principals but the whole of the company, and lodged them in the Compter for the night.” The paragraph writer then becomes clumsily facetious about the appropriate transfer of the population of the Peahen to the Poultry Compter.[[84]]
In May, 1802, “on the last day of the Quarter Sessions at Newbury, Belcher, Joe Ward, and Harry Lee, appeared with their bail,” and poor Berks was brought up from the gaol. Jem’s aristocratic patrons had been busy, for we read, “Mr. Dundas, the Chairman of the Sessions, addressed them: he said the prosecution was at the instance of the county, but had been moved by certiorari into the Court of King’s Bench. He admonished them to leave off the pugilistic profession, and particularly directed his observations to Belcher, of whose generally peaceable conduct he had heard so favourable a report. The Court was very highly pleased at the respectful manner in which they all surrendered themselves to the laws of their country; and it was understood, that unless they were again sufficiently atrocious to violate them, they would not be called upon to answer for their misconduct.”
At the latter end of this month, May, notwithstanding this advice, the following paragraph appeared in the Oracle: “Belcher and Berks have been matched at Newmarket by Captain Fletcher and Fletcher Reid, Esq., for 200 guineas a-side. Belcher has already set off to Yorkshire, to put himself in training, accompanied by Joe Ward, and Berks remains in the neighbourhood of Newmarket for the same purpose. The battle is agreed to take place within six weeks, but where or when will be kept as much a secret as possible.”
The best accounts of the disappointments these olden gymnasts met with in their attempts to decide this contest, may be collected from the following excerpts:—
BELCHER AND BERKS.
From the York Herald.
“The boxing match made some time since, at Newmarket, to be fought by the above-named, it was agreed by the parties, should be decided on Thursday, June 17, between the hours of twelve and two, at the village of Grewelthorpe, about six miles from Ripon. The above village is in the West Riding; the division of that part of the county and the North Riding taking place there. Accordingly, on the morning of Thursday, a stage was erected at the bottom of a close adjoining the house of Mr. Pickersgill; the money, amounting to £1,450 a-side, deposited by the parties, and every necessary preparation made. In consequence of information having been previously sent to the magistrates, the Very Reverend the Deans of Ripon and Middleham, with several of the justices for the North and West Ridings, attended at Grewelthorpe, and signified their determination to put a stop to all such outrageous proceedings; but finding that the business was likely to be proceeded with, and that a number of people were assembling, they ordered the Riot Act to be read, which was accordingly done about twelve o’clock, by Mr. Taylors, the Town Clerk. However, between one and two o’clock, Belcher, with his second, etc., went upon the stage, and was followed by Berks, upon which Mr. Trapps went down to inform them, that if they did not instantly quit the stage, and the neighbourhood, they and their parties would be apprehended. They immediately obeyed, and left Grewelthorpe soon after.”
From the Morning Post.
“It appears that on Thursday, June 17, a stage, on which it was intended that Belcher and Berks should exhibit a fresh trial of their skill and strength, was erected in a bye place, about twenty miles distant from Middleham, in Yorkshire, and so conveniently situated for the purpose, that no persons present could have been deprived of a full view of the fight. At one o’clock, Fletcher Reid, Esq., on the part of Belcher, and Captain Fletcher, on behalf of Berks, met on the appointed spot, to make good the stake of 1,450 guineas a-side, being the sum for which Belcher and Berks were matched to fight. The conditions having been fulfilled, Belcher appeared on the stage at a quarter before two o’clock, attended by Joe Ward as his second, and Bill Gibbons as his bottle-holder; and shortly after Berks joined them, with Crabbe as his bottle-holder, but no second. The two bruisers shook hands, and Berks observed, ‘that it would now be determined which was the best man;’ to which Belcher replied, ‘he was surprised he did not know that already.’ There were several hundred persons present on the tiptoe of expectation to see the conflict commence; but the combatants could not set-to, as Harry Lee had not ascended the stage, who was Berks’ promised second. On his name being called out among the crowd, he answered to it; but when asked why he did not appear in his place, he gave no other explanation than that he would have nothing to do with the fight. This circumstance produced general dissatisfaction, as it was declared that this determination on the part of Lee could only have been occasioned by a previous understanding between him and Berks’ friends, who now began to think of the large sums they had betted, and the little chance they had of success. No bets could be procured on the ground, without staking considerable odds. As Berks refused to accept any other second in the room of Lee, all hopes of a contest now vanished, and the champions retired from the stage. Belcher, however, unwilling to disappoint the company, offered to have a few rounds with Berks for pure ‘love,’ but he declined, and immediately set off in a post-chaise.”
