Humphries, attended by Tom Johnson, as his second, entered between one and two o’clock, followed by Butcher, as his bottle-holder, and Harvey Combe, Esq., the brewer and alderman, as his umpire. Mendoza immediately afterwards made his appearance, attended by Captain Brown and Michael Ryan, as his second and bottle-holder, having Sir Thomas Apreece for his umpire. The seconds, according to agreement, retired to separate comers on the setting-to. The reporter continues: “The first blow was struck by Humphries at the face of his antagonist, which Mendoza stopping with great adroitness, returned and knocked Humphries down. The second and third rounds terminated in precisely the same manner. Astonishment at the confidence and quickness of Mendoza was expressed by every spectator.
“After the contest had lasted about forty minutes, in which Mendoza, by generally catching his opponent’s blows on his arm and returning with his left hand, or throwing him, had indisputably the advantage of the combat, it was stopped by a circumstance that created the greatest confusion on both sides.
“In the twenty-second round, Mendoza having struck at Humphries, the latter dropped. The articles of agreement particularly specified that whichever combatant fell ‘without a blow,’ should lose the battle. Consequently a general cry of ‘Foul! foul!’ took place, and it was declared by Mendoza’s friends that he had won the battle. Humphries, Johnson, and the spectators interested on that side of the question, contended it was fair, asserting that Humphries had stopped the blow before he fell. The partizans on the opposite side as vehemently insisted on the contrary, and the whole was a scene of uproar and confusion. Sir Thomas Apreece, as the umpire of Mendoza, declared it foul, but Alderman Combe refused giving an opinion. During this affray, Captain Brown (Mendoza’s second) in a moment of irritation called Johnson a liar and a blackguard, which was answered by the approach of Johnson in a stern and menacing manner. This led to the expectation of a bye-battle between the seconds. Humphries came several times to his adversary, calling on him to fight out the battle, but Mendoza’s friends would not permit him. Humphries then threw up his hat, and challenged him again to the combat. However, numbers present said, that this went no way to the decision of the point in dispute, and the battle most likely would have been a drawn one, had not Mendoza, by the advice of his friends, or perhaps irritated by his adversary’s continually taunting him for not continuing the fight, consented to resume the contest.
“They again set-to, and the first two rounds terminated by Mendoza’s knocking down his adversary. They fought for about half an hour, Mendoza all the time evidently holding the advantage, and at last gained the victory, by Humphries again violating the articles of agreement. In the last round, after some blows had passed, Humphries had given way, Mendoza followed him up, and was preparing to strike, when his opponent fell, obviously without receiving any blow. Mendoza was immediately declared the conqueror.
“Mendoza in this battle displayed great superiority of skill. Humphries allowed his antagonist to gain ground upon him during the whole combat; and when he was preparing to strike, he always flinched. Mendoza, on the contrary, stood up to his man manfully, and followed him with coolness and resolution, which proved much more serviceable to him than the impetuosity of temper he displayed in his last contest with Humphries at Odiham. Several times, when Humphries was in the act of setting-to, he walked up to him, and viewing him with a keen look, seemed contemptuously to drop his guard. When Humphries closed, he several times said to Mendoza, ‘Very well, indeed—very well!’ and which Mendoza, when he succeeded in throwing him, repeated in a mocking tone of irony. Nevertheless, during the whole contest, up to his fall, the bets were in favour of Humphries.
“The only blows of consequence received by Mendoza were one on the cheek, and several on the ribs and back at the time of closing. Towards the end of the contest Humphries aimed several very severe darts at the pit of the stomach, which were admirably stopped by Mendoza; had they reached their aim, they might have proved fatal to his chance. Humphries was much beaten about the face; one eye was closed, and his forehead cut above the other; his lip was also cut, and he frequently spat blood, but we think the hemorrhage was merely from the last-mentioned wound.”
Humphries was by no means satisfied of the Jew’s superiority, and persisted he had been “wrangled” out of the fight. A third trial by battle was therefore sought by him, and readily agreed to. We copy the report.
Third Fight between DANIEL MENDOZA and GEORGE HUMPHRIES, at Doncaster, September 29th, 1790.
From an original Picture.
“September 29th, 1790, is rendered memorable in the annals of pugilism by the well-fought third battle between the celebrated champions Humphries and Mendoza. An inn-yard at Doncaster was pitched upon as the spot for the decision of the contest. The time (the Sellinger and Cup week), and the place were capitally chosen. The ground was bounded on two sides by the backs of houses, at one end by the inn, at the other by a strong palisade, behind which ran the river Don.” Upwards of 500 tickets at half-a-guinea were sold, and the persons admitted. But the Yorkshire “tykes” of humbler means were not to be baffled; and a ‘cute ferryman having brought over some hundreds at sixpence a-head, the crowd outside soon demolished the paling, stout as it was, and an immense concourse got in. The spectators seated around the stage, however, prevented any inconvenience or interruption of the principal performers.