
His gravestone says 1872 – it was erected in 1955 and back then Fleischer’s Encyclopedia indicated 1872 as his birth year above the record as well.

Why is March 13th, 1873 now universally recognized as Walcott’s birth date?



Tom . . . It was my goal to put Walcott up for posthumous induction in to the World Boxing Hall of Fame, along with a a group of forgotten pioneers, in 2010.El Intocable wrote:Whereas all old reference books and articles (Thomas Andrews etc.) indicated Joe Walcott’s birth date as April 7th, 1872, modern sources say that he was born in 1873. Fleischer’s 1973 Encyclopedia gives his birth date as April 7th, 1872 in the short biographical note, but above the actual record the date is March 13th, 1873. According to the 1900 Census, Walcott was born in April 1872:
His gravestone says 1872 – it was erected in 1955 and back then Fleischer’s Encyclopedia indicated 1872 as his birth year above the record as well.
Why is March 13th, 1873 now universally recognized as Walcott’s birth date?


As far as I know, he's always been buried in the cemetery. He is buried in his wife's family plot, and I read that his father-in-law refused to allow John L. Sullivan to raise funds for a memorial to Dempsey. (Apparently his father-in-law didn't like the way Dempsey had treated his daughter.) I know this was right around the time of the Jeffries-Johnson fight (circa 1909-1910) because I came across the article while researching Jeffries-Johnson. Sadly, I didn't save the article. The tombstone must be more recent than that.BoxBuzz wrote:Ray, is it possible that at some point in the past Dempsey's grave could have fit the descriptor in the poem? Or has it always been kept up? Is that it's original location? I imagine it is....a bit ghoulish to move such things...though on occasion it does happen as I understand it.
At the time Walcott was born, the record keeping of birth records was hit-and-miss, so there is probably no contemporaneous record one can check. Walcott, for reasons known only to him, may have given different dates. (Bob Fitzsimmons certainly did. Same thing with Sonny Liston and Archie Moore in more recent times.) Walcott may have given a 1873 date, somebody remembered it, and it caught on. The census record you reproduced seems pretty conclusive to me.El Intocable wrote:Thank you very much all for your fantastic posts! The question still remains, however; why do modern reference books and BoxRec list March 13th, 1873 as Walcott's birth date?
Funnily enough, his biographical note here mentions 1872:
http://www.boxrec.com/media/index.php/Joe_Walcott
Does anyone know how Walcott got a year younger long after his death?
According to the March 13, 1909 Tacoma Daily Times (Tacoma, WA, USA), M. J. Brady, Dempsey's father-in-law, refused to permit former World Champion John L. Sullivan and John S. Barnes to raise funds to erect a monument over Dempsey's grave. The family believed that the four-foot marble shaft was a sufficient memorial. The matter was thus dropped. (From the BoxRec wiki page on Dempsey, and the quote I had inserted there based upon my newspaper research.)raylawpc wrote:As far as I know, he's always been buried in the cemetery. He is buried in his wife's family plot, and I read that his father-in-law refused to allow John L. Sullivan to raise funds for a memorial to Dempsey. (Apparently his father-in-law didn't like the way Dempsey had treated his daughter.) I know this was right around the time of the Jeffries-Johnson fight (circa 1909-1910) because I came across the article while researching Jeffries-Johnson. Sadly, I didn't save the article. The tombstone must be more recent than that.BoxBuzz wrote:Ray, is it possible that at some point in the past Dempsey's grave could have fit the descriptor in the poem? Or has it always been kept up? Is that it's original location? I imagine it is....a bit ghoulish to move such things...though on occasion it does happen as I understand it.
- Would've been treated like a KING by the train porters on the way down and welcomed as a KING by many if not most in New Orleans.raylawpc wrote: Imagine the bravery it took to journey into the Deep deep South that was New Orleans and fight Jack Skelly for the world's title in 1892!
You honestly think a white man fighting in the Antebellum South would have had more "problems" than the African-American he was fighting?BroughtonRulesRefuge wrote:- Would've been treated like a KING by the train porters on the way down and welcomed as a KING by many if not most in New Orleans.raylawpc wrote: Imagine the bravery it took to journey into the Deep deep South that was New Orleans and fight Jack Skelly for the world's title in 1892!
I suspect Skelly as a Brooklyn yankee would've had the most problems if any. They didn't go all that way for nothing. New Orleans was multicultural and cosmopolitan before the US was the US of A.
- New Orleans was never the antebellum south any more than Tehran is fundamentalist Islam or Hong Kong is communist China. When does the "banning" of mixed race bouts have anything to do with the personal treatment Dixon received during his travels? Just how well was he treated in Boston, eh?raylawpc wrote: You honestly think a white man fighting in the Antebellum South would have had more "problems" than the African-American he was fighting?![]()
![]()
![]()
Treated him like a king? The Olympic Club, which promoted the bout, banned mixed-race bouts as a result of the fight. At least one account that I've read said the result nearly ended in a riot.