Mr. Fletcher Reid, who backed Belcher, made him a present of £50 for his trouble, and £5 to bear his expenses to London. He also made a present to Ward, his second, and to the bottle-holder, with money to bear their expenses to town.
In the beginning of July, 1802, the following letter from Berks appeared in the Oracle and Daily Advertiser:—
“To the Editor of the Daily Advertiser.
“Sir,—The wager for which I was to have fought with Belcher, at Grewelthorpe, in Yorkshire, was 1,450 guineas a-side; Captain Fletcher betting upon me, and Mr. Fletcher Reid upon Belcher; the match was to be fought between twelve and two.
“Captain Fletcher was on the stage half an hour before Mr. Fletcher Reid could make up the sum betted. Belcher did not come upon the stage until half past one, and then appeared in boots, consequently not very likely with an intention to fight. Immediately on his coming on the stage, Captain Fletcher came to me at the house, and desired me to put on my fighting dress, and be ready immediately, which I directly did. I was then asked by Fletcher Reid, ‘Where is your second?’ I answered, ‘Let us fight without seconds, for Harry Lee has refused to be one, on account of the magistrates.’
“I had wished to fight before the hour named, to prevent the interposition of the magistrates; for though no man can more respect their authority, which I would not attempt to resist, I thought it would be fair enough to get a start of them.
“Mr. Bolton, of York, held the bets, to the amount of 2,900 guineas.
“I had been in training seven weeks at Middleham, and was never in better condition. I ran and leaped with many people, and always beat them. I was exceedingly well treated by the people there, and must say that Captain Fletcher behaved amazingly well, and like a gentleman to me. I told him it was not for the sake of money, but of my honour, that I wanted to fight.
“Belcher had not been ten minutes on the stage, when two or three gentlemen came and told him to get off, for that the magistrates had issued their warrants.
“Belcher on this was directly going off, when I said, ‘Belcher, stop and fight at all risks, and we shall see who is the best man.’ I must say it is not true, as stated in some of the papers, that Belcher made a reply, ‘that he thought I knew already,’ for he made no answer, but acted the part of ‘Orator Mum.’
“It appears odd to me that Joe Ward was at Grewelthorpe the day before, but did not appear the day appointed for the fight at all. I do not wish to impute anything wrong to him, but think it very strange.
“The above is a true statement, which nobody will deny, and which Belcher, if he has a regard for truth, dares not contradict.—I am, sir, yours, etc.,
“JOSEPH BERKS.”
“London, July 1.”
On the 19th of August, it being Camberwell Fair, those two disappointed and hitherto considered equal champions accidentally met, never having seen each other since their proposed match in Yorkshire. “Belcher first espied his pugilistic rival entertaining a number of people with the manner in which he would serve out Belcher the first time he met him; but this seeming to have happened unexpectedly, their first salute was at least civil. Belcher, however, could not help expressing his regret that Berks should boast everywhere of his superior prowess, that he could beat Belcher with ease, that Belcher was afraid to fight, etc. Berks did not deny these accusations, and offered to fight him immediately. They then adjourned to the bowling-green belonging to the house where they met, and Berks attacked Belcher before he could get his shirt off. However, when they fairly met, Belcher put in a well-directed hit, knocked out one of Berks’ front teeth, and following it up with a blow under the ear, brought him down. Berks not being quite sober, and Belcher indisposed, their friends agreed that they should meet next day at Oxendon Street, Leicester Square. This being settled, they separated.”
August 20.—“This day they met according to agreement, and after some negotiation respecting the order of proceeding, they went, each in a separate hackney coach, accompanied by their friends.
“At a little before one o’clock the parties arrived at Tyburn Turnpike, where they immediately fixed on the first open space, a large field directly behind St. George’s Chapel, which faces Hyde Park. The combat having been so suddenly determined on, very few amateurs were present, excepting Mr. Fletcher Reid and Mr. Crook. There not being time to build a stage, an extensive ring was immediately formed, and the multitude, which was immense, placed around it. The first row almost lying, the second sitting, the third kneeling, and the remainder standing; those behind thinking themselves well favoured if they now and then got a peep.
