[35] The career of Joe Goss shows that even in the last days of its degeneracy the P.R. had brave men who would have gone straight, had they not been warped from the direct course of honesty by knaves who sought only to make the pugilist the instrument of their own nefarious ends. Goss’s birthplace was the file-making town of Wolverhampton, on the 16th of August, 1838; and he made his début at the age of twenty-one, in a battle with Jack Rooke, of Birmingham, for £25 a side, on the 20th September, 1859. His defeat of Rooke in 1 hour and 40 minutes, after 64 sharp rounds, was a promising first appearance, seeing that that boxer had recently beaten Tom Lane—brother to the renowned “Hammer” of that ilk. His next match was with Price, of Bilston, a 12 stone man, who has been often confounded with Posh Price, of Birmingham—also, at a subsequent period (1862) beaten by Goss. This battle ended in a forfeit by Goss, he being arrested at the instance of his father when going to scale, November 9th, 1859. Joe was determined not to be baulked, and at a meeting between himself and Price, the latter offering to fight him for £10, as a solace for his disappointment, the money was posted, and the men met on the 10th of February, 1860, near Wolverhampton. Joe’s activity, power of hitting, and fearless style soon brought his opponent down to his own weight; and in the short space of 25 minutes, in which 15 rounds were fought, Price was consummately thrashed. Bodger Crutchley, who was in high esteem for his victories over George Lane, Sam Millard, Bos Tyler, Smith (of Manchester), and who had last fought Posh Price a drawn battle (interrupted by the police), was Joe’s next opponent. They met near Oxford, July 17th, 1860, for £100 a side, when, after a gallant struggle of 120 rounds, lasting 3 hours and 20 minutes, Goss was hailed the victor. On September 24th, 1861, Joe met and defeated Bill Ryall, for £50 a side, in 2 hours 50 minutes, during which 37 tedious and shifty rounds were fought; and on the 11th of February, 1862, Joe a second time faced Bill Ryall for £100 a side (on the Home Circuit), for three hours and eighteen minutes, when, as neither man could or would finish, the referee declared “a draw.” This brings us to his battle with Mace for £1,000, detailed above. On December 16th, 1863, Goss entered the ring with Ike Baker for £100, whose pretensions Joe disposed of in 27 rounds, lasting 80 minutes, the punishment being all on one side. Joe’s next two matches were defeats by Mace. On March 6th, 1867, Goss was matched for £100 a side with Bill Allen, of Birmingham. This was a remarkable muddle; after fighting 34 rounds in three different rings, time inclusive 1 hour and 54 minutes, darkness came on, and “a draw” was declared. Soon after Allen sailed for America, landing at New York, July 21st. Joe, who considered he had been treated unfairly, and robbed of the fair reward of his milling superiority, followed him, and, notwithstanding his voyage, issued his challenge to Allen on the 8th of April, six days after his arrival. This was promptly accepted, and the match made for 5,000 dollars (£1,000), to be fought for on the 7th of September. We need hardly remind the reader that the Irish newspaper Press of the United States is in the hands of expatriated Irishmen, whose buncombe and bombast is only exceeded by their prejudice and ignorance. These worthies magnified the contest into a battle for “the Championship,” but as Goss had been two and a half times beaten by Mace, and Allen had done nothing in England beyond drawing the stakes in a forfeit with Posh Price, and failed to do the same in his draw with Joe Goss, it would puzzle “a Philadelphia lawyer” to know how this could be a “fight for the Championship of the World,” except of Irish America, to which title they are both welcome. The “Cincinnati Fight” ended by a “foul” blow, Tom Allen hitting Goss when on the ground! Sic transit, &c.]
[36] We need not say that this gentleman was not the ex-recorder of Brighton, ex-member for Marylebone, and ex-Q.C., who about this period had left this country for the New World.—Ed.
[37] See Vol. I., Preface, pp. viii. and ix.
[38] No doubt many of the weak-kneed brethren, the disciples of a flabby, invertebrate pseudo-humanitarianism, will feel surprised, if not scandalised, at this claim of Lord Shaftesbury as a patron of pugilistic practice. His lordship’s Christianity, however, has always been practical, and of the order called “muscular.” Witness his gallant successful efforts to emancipate the poor little white slaves in our factories by his glorious Ten Hours Bill, and other humane legislation—legislation, let it never be forgotten, opposed by John Bright and the Gradgrind social reformers of the doctrinaire and politico-economical kidney. The friend and benefactor of the Street Arab, the Shoe Black, and the founder of Ragged Schools bore outspoken testimony of his admiration of boxing only a few weeks since in a speech at Exeter Hall, at the Young Men’s Christian Association, wherein he recommended sparring with the gloves as a gymnastic exercise of high value, and recalled, at eighty years, the days when he was himself accounted no mean antagonist, and “reckoned a good boxer among those who were judges of the art.” His style was worthy of a Homeric hero—a Nestor of the Ring.
[39] Some who remember “old times” and “the Kentish Town match,” may like to hear that on his annual visit to England, in December last, we smoked a pipe and recalled faded scenes and memories over a cheerful glass with “Temperance” Drinkwater; his activity, mental and bodily, being phenomenal for a man in his 77th year.—Ed.
[40] The clerical Editor’s “presumption” is equal to his gullability. We have already pointed out that these gentlemen are “two Dromios.”—Ed.
CHAPTER III.
TOM KING (CHAMPION).
1860–1862.
The brief history of the last legitimate champion of the British P.R. is, in many respects, a consoling contrast and relief to the chicanery, trickery, and moral or physical cowardice which marked the “latter-day” professors of pugilism, and their yet more disreputable and despicable patrons. If Tom King fell short in scientific attainments and the intuitive fighting gifts which were so conspicuous in Tom Sayers, Tom Spring, Jem Belcher, Dan Mendoza, John Jackson, and Tom Johnson, he nevertheless exemplified through his brief but bright pugilistic career the boldness, honesty, and fairness which are the accompaniments of true courage; and, whether winner or loser, won or lost upon his merits.
