What Was Jackson's Status When he Fought Jeffries?

obviously, johnson sounds like he has the more legitimate claim but if jackson didn't lose it, I suppose there's an issue there. I guess that's reflective of my question: the coloured championship has the same pitfalls as any other, as lineage and legitimacy can be questioned here as well.

how closely, if at all, did the newspapers (admittedly, all white writers) acknowledge the belt and if they did, did they hold champs accountable?

 

February, 10 1898

"Dark Peter is in the finest fighting trim we've seen since his bouts with Dooley. He moves as a Wallaby upon the grange, fleeting and quick, and punches with the clout of an Croc's tail. He surely will defeat any who rise to challenge, including this Yank Jeffries."
Mick Dundee, The Western Australian

 

I dont understand this question. Peter Jackson was dead by 1902, so of course Jack Johnson had a better claim to being the coloured champion, even though Jackson was technically still the lineal champion. Personally, i think that Wlad Klitchsko has a better claim than Gene Tunney as well, although i suppose techinically i am wrong.

 

This one has it billed as the world championship.

http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/art...ckson slavin world championship&searchLimits=

It is forgotten today, because of John Ls comeback but many people considered Peter Jackson the world championship, as John L had retired (from memory this occurred around about the time of the slavin jackson fight).

Here is Peter Jackson's opinion on the status going into the fight. One thing generally isnt disputed by anyone - Peter Jackson is a class act and deserved a shot at the world championship.

http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/art...ckson slavin world championship&searchLimits=

 

The second link was just for interest.

Note the third Article which refers to World champion Peter Jackson defending his crown against goddard

http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/art...rm=peter jackson world champion&searchLimits=

http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/art...rm=peter jackson world champion&searchLimits=

http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/art...rm=peter jackson world champion&searchLimits=

And of course for the Corbett fight we saw the american champion vs the coloured champion of the world.

http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/art...rm=peter jackson world champion&searchLimits=

It is actually quite interesting that Peter Jackson seems to have been considered the Coloured Champion of the world. Whereas Jack Johnson when he was champion was considered the World Champion of the Coloureds. A Subtle yet important difference.

I think that Jackson's title was more important because he claimed it by not only beating the Champion of the coloureds, but also the champion of England (smith and Slavin), Australia (Lees) Plus he drew with Corbett Champion of America and he was Ducked by Sullivan (who never beat that Australian Champion (any of them) and even struggled with the English champions(MItchell and even Cardiff). Of course, Sullivan was past prime by this time and struggled is probably a strong word. Still, Jackson was universally considered the best (or at least a top 3 fighter) by this time. Johnson, despite what we later found out, was not. It wasnt until he beat Burns and later that he could be considered a world champion.

Of course by the time Jackson met Jeffries he was a shot fighter, and his claim was similar to Jeffries title he lost to Johnson or even Johnson's world coloured title that he lost to Eddie Lawson.

 

So, this means that Jeffries became the coloured champion, correct? And that Johnson won the championship from Jeffries in 1910.

 

McVey won't like that. Colored champ and British Empire champion.

 

^^^ Mcvey losing face. :hi:

 

All titles were 'claimed' to begin with.
I'm no expert on the era but I've read that Jackson was considered champion of the British Empire, or perhaps even touted as world champion within the Empire.