“After walking about for a few minutes they began to strip, and when prepared, Berks asked Mr. Fletcher Reid ‘Whether it should be a fair stand-up fight.’—‘Certainly, in every way,’ said Mr. R., and immediately called Belcher to acquaint him with what Berks had asked, when he said ‘Certainly, I can do no otherwise.’ Berks then requested that the pauses between each round might be three quarters of a minute, but Belcher’s friends insisted on the old established interval of half a minute.
“A purse of thirty guineas was subscribed for the winner, and five for the loser, by the amateurs present. A few minutes after one they entered the ring; Belcher, accompanied by Joe Ward as his second, and Bill Gibbons as his bottle-holder; and Berks, by Tom Owen as his second, and Yokel, the Jew, for his bottle-holder. After the accustomed salutation they set-to.”
THE FIGHT.
Round 1.—Berks showed in this round that his hope of gaining the battle rested upon his superior strength. He ran in, closed upon Belcher, and tried to throw him, but failed, when Belcher dexterously accomplished what his antagonist was so desirous of doing, and had his man down on the grass. Some blows were struck, but no blood drawn.
2.—Berks followed the plan he had commenced with, ran in, and received a well-aimed blow from Belcher in the throat, which drew blood. They closed, and Belcher again threw his opponent.
3.—Berks once more ran in with great pluck, and with much adroitness planted a sharp blow on Belcher’s right cheek bone with his left hand; he then put in a severe blow between the shoulder and the breast, which, had it been lower, would have done execution. While aiming another blow with his left hand, Belcher rallied, closed, and a third time brought Berks down with a hit and a close.
4.—Berks rushed upon his adversary, missed his blow, and fell. Here some groaned, calling out, “Berks is at his old tricks,” supposing him to be shifting, but his subsequent conduct showed the fallacy of such a charge.
5.—Berks ran in with great force, caught Belcher by the hams, doubled him up, and threw him in the style of a cross-buttock; Belcher pitched on his head with such force it was feared his neck was broken. A cry of “Foul! foul!” ran round, but Belcher rose as sprightly as ever, said he was not hurt, and in answer to the cries of “Foul,” said “No, never mind.”
6.—This was one of the most severe rounds that had been fought. Berks ran in as usual: several severe blows struck on each side. Belcher tremendously struck Berks on the side of the head, a second on the neck, and a third on the throat, all truly severe. They closed, struggled, changed legs, and each displayed his utmost skill and strength in wrestling; at last both fell, neither being able to claim any advantage.
7.—Berks had lost his gaiety; he seemed less eager, and his strength evidently began to fail: when put to the test, he still, however, showed great spirit. They closed, and Berks was a fourth time thrown.
8.—Berks during this round fought on the defensive, but at that he had no chance. Belcher put in several good blows, and terminated the round by bringing Berks down the fifth time.
9.—Bets at this time were twenty to one in favour of Belcher, who did not appear the least exhausted. While sparring, he was nodding and talking to his antagonist, at the same time putting in some most severe and unexpected blows. Poor Berks was again brought down.
10.—Berks set-to with spirit, and came to close quarters. Belcher put in some awful hits, and struck unusually sharp: he cut Berks under the left eye, then under the right, and thirdly, planted a most dreadful blow between the throat and chin, so severe that it lifted Berks off his feet, and his head came first to the ground. Belcher fell from the force of his blow, and as they both lay, the blood gushing up Berks’ throat, he collected it in his mouth, and squirted it over Belcher. This he did not relish, and swore he would pay him for it in the next round. Berks, however, declared he did not do it intentionally.
11.—Although Berks was evidently beaten, he still showed fight. Some blows were struck, they closed, and Belcher threw Berks, at the same time falling on his own hands, not wishing to hurt Berks more by falling on him, though the practice is customary, and considered fair in fighting.[[85]]
12.—Berks now showed considerable weakness, sat longer on the ground, and required greater assistance from his second than before. This round ended by Belcher’s throwing him.
13.—Berks again came up; Belcher struck five or six blows, closed, and again threw him. Berks was now heard to express a wish to give in, but his second desiring him to persevere, put a handkerchief to his mouth, and stopped his utterance. (This was disgraceful, and opposed to all rules of the ring.)
