John L. Sullivan: No Racist!

HomicideHenry · Post by **HomicideHenry** » 28 Feb 2007, 01:19

There is often the comments that John L. Sullivan refused to fight any black men or defend his title against any black man. While it is true that he never did fight a black man in his entire career, its not true that he refused black men right left and center.

Many often say that Sullivan hated black men, and was quoted as saying that the white race was a superior one and that he would 'never fight a person or a foreigner'.

This statement, in my mind, irrefustably has to be the work of an over zealous newspaper writer, or someone close to Sullivan taking his words out of context. I say this because of the following reasons:

-The Irish who immigrated to America were often the subject of much ridicule and abuse

One of the more popular sayings of the day were that 'an Irishman is a person turned inside out' or 'if an Irishman kills a person, hang the Irishman'. Sullivan, whose parents were full blooded Irish, would have surely have witnessed all this racial hatred, even possibly being the subject of racial tension himself.

Mind you, many Irish were often refused entry into many restraunts, as were blacks, and were told at many a business 'No Irish Allowed'. Many of the Irish were doing 'slave labor' just to get by being paid just peanuts (figure of speech) for months of work that was back breaking. Its a fact that the Irish, Orientals and Latinos built the railroad system virtually without pay or food.

-Sullivan had been given offers three times to fight George Godfrey, who was possibly the second best black fighter in the world. The first offer was a 'fight to the finish' and police intervened before the contest started, the second time Sullivan did refuse to fight Godfrey, and the third time Sullivan asked Godfrey to a fight and Godfrey turned it down saying he would need more time to train.

It must be also noted that Sullivan couldnt have been too racist because he refereed two of Godfrey's bouts for his 'Coloured Heavyweight' title.

The only african fighter, of note, that Sullivan possibly did turn down for fear of losing or maybe even fearful of losing his status as a celebrity if he did fight a black man of such ability, was 'The Black Prince' Peter Jackson. Jackson had defeated such men as Steve O'Donnell, Patsy Cardiff, Professor William Miller, Peter Maher and who would go on to win the British Commonwealth title as well as the 'Coloured Heavyweight' title and was already the champion of Australia.

Many in the years to come would say Jackson was the equal of Jack Johnson, if not the early 20th century version of Muhammad Ali. Jack Dempsey put Jackson in his list of the greatest fighters of all time, as have many others. He was quite possibly the greatest of the bare knuckle and early gloved era, John L. Sullivan and Jem Mace not withstanding.

There might be some truth, though, when it comes to foreigners. Sullivan was greatly patriotic, even though he was Irish and more than likley faced some form of racism towards himself. Sullivan did want to fight Godfrey who was an African American, but not Jackson, who was from Australia. Sullivan, when he did tours in the UK, did all exhibitions--though he did try to get a fight with Jem Mace, and had fought with Charlie Mitchell and Herbert Slade in the past---though both men would fight mainly in the USA.

When Sullivan lost to Jim Corbett he was quoted as saying 'At least a fellow American won the title over me.'

-Sullivan was the first to congratulate Jack Johnson on beating Jefferies.

While it is true there was a sort of rivalry between Sullivan and Corbett over who would train Jefferies in his comeback fight against Johnson, it was Sullivan who was the first man to congratulate Johnson, and Sullivan was possibly the only man there in Reno, if not the entire country (least white folks) who gave Johnson any credit or treated him with any respect at all. Hardly a racist attitude. Alos it must be mentioned when Willard finally beaten Johnson, Sullivan must have been so shocked by the 6'6'' Willard beating the seemingly invincible Jack Johnson that he said Willard was the 'champion of champions', because he didn't believe Johnson could be beaten.

Conclusion? Whether you like the old timers or not, whether you think Sullivan was a great fighter or not, all evidence here insists that Sullivan, though being quite the boastful braggart that he was and could be one helluva hard bastard when he wanted to be, bared no malice towards black men.

