What Was Jackson's Status When he Fought Jeffries?

Jim Jeffries win over Peter Jackson is often referred to as a victory over the reigning Coloured Champion.
Given that Jackson appropriated the title when he beat George Godfrey in 1888 , never defended it,retired for 3 years between 1895 and 1898 and came back for two fights then retired for good, was Jackson still the champion?
If you think he was then consider this, Frank Childs was the Coloured Champion in 1902 he was beaten by Jack Johnson ,who then defended it multiple times.
In 1905 Johnson lost by controversial dsq to Joe Jeannette ,Johnson still claimed the title because it was a dsq loss ,whatever the merits of this he beat Jeannette a week later. this is December 1905.

Johnson sandwiched in between this a defence against Young Peter Jackson , the day before he beats Jeannette ,then into 1906 defends against,Jeannette twice more then defends against Black Bill,followed by Sam Langford Jeannette twice more,Peter Felix up to1913 Johnson has not been beaten by a black fighter, he defends his world title against Battling Jim Johnson, breaks his arm but gains a draw.

Johnson does not lose to a black fighter until Brad Simmons turns the trick in 1926.

So Johnson was coloured champion from 1903 until 1926! And , unlike Jackson who never put his title on the line ,he actually successfully defended it 21times and ,was Coloured Champion for 23 years!

 

This is actually hilarious.
Want to know why? There was no Empire Title, Jackson claimed it when he beat Frank Slavin, Slavin had never beaten anyone for it , nor had he ever defended such a title and neither did Jackson.
There was no recognized boxing body to award such a title.The BBBof C was not established until 1929 , 17 years later

Far more important? You make it up as you go along don't you?:rofl

 

EVEN FUNNIER!!!!

Jackson fought Jem Smith in 1889, on the 11th of November.
NO TITLE WAS AT STAKE .Jackson was defending NOTHING when he fought Slavin.

From July 1891 until May 1895 Smith was retired.

What will you do now ,admit you are WRONG ?
Or do your usual and creep away not answering.:hi:

 

Why?

 

The problem with Munroe's statement is that neither Slavin or Smith had beaten anyone for this spurious title.
You forgot New Zealand from whence came another claimant to Commonwealth/Empire honours,Dan Creedon.Creedon fought Smith for what was billed as the"Imperial British Empire Title" this was in 1896.

Smith fought Slavin for what was billed as the English heavyweight title in 1889 ,the fight was in Bruges and was a DRAW.

One wonders how the could have called Slavin the English Champion , had he won since he was an Australian and ,therefore ineligible to fight for English titles? This was bareknuckle contest.

Mendoza stated that Jackson beat Smith for the British Empire Title in 1892 and defended it against Slavin in 1892 he did not Slavin was beaten by Jackson in 1892 but neither of them were British Empire Champion,and Jackson had beaten Smith way back in 1899 3 years earlier,when again neither had a title to defend

 

Who would you personally say has the most legitimate claim to be called the Coloured Champion?
Peter Jackson who beat 165lbs 35 years old George Godfrey for it and then never defended it?

Or Jack Johnson who won it from Frank Childs in 1902 defended it against Denver Ed Martin twice,Sam McVey 3 times,Childs again,Joe Jeannette7 times, Sam Langford,Black Bill 4 times,Peter Felix,among others, up until 1926? Racking up a total of 21 defences?

 

Apart from a meaningless no contest with nobody Gustav Wilkie, Jackson had not fought in 6 years ,was tubercular ,alcoholic and 37 years old ,but this is common knowledge, my thread is about Jackson's status at the time, was he the Coloured champion?
Certainly he had not been beaten for it ,equally certain he had never defended it in the 10 years he might have been said to have a flimsy claim to it.