14.—Berks showed game, but his strength was gone; in short, he only stood up to be beat; every one manifestly saw he had no chance of success. After a few sharpish blows, Belcher closed and threw him on the chest, where he laid for some seconds, and then yielded the palm. He was several times asked by Joe Ward if he had given in, and distinctly answered “Yes.” He could scarcely see or stand, and was so shockingly cut about the face, that it was impossible to distinguish a feature. His friends placed him in a hackney coach, and carried him to a house in the neighbourhood of Grosvenor Square.
Remarks.—Belcher carried no marks of the battle, excepting the bruise on the cheek bone and his left shoulder. After the battle was over he leaped with great agility, and having walked three times round the field, left it on foot. His style of fighting in this contest was his own peculiarly, putting in with astonishing rapidity his three successive blows, and knowing Berks’ superiority of strength, avoided closing whenever he was able. The whole of the bets depending on the intended Yorkshire battle were decided by this contest.
Tuesday, August 24th, Mr. Fletcher Reid, the pugilistic amateur, gave a dinner at the One Tun public-house, in St. James’s Market, to a number of the professors of boxing. Berks was there, and in the evening Belcher called in, when Mr. Reid addressed Berks, telling him he must now be convinced it was impossible for him to beat Belcher, and asked him to give him his hand, which he immediately consented to do, and the two champions sat down at the same table, and spent the remainder of the day in good humour. Berks was astonishingly recovered, and said he felt no inconvenience now from the fight, but being a little stiff. In the course of the evening a wager was made between him and Jack Warr, Bill’s son, to run one hundred yards, for two guineas, which they immediately decided, and Berks won by five yards.
On Friday, October 8, 1802, James Belcher was carried before his attentive friend, Nicholas Bond, Esq., and Sir William Parsons, at the Public Office, Bow Street, being taken into custody on a warrant of Lord Ellenborough’s, dated the 22nd of July, 1802, in order to give bail for his appearance next term in the Court of King’s Bench, to answer an indictment found against him for certain riots and misdemeanours; alluding to the battle he fought with Berks at Hurley Bottom, in Berkshire, and which had been removed from the Quarter Sessions to that Court, where it would have rested, as before understood, had he not lately fought another battle.
The recognizance was himself in £200, and two sureties in £100 each.
This meddling Midas appears to have been one of those public nuisances that are occasionally entrusted with in-discretionary power. Belcher had engaged Sadler’s Wells Theatre for the evening of October 26th, 1802, for his benefit. But Mr. Bond and his brother magistrates disappointed hundreds, and robbed Belcher, by “closing the house for the season,” declaring sparring an “unlawful exhibition!” Such are the fantastic tricks of men “dressed in a little brief authority.”
John Firby (the Young Ruffian), who at this time, 1803, stood high in reputation, offered himself, though certainly stale, as a candidate for “the Bristol youth’s” favors. A purse of 100 guineas was subscribed by “the dons of Newmarket race-course,” as the prize; and they were to meet on Tuesday, April 12th, 1803. But the magistrates of Suffolk and Cambridge getting wind of the meeting, exerted their authority to prevent it, and on the Monday evening before, sent notices to the men that a fight would not be permitted. A secret meeting was immediately held, and it was determined to repair to the nearest spot in the county of Essex, where they might fight unmolested by the magistrates. Accordingly, by six o’clock the next morning, every one in the secret was in bustle, procuring vehicles and horses for their conveyance. “At seven o’clock Belcher started in a post-chaise, seated between Joe Ward, his second, and Bill Warr, his bottle-holder. They pursued the London Road, followed by an immense retinue, until they arrived at Bone Bridge, where they turned to the left, passed through Linton, instilling awe into the astonished inhabitants, who could conceive nothing else but that the French were come. When they had got to the distance of half-a-mile beyond Linton, and about fifteen from Newmarket, being in the appointed county, they turned out of the road on to a level piece of ground, and there resolved to decide the contest. To prevent a possibility of any interruption it was judged expedient to be as active as possible. They immediately commenced the formation of a ring, which was accomplished without much difficulty, there not being many pedestrians. This being executed, the combatants were called, and informed that the collection was 100 guineas, but with regard to the terms on which they contested, they must themselves decide. They immediately agreed 90 guineas for the winner, and 10 for the loser.
“The combatants without loss of time began to strip, and after the usual ceremony, at a quarter past nine, began.”
THE FIGHT.