As far as Jackson goes, all fighters, no matter who they are, have that one guy they didnt fight, for whatever reason it may be. Maybe Sullivan did duck him, but Sullivan virtually fought every single big name that they could throw at him. But the same case could be made for Joe Louis not fighting Elmer Ray or Turkey Thompson, or Lewis for not fighting Bowe, or hell Tyson for not fighting Bowe, Mercer at all or Lewis when both were in their primes.

Sullivan for all intents and purposes I think would have fought black men...they just had to be American.

barry · Post by **barry** » 28 Feb 2007, 03:29

Sullivan was very racist! He may have chilled out later in life but you should have heard a lot of the crap that he said to George Dixon when Dixon destroyed Jack Skelly in New Orleans, which that was just one example...there are many more! It was certainly not overzealous newspaper men making up tales about Sully...he was racist...and very much so for a lot of years!

overhand_right · Post by **overhand_right** » 28 Feb 2007, 07:23

Christ what a stupid thread. You are deluding yourself and write nothing with any source or fact, just way out speculation. Sullivan was racist, there is a whole archive of fact regarding this, but at the same time, those were the times they were living in.

Forget about it.

JC · Post by JC » 28 Feb 2007, 10:05

IrishRufusMurphy wrote:-The Irish who immigrated to America were often the subject of much ridicule and abuse

One of the more popular sayings of the day were that 'an Irishman is a person turned inside out' or 'if an Irishman kills a person, hang the Irishman'. Sullivan, whose parents were full blooded Irish, would have surely have witnessed all this racial hatred, even possibly being the subject of racial tension himself.

Mind you, many Irish were often refused entry into many restraunts, as were blacks, and were told at many a business 'No Irish Allowed'. Many of the Irish were doing 'slave labor' just to get by being paid just peanuts (figure of speech) for months of work that was back breaking. Its a fact that the Irish, Orientals and Latinos built the railroad system virtually without pay or food.

So just because someone has been the victim of prejudice they can't be prejudice theselves? That's just silly, my grandparents came over here from Ireland in the 50s and experienced the "No Blacks No Dogs No Irish" signs and all that, but while I wouldn't exactly call my Grandad racist he holds all the same racial predudices that most guys of his generation did.

Yes Irish immigrants might have been refused entry to resuarants but many also rioted in 1863 prostesting being drafted into "a war to free the blacks." Before anyone gets the wrong idea I'm not having a dig at the Irish, most of my family are Irish I'm just refuting Rufus' logic.

Applying 21st century concept of racism to the 19th century is just niave. But if we must lets get it stright anyone can be racist regardless of their own ethnicity.

UpWithEvil · Post by **UpWithEvil** » 28 Feb 2007, 11:41

So just because someone has been the victim of prejudice they can't be prejudice theselves?

Actually there is a school of sociological thought that claims "racism" can only flow from the empowered social groups to the disenfranchised castes. Muhammad Ali once preached that the white man was subhuman, created by an evil scientist by breeding black men with animals. This is every bit as racist as anything Sullivan ever said, yet you rarely hear Ali referred to as a racist.

JC · Post by JC » 28 Feb 2007, 11:59

UpWithEvil wrote:
So just because someone has been the victim of prejudice they can't be prejudice theselves?
Actually there is a school of sociological thought that claims "racism" can only flow from the empowered social groups to the disenfranchised castes. Muhammad Ali once preached that the white man was subhuman, created by an evil scientist by breeding black men with animals. This is every bit as racist as anything Sullivan ever said, yet you rarely hear Ali referred to as a racist.

Yes, I didn't mean to over simplify the whole issue, I just think the idea of; Irish suffered predjudice, Sullivan was Irish, ergo Sullivan was not a racist is shallow and weak.

At the last election one UK politician said, "nobody can call me a racist my Grandmother died in Auschwitz," as if because of that whatever he did couldn't be racist, it's just nonsense.

In the case of Ali I always tend to see it as a young man who had grown up under segregation getting sucked in by people offering all the answers. If he was still saying that stuff now I'm pretty sure he'd be critisied for it.

