So who thinks Peter Jackson would have beaten Sullivan?

Every account i've come across details that he was suffering from TB.

That would do it!

 

Jackson was not the undisputed #1 contender - it seems Goddard too was seen as having some sort of claim. But not for Corbett himself, who declared the day after the Sullivan fight:

"Jackson I consider has the first and best claim to my attention...I consider he is alone entitiled to my attention." Charley Mitchell was a "stiff...unworthy of my notice." (Times-Democrat)

Four days later:

"Corbett says the man above all others in the world that he wants to meet is Charley Mitchell." (Daily Picayune)

I'd suggest it's reasonable to suggest that Corbett's "friends in the south" had been in his ear about the colour line. But Sullivan may have had an impact on his thinking too:

"My advice to him is that if he want to keep [the title] he better not meet the ****** Jackson. If he he ever does he will get licked." (New York Herald).

Mendoza, as to the question of Jackson "not want[ing] to fight in the south", things are more complex. Peerless George Dixon had lifted the featherweight title the same week that Corbett defeated Sullivan - beating a white fighter in the process, I think in New Orleans. This did not go down well in the south:

"They [black Americans] are loudly proclaiming the superiority of their race, to the great scandal of the whites, who declare that they should not be encouraged to entertain even feelings of equality, much less superiority. The Olymipc Club Management have about decided not to hold any more coloured contests." (New York Herald)

The Herald went on to say that contests of this type were viable in the north where "there are very few negroes" but that this type of contest in the south "could only arouse bitter feelings between the races which will lead to bloody affrays".

The Times Democrat continues in an even stronger vein calling the decision to match a black and a white in that part of the world "a mistake". These are objective judges (As far as it goes) and certainly not "pro Jackson" reports - it seems to me that trying to arrange this match in the south, in these circumstances, is not a reasonable thing to do. Jackson would need to be insane to fight in the south in these circumstances.

We all know that Corbett's decision to fight Mitchell instead of Jackson is a joke, I think Corbett's insistance that the fight go ahead in the south is as clear a dodge as has taken place in the titles history, and I personally would have seen Jackson as favourite going in.

 

All due respect Mendoza - but that is very far from the bottom line. Here is the bottom line -

Corbett refused to fight Jackson in any arena other than one where Jackson would be in fear for his life, never mind likely to recieve a fair hearing.

I have multiple round by rounds of the fight and I agree with your surmise. But I also have Jackson going in with a bad ankle - do you? The bottom line here would be, draw.

As to Corbett "wanting it", Bill Delaney, Corbett's right hand man disagreed:

"You can say I am in the position to announce that Corbett will not meet Jackson again. He is averse to meeting a negro on principal [it's worth noting that Corbett denied this]. besides all of his friends in the the South do not want him to again face the black man. Jim is anxios to pelase them in everything..." (New York Sun)

It's worth noting that this is in an interview conducted with a Northern newspaper.

It is my opinion that the hotel meeting was grandstanding. Corbett, within a week of becoming champion, had made up his mind not to face Jackson if it could be avoided.

OK, the champion can dictate terms - but you can't seriously think that Jackson is at fault for refusing to go south in light of the Dixon trouble? People were killed.

Interesting.

 

I do not say that Jackson would be assaulted. I say that he would have been in fear of his life. This is real life, not history. There was near hysteria over a featherweight title fight in the south.

Let's not beat this point to death. I will just say - I do not think that Jackson can be expected to go south in these circumstances.

Yes, although I have also heard that Jackson was limited by this accident. All Jackson camp, all after the fight.

September 9 1892. So well over a year before the Mitchell fight, AFTER Corbett had neamed Jackson as the only man worthy of his attention, but surely before the Mitchell fight had been made.

So no.

You do me a slight injustice I feel - Corbett speaks about Jackson's lone worthiness in the days after the Sullivan fight, but after just a week of being champ he has begun naming an unworthy white challanger of equal consideration. Then we have Delaney speaking of Corbett's "friends in the South". Circumstantial at best, but "speculation at best"? Unfair, I feel.

 

Get gone, you know all this.

Three quarters of my end comes out of your book!

Post the link for your Fitz effort again, or PM me, re-reading that chapter form Corbett has me ready for your new one.

 

I think you meant to quote Mendoza here, I mostly agree with you.