Round 1.—Every countenance expressed the greatest anxiety, while each stood on his guard, in expectation of his opponent’s blow. The disparity in size was considerable, Firby standing six feet one, and weighing fifteen stone; Belcher five feet eleven, and barely twelve stone. The combatants remained inactive for some seconds, when Firby put in a blow at the head, which Belcher avoided, and immediately returned by two blows left and right, but without much effect; they closed, and both fell, Belcher underneath. Many offers to take two to one that “the Ruffian” would win, but few betters.
2.—Belcher immediately struck Firby in the mouth, from which blood flowed copiously, and following it up by a right-handed blow on the side, brought his antagonist down. (Odds were now three to one in favour of Belcher.)
3.—No harm on either side. This round, Firby at the commencement aimed a blow at his opponent’s head, which he caught, and gave a returning blow, which Firby likewise parried with much dexterity. Belcher again made a blow which was also stopped; he, however, made a blow, followed up his opponent fighting half armed, and Firby fell.
4.—Both combatants rallied, and both put in some severe blows. They closed, Belcher fell, and while on his knees Firby struck him. A cry of “Foul! foul!” resounded from all sides. Belcher appealed for a decision of the point, but wished to go on rather than take advantage of such a circumstance. At this time a parson and a constable arrived from Linton, and endeavoured to prevent the further progress of the battle; but the combatants not paying much attention to the sacred cloth, or the legal staff, commenced the
5th round.—Firby, who now had a black eye, and spit up blood, shifted, and seemed afraid to approach his antagonist. Belcher facetiously beckoned to him, when he came up and struck, but so slowly, that Belcher avoided it by a jerk of the head, and while he was making a violent hit at Firby’s side, he fell. Belcher smiled; his opponent was evidently distressed.
6.—In this round, which undoubtedly was the best contested throughout the battle, it became apparent that Belcher’s strength increased, whilst that of his adversary was much exhausted. Firby, with much irritability, made some severe hits at Belcher, which he, however, either parried or avoided, so that not one of them told. Belcher smiled and looked about him with the greatest composure, even in the heat of the round, and carefully watching, put in a well directed blow in the stomach, at the same time closing, he gave his antagonist a cross buttock with great violence.
7.—Much hard straight-forward fighting on both sides, but Firby had the worst of it. (Odds ten to one on Belcher.)
8.—Firby rallied, made a hit, which Belcher stopped with great adroitness, and immediately struck Firby over the mouth, cutting his lip severely; Firby, however, returned it by a sharp hit, but did not draw blood. (Odds in this round sunk from ten to five to one.)
9.—At the first onset Belcher put in a severe blow over his antagonist’s right eye, and immediately resuming a defensive attitude, very cheerfully said, “How do you like that, Johnny?” Firby made a desperate blow, but over-reached himself, and fell; Belcher smiled, and while he was down pointed at him with great irony.
11.—Belcher followed his opponent round the ring, and put in some severe blows, which Firby stopped, but not effectually; Belcher at length gave him a knock-down blow, when his friends insisted he should give in.
The contest lasted twenty minutes, during which time Firby never had any chance of success. He had ever been considered a first-rate pugilist, and consequently the amateurs expected one of the best displays of science that ever had been witnessed; but whether Belcher’s name overawed him, or he really had fallen off in his style of fighting, he in this contest fell much short of what was anticipated. Belcher after the battle had not the mark of a blow perceivable.
Thursday, May 12, 1803.—“Mr. Garrow this day moved for the judgment of the Court on four defendants, James Belcher, Joseph (but in the indictment erroneously called Edmund) Burke, Joe Ward, called also erroneously James, and Henry Lee, who were described to be labourers. These defendants had allowed judgment to go by default.”
The indictment charged, that they, being persons of evil and malicious dispositions, and fighters, duellers, rioters, etc., had, on the 25th of November, in the county of Berks, conspired and combined together, that James Belcher and Edmund Burke (!) should fight a duel, and that the other two defendants should be aiding and assisting in the said fight and duel; and that in pursuance of the said conspiracy, the said James Belcher and Edmund Burke unlawfully and riotously assembled together, with fifty others, to the disturbance of the public peace; and that Belcher and Burke “fought a duel,” and the other two “were present, aiding and assisting, together with fifty other persons.” Mr. Garrow, afterwards a brutal Tory attorney-general and truculent judge, earned his dirty fee by a more than ordinary amount of hireling abuse of pugilism. Of course he said little of the deadly weapons with which the prisoners’ “betters” settled their duels. The celebrated Erskine, afterwards Lord Chancellor, and Mr. Const defended the prisoners, merely asking the lenity of the Court. Lord Ellenborough finally bound the prisoners, each in his own recognizance of £400, to come up when called on for the judgment of the Court; a nominal judgment, upon which the defendants were discharged.