On the original point I have no idea if Sullivan was racist or not

SteveO · Post by **SteveO** » 28 Feb 2007, 15:50

Which two of George Godfrey's bouts for the 'Coloured' heavyweight title did John L. Sullivan referee?

silkov · Post by **silkov** » 28 Feb 2007, 16:04

Don't you do any research for your posts Rufus??... this is the biggest turkey you've wrote yet!... Sullivan not racist!... what a load of bull!!!... much as I admire the man as a fighter and character he was definately racist... you should try reading Sullivans report of the Jeffries vs Johnson fight where Sullivan writes of his 'well known antipathy of his race' when talking about Johnson!... if that is not racism I dont know what is!...

theone · Post by **theone** » 28 Feb 2007, 18:38

Muhammad Ali once preached that the white man was subhuman, created by an evil scientist by breeding black men with animals. This is every bit as racist as anything Sullivan ever said, yet you rarely hear Ali referred to as a racist.

I think its narrow minded thinking, judging Ali as racist as Sullivan. I imagine it wouldn't be too tough convincing any of us on this forum that the "white man" was a devil if we were all young black men growing up in the deep south during the days of segregation.

HomicideHenry · Post by **HomicideHenry** » 28 Feb 2007, 21:47

Which two of George Godfrey's bouts for the 'Coloured' heavyweight title did John L. Sullivan referee?

Charles Hadley- February 22nd, 1883 ['KO' 6th round win for Godfrey]

Joe Lannon- February 4th, 1889 [12 round pre-arranged draw]

Sullivan was the referee in both fights; Sullivan, as mentioned before, almost had fights/offers with George Godfrey---the first was to be a fight to the finish but police intervened, the second time Godfrey challenged Sullivan but Sullivan refused, the third time Sullivan challenged Godfrey and Godfrey refused.

UpWithEvil · Post by **UpWithEvil** » 28 Feb 2007, 22:47

I think its narrow minded thinking, judging Ali as racist as Sullivan. I imagine it wouldn't be too tough convincing any of us on this forum that the "white man" was a devil if we were all young black men growing up in the deep south during the days of segregation.

Would you have more or less trouble convincing a white Afrikaner that the African tribal negro is of low intelligence and prone to violence?

theone · Post by **theone** » 28 Feb 2007, 23:13

Would you have more or less trouble convincing a white Afrikaner that the African tribal negro is of low intelligence and prone to violence?

Don't really get your point in relation to Ali and Sullivan. Please explain.

HomicideHenry · Post by **HomicideHenry** » 28 Feb 2007, 23:29

I would also like to comment that, though Sullivan can be deemed as racist today the same could be said of even the most influencial 'civil rights' leaders and authors of the time. Take Lincoln as an example. Most African Americans today still refer to Lincoln as 'Father Abraham' for freeing them. I say take a look into the Lincoln Douglas debates and Lincoln is quoted many times as saying he felt the position of the superior race was to the white man, that he also did not condone white men or white women to be with black men and women and even proposed that the slaves be sent back to 'Liberia', only to recant saying the Africans wouldn't survive in a week because they weren't intelligent enough to govern themselves.

Sounds racist today, but then again, change in opinion takes time. What would have been deemed racist today was revolutionary in Lincoln's time. Its like how many blacks today are trying to ban 'Tom Sawyer' and 'Huck Finn' and 'Uncle Tom's Cabin' from libraries and schools today because its 'racist garbage', but what they fail to realize that it was those same books that made people think 'Maybe slavery is wrong'.

Harriet Beecher Stowe who wrote Uncle Tom's Cabin once met with Lincoln and the President looked down on her (she was 5', Lincoln was 6'4") and he said with a smile 'So you are the little woman who started the big war?' in reference to how her book changed opinions on slavery, though today the literature would seem racist with black people talking ebonics and saying 'Yes Suh' and talking up how 'the masta's been so good to ol' Tom', despite being beaten and eventually killed.

Hope someone can see what I am trying to say.