You are one of those sad individuals who probably believes the Holocaust never occurred, and that the Apollo moon landing was staged by NASA in a Houston TV studio. And now you've added one more to the list: Racism didn't exist in Post-Reconstruction New Orleans.BroughtonRulesRefuge wrote:- New Orleans was never the antebellum south any more than Tehran is fundamentalist Islam or Hong Kong is communist China. When does the "banning" of mixed race bouts have anything to do with the personal treatment Dixon received during his travels? Just how well was he treated in Boston, eh?raylawpc wrote: You honestly think a white man fighting in the Antebellum South would have had more "problems" than the African-American he was fighting?![]()
![]()
![]()
Treated him like a king? The Olympic Club, which promoted the bout, banned mixed-race bouts as a result of the fight. At least one account that I've read said the result nearly ended in a riot.
If the conditions were as dire as you make up, why would a carpetbagging yankee and freed black man make such a long journey for such a fight? A pair of masochists? Did New Orleans also ban mixed raced musicians from playing together? Guess Jazz was developed elsewhere and sneaked into NO on the sly, eh?
Joe Gans also defended in Hot Springs, Arkansas and Baltimore Maryland, the antebellum south now, eh? They used to auction slaves on the steps of the US capital, or have you forgotten?
A riot at a boxing match? Please do perish the thought sire. Why boxing fans are not such common rabble as to disturb nary a single hair upon the noble head of John Law or ruffle the blouse of sainted Mother Mary. No nobler or finer upright citizens have ever existed in the history of mankind, so be still thy dark thoughts of skulduggery.
And, yes, please do expand on any results before, during and after the bout.
- Stuff a rag in it Jacko. Don't recall asking for or receiving assistance from your candied ass when taking on the whole lot of your Islamic terrorist buddies wanting to drive Israel into the sea: http://forum.boxrec.com/viewtopic.php?f ... 47&start=0raylawpc wrote:
You are one of those sad individuals who probably believes the Holocaust never occurred, and that the Apollo moon landing was staged by NASA in a Houston TV studio. And now you've added one more to the list: Racism didn't exist in Post-Reconstruction New Orleans.
"I have decided it makes no sense to argue with folks like you, so I will not waste the effort."BroughtonRulesRefuge wrote:- Stuff a rag in it Jacko. Don't recall asking for or receiving assistance from your candied ass when taking on the whole lot of your Islamic terrorist buddies wanting to drive Israel into the sea: http://forum.boxrec.com/viewtopic.php?f ... 47&start=0raylawpc wrote:
You are one of those sad individuals who probably believes the Holocaust never occurred, and that the Apollo moon landing was staged by NASA in a Houston TV studio. And now you've added one more to the list: Racism didn't exist in Post-Reconstruction New Orleans.
Harry Wills was born in NO and defended his coloured title there against McVea, Langford, Clark, and many others. He didn't drag them down to get lynched. Jack Johnson traveled extensively through the south with little incident other than paying off speeding tickets and laughing off a few insults.
New Orleans was the Paris of the US and Dixon would've been treated as a king regardless of any isolated incidents. You fail to understand how the rail system operated with black porters being one of the highest paid service postions in the country with exclusive control over the service and hospitality operations. Dixon would've traveled in a segregated car, treated like a king and protected from any rough patches that may have existed during his travels.
You haven't even wiped out racism in your generation, so really, what good are you other than a laugh at your hormones going whacko?
These early black contenders and champs were extensive world travelers and a lot more savvy than to hang around on the street corner munching moon pies while waiting for the klan to ride by for a drag thru.
granberry wrote:Tell us all about how Walcott fought, buzz.
LOL
Are you a little confused between Walcott and middleweight champ Dempsey?
That's nothing.El Intocable wrote:
Does anyone know how Walcott got a year younger long after his death?
It gave him a chance to mention 'clueless shill' Goldman.BoxBuzz wrote:as if that was somethin'
Nat Loubet was still running The Ring at that time. The USA boxing tournament scandal occurred in 1977. Goldman joined the staff in 1978.Collins2000 wrote:It gave him a chance to mention 'clueless shill' Goldman.BoxBuzz wrote:as if that was somethin'
Goldman was running The Ring when granberry (aka Paddy Dolan) was sending in fake fight results for his protege Donald "Biff" Kline.
No wonder Paddy would rather talk about Kid Azteca (not that he has anything other than a comic book cover to share) rather than his own days mis-managing a couple of fighters in the 70's.
Homosexually fixated collins, the boxrec moderators' darling,Collins2000 wrote:It gave him a chance to mention 'clueless shill' Goldman.BoxBuzz wrote:as if that was somethin'
Goldman was running The Ring when granberry (aka Paddy Dolan) was sending in fake fight results for his protege Donald "Biff" Kline.
No wonder Paddy would rather talk about Kid Azteca (not that he has anything other than a comic book cover to share) rather than his own days mis-managing a couple of fighters in the 70's.