An unfortunate accident now struck down the skill of this talented boxer, and clouded his after life in every sense. While playing at rackets with Mr. Stuart at the Court in Little St. Martin’s Lane, on the 24th of July, 1803, Belcher received a blow from a ball struck by the marker, of such extraordinary violence as literally to almost knock his eyeball from its socket. This distressing accident and the heavy recognizance on which he was bound, had a most depressing effect on Jem’s spirits and health, and he announced his retirement from the ring. His friends rallied round him, and placed him in a public-house, the Jolly Brewers, in Wardour Street, Soho, where he was well supported. But Jem’s spirit was active, though prudence dictated entire retirement. A quarrel between a brother of Jem’s (who soon after died) and Hen. Pearce, the Game Chicken, his fellow townsman and protegé, led to this unfortunate rencontre. The lavish praises too of Pearce’s friends excited Belcher’s envy: he declared he had taught Pearce all he knew, and spoke slightingly of “the Chicken’s” ability and skill; but we are anticipating.
Joe Berks, upon Belcher’s retirement, claimed the championship; but Pearce of whom we shall soon give the pugilistic career, was invited to London by Jem, with a promise to procure him patronage and a match with Berks. These matters will be found hereafter in our Life of Pearce, who had in the interim twice beaten Berks, and subsequently, Elias Spray, Carte, and lastly John Gully, when Belcher rashly challenged “the Chicken” for 500 guineas, to fight within two months. Pearce appears to have been much mortified at this challenge, but his position as champion forbade him to decline it. Mr. Fletcher Reid, Belcher’s firm friend, staked for Jem, and Captain Halliday posted the 500 for “the Chicken.” This, the first defeat of the renowned Jem, will be found fully detailed under the memoir of his conqueror.
Belcher had materially declined in constitution, independently of the loss of his eye. Among the serious effects of that accident was a nervous depression and irrepressible irritability, which, according to the testimony of many who knew him intimately, he tried in vain to control. Upwards of two years had passed in retirement from active pursuits, and in the ease and free living of a publican’s calling, when Belcher came forward, upon Pearce’s claim to the championship, to dispute his title. He could not be persuaded of the difficulties of meeting so skilful and formidable a boxer with the loss of an eye; and when too late he discovered his inferiority. How he did fight was long remembered by those who witnessed the lamentable but truly heroic and honourable combat, in which more unaffected courage, manly forbearance and true humanity were displayed and applauded, than ever entered into the narrow soul of craven slanderers of pugilism to conceive. Animosity was merged in honourable emulation, and the struggle for fair and unimpeachable victory. Belcher fought in his accustomed style, and tried his usual hits with adroit rapidity; but it was noticed that they were often out of distance, and that his defective eyesight was painfully made evident. When this was aggravated by blows over the good eye, his aim became utterly confused, and he became a victim to his own fatuity. Nevertheless, poor Jem endeavoured to make up for deficiency of sight and aim by an astonishing and unequalled display of courage and gaiety; and though the skill and science on both sides deserved respect, the spectators could not avoid seeing that Belcher’s guard was no longer ready, and his rapid antagonist planted on him so severely and frequently as to excite the regret of his friends that such a combat should have been provoked, and that the envious infirmity of human nature should have thus blinded the mental judgment as well as the bodily sight of so able a champion. Jem’s spirits, however, never forsook him during the fight; and at its close he declared, “That his sorrow was more occasioned by the recollection of the severe loss of a particular friend, who, in fact, had sported everything he possessed upon his head, and had been one of his most staunch backers and supporters through life, than as to any particular consideration respecting himself!” a generous sentiment and well worthy of record. Notwithstanding the somewhat ill-natured remark of John Gully, “That had Jem been in possession of four eyes, he never could have beaten Pearce,” it must be remembered that the future M.P. had been thrashed by Pearce, and had not even seen Belcher in his prime. Fully conceding the excellence evinced by the Chicken in science, wind, strength, and game, we may yet be allowed the supposition, that had this contest taken place when Jem Belcher possessed his eyesight in full perfection, its termination would, to say the least, have been very doubtful.