Collins2000 · Post by **Collins2000** » 01 Mar 2007, 00:41

IrishRufusMurphy wrote:Conclusion? Whether you like the old timers or not, whether you think Sullivan was a great fighter or not, all evidence here insists that Sullivan, though being quite the boastful braggart that he was and could be one helluva hard bastard when he wanted to be, bared no malice towards black men.

You don't have to bare malice towards people to be a racist.

Many of the biggest slave owners treated their slaves quite well and bore them no malice. Well, no more malice than you bear towards any living thing you owned.

But they were still racists. As was Sullivan. As were many people from previous generations including my father and my uncles.

You need to get some 'edumucation, lad, before entering into debates of this nature.

HomicideHenry · Post by **HomicideHenry** » 01 Mar 2007, 00:58

Sullivan prolly did have some racist attitudes, but I still dont see how he was so racist---if he was he would have drawn the color line completely and not have bothered to have given George Godfrey a chance at all, unlike other white men of the times---though the fights fell through for one reason or another.

I give John L at least that much credit that he tried to get the fight to come off the ground.

barry · Post by **barry** » 01 Mar 2007, 01:20

>>>Sullivan prolly did have some racist attitudes, but I still dont see how he was so racist<<<

That would probably be due to the fact that you have not read much about him, especially articles that he wrote! As silkov stated...read his articles leading up to and after the Jeffries-Johnson bout. Read the articles and statements that he made about Godfrey...read the articles leading up to, during and after the Carnival of Champions. Read about his comments every time that he was ringside for a George Dixon fight. Read his comments about any fight that he attended where a colored fighter fought...especially when it was against a white man! If he was not a racist then I will quit researching boxing altogether. I admire what he did in the ring, but he was not a decent human being outside. And to your theory about the Irish being a group that suffered racism...while that is true I do not recall ever reading any instance where Sullivan himself dealt with racism!

HomicideHenry · Post by **HomicideHenry** » 01 Mar 2007, 01:44

I'll tell you wat, if you all have the links to each article that has him being racist, I'd be glad to read them. I do admit that he did say or was quoted as saying some pretty harsh things, but then again Sullivan seemed equal opprotunity when it came to his hatred of others 'I can lick any SOB in the house' and other remarks and openly picking fights in bars and on the street to 'prove' that he was 'the man', which is ridiculous because no ordinary man would stand a chance against a world class fighter, so I do admit he was pretty vile.

But I would like to see the articles, if anything at all, to get a better glimpse of a man I always held highly as a fighter.

UpWithEvil · Post by **UpWithEvil** » 01 Mar 2007, 08:04

theone wrote:
Would you have more or less trouble convincing a white Afrikaner that the African tribal negro is of low intelligence and prone to violence?
Don't really get your point in relation to Ali and Sullivan. Please explain.

I'm just trying to see if we're allowed to ignore or excuse racist beliefs by individuals if those beliefs are based on their personal experiences. This is in reference to theone's comment, "I imagine it wouldn't be too tough convincing any of us on this forum that the "white man" was a devil if we were all young black men growing up in the deep south during the days of segregation."

theone · Post by **theone** » 01 Mar 2007, 08:11

I'm just trying to see if we're allowed to ignore or excuse racist beliefs by individuals if those beliefs are based on their personal experiences. This is in reference to theone's comment, "I imagine it wouldn't be too tough convincing any of us on this forum that the "white man" was a devil if we were all young black men growing up in the deep south during the days of segregation."

I'm not excusing any form of racism; I'm just trying to keep things in perspectives. Hating someone for wrongs they have perpetrated against you is not exactly akin to hating someone just because they are different.

UpWithEvil · Post by **UpWithEvil** » 01 Mar 2007, 08:44

theone wrote:
I'm just trying to see if we're allowed to ignore or excuse racist beliefs by individuals if those beliefs are based on their personal experiences. This is in reference to theone's comment, "I imagine it wouldn't be too tough convincing any of us on this forum that the "white man" was a devil if we were all young black men growing up in the deep south during the days of segregation."
I'm not excusing any form of racism; I'm just trying to keep things in perspectives. