This link shows Willard giving his reasons for not defending against black challengers. http://dbs.ohiohistory.org/africanam/page.cfm?ID=5735 This content is protected
No mention of Harry Wills of course. He's not completely wrong in what he is saying but history shows that for 3 years Willard did not only draw the color line against black boxers, he drew a line against every potential title challenger until taking on Jack Dempsey. His reign was among the worst.
He did make some valid points there, although it is a shame that great fighters like Willard and Dempsey drew that color line. There really could have been some great matchups. Dempsey/Langford. Willard/Mcvea ect...
I tend to think Harry Wills' people were crap at publicity. No one seems to know much about Wills when Wills was in his prime.
He was the second biggest money maker of his time, i hardly think, you could call that crap at publicity!
I think those really big paydays happened later in his career, in the 1920s. But regardless of whether he was drawing fans wherever he fought, he doesn't seem to be getting much column space in the newspapers. He seems to be regarded less than Langford even during the period he was establishing supremacy over Sam.
Willard's reasons were sound, considering that hundreds of people had been killed or injured in the unrest that followed the Johnson-Jeffries fight. But as TheGreatA says he didn't seem to have much intention of defending much against anyone anyway. The real injustices of the time were the ones that made Willard's conclusions and actions reasonable ones. A white prizefighter saying he wouldn't fight any more black prizefighters wasn't some wild act of gratuitous prejudice, or a primary cause of a major injustice .... it was the result of something far bigger and far more malignant in society.
In the end I have to say that Willard defending against a Langford or Wills would not have been as big a deal as Johnson-Jeffries, as Willard was not as beloved and respected a champion as Jeffries and neither Langford or Wills were such a source of controversy as Jack Johnson. In fact Langford seemed to be universally respected for his skills and ability. I think Wills's publicity campaign only truly got going by the 1920s.
I suspect, to the kind of white people who would be the ones to cause trouble, the facts of Willard being less lovable than Jeffries, and Langford being less hate-able than Johnson, would matter little IF Langford had KO'd Willard in a "mixed bout". All they'd care about is that the white champion and conqueror of Johnson had been defeated by a black. And if any blacks were brazen enough to celebrate or express satisfaction with the result there would likely have been carnage. And it's likely the racist whites would have imagined something anyway. Simply, the minds of hooligans are not very complex. In my life time, I've seen or heard about foreigners get beaten up or foreign cars smashed up when England loses a football match. In 1910s America it really didn't take much to set off murderous race riots. You might be right. But Willard wasn't taking the risk, and that's understandable.
That's certainly mighty white of Willard, looking out for his black brethren. I'll say that he doesn't seem nearly as hateful of blacks as Jeffries, some of whose quotes make blood curdle.
Maybe he was looking out for himself, and the financial viability of the championship, and the fight game in general. Yeah, but we do have to suspect reporters often made most of this stuff up anyway. Willard's explanation was possibly something a liberal segregationist had come up with and attributed to him. Him and Jeffries possibly never said anything much to reporters, they were at home on the farm, rasising cattle or watching alfalfa grow.
I've been so busy lately but have meant to put together a collection of them. In the Pollack book, there is the fantastical contention that he would not fight Blacks because their smell gave an unfair advantage, almost decking him before the fight began. I am not for judging different eras and thinking I would have been so enlightened were I raised in those times, but some folks just stick out as a bit over the top.
Wills generated a masive amount of publicity in the 20s. Jack Sharkey likened it to the publicity surrounding Joe Louis before he won the title. The remarkable thing about Wills is not that he did not generate a lot of media atention, but the fact that he fell from the limelight so quickly once he was beaten. Its almost as if they kicked over the traces.