Respecting Belcher’s two battles with Cribb, when the circumstances of the case are duly appreciated; when it is recollected that his spirits must have been somewhat damped by previous defeat; and that his powers were known to be on the decay previous to his fight with the Chicken, it must be allowed that his heroism and science shone resplendently.
In the first fight with Cribb, as may be traced, Jem’s superiority in tactics was manifest. The former was severely punished; and not until Belcher had received a most violent hit over his good eye, and sprained his right hand, did Cribb appear to have an opening for a lead. In the seventeenth round the odds were two to one on Belcher, and in the eighteenth five to one, when Cribb was so much beaten, that considerable doubts were entertained whether he would be able to come again; and even at the conclusion of the battle Cribb was in a very exhausted state. Until Belcher lost his distance, from his confused sight, victory appeared to hover over him.
In the last battle that Belcher fought his courage was principally displayed, and he by no means proved an easy conquest to Cribb. Since the loss of his eye, it was the positive wish of his best friends that he should fight no more, but he was not to be deterred, obstinately neglected good advice, and would not believe in the decline of his physical powers. In this last battle, his disadvantages were great. His opponent had made rapid improvement in science, was in full vigour, and a glutton that was not to be satisfied in a common way; still Jem gave specimens of his former skill; but they were rather showy than effective, for the strength had departed. His hands, too, failed him, and for several of the latter rounds he endeavoured fruitlessly to prolong the contest without the indispensable weapons to bring it to a successful issue. Youth, weight, courage, freshness, and no mean amount of skill, were too much for the waning stamina and skill of even a Belcher to bear up against.
At the end of the report of his fight with Firby, a correspondent of the Morning Post thus sketches Belcher’s qualifications from personal acquaintance. “Belcher is a dashing, genteel young fellow, extremely placid in his behaviour, and agreeable in his address. He is without any remarkable appearance of superior bodily strength, but strips remarkably well, displaying much muscle. Considered merely as a bruiser, I should say he was not so much a man of science according to the rules of the pugilistic art, as that he possessed a style peculiar or rather natural to himself, capable of baffling all regular science, and what appeared self-taught or invented, rather than acquired by practice. He was remarkably quick, springing backwards and forwards with the rapidity of lightning. You heard his blows, but did not see them. At the conclusion of a round his antagonist was struck and bleeding; but he threw in his hits with such adroitness that you could not discern how the damage was done. His style was perfectly original, and extremely difficult to avoid or to withstand.” Again, “His style, like that of the great masters in every line, was truly ‘his own;’ the spectator was struck with its neatness and elegance—his opponent confused and terrified by its effects; while his gravity, coolness, and readiness, utterly disconcerted the fighting men with whom he was often opposed in mimic as well as actual combat. Add to this, that a braver boxer never pulled off a shirt, and we need hardly wonder at his eminent success, until an accident deprived him of one of the most valuable organs of man’s complex frame.”
In his social hours, Jem was good-natured in the extreme, and modest and unassuming to a degree almost bordering upon bashfulness. In the character of a publican, no man entertained a better sense of propriety and decorum; and the stranger, in casually mixing with the Fancy in his house, never felt any danger of being offended or molested. It would be well if as much could be said of all sporting publicans.
After his last defeat by Cribb, much of Belcher’s fine animal spirits departed. He was depressed and taciturn, and his health much broken by twenty-eight days’ imprisonment to which, with a fine, he was condemned for his breach of the peace by that battle. The old story too, for Jem was not prudent, is again to be told. His worldly circumstances had suffered with his health, and
“The summer friends
That ever wing the breeze of fair success,
But fly to sunnier spots when winter frowns,”
forgot to take what old Pierce would have called their nightly “perch,” or “roost,” at Jem’s “lush-crib.” His last illness approached, and, with at most two of his firmest friends, the once formidable champion departed this life on Tuesday, July 30, 1811, at the sign of the Coach and Horses, in Frith Street, Soho, in the thirty-first year of his age, and, on the following Sunday, was interred in the burial ground of Marylebone. The concourse of people to witness the funeral was immense; and a more general sympathy has rarely been witnessed. The proximate cause of his death was a family complaint, having its origin in an enlargement of the liver. The following inscription may be yet read upon his tombstone:—
IN MEMORY OF
JAMES BELCHER,
Late of St. Anne’s Parish, Soho,
Who died
The 30th of July, 1811,
AGED 30.
Universally regretted by all who knew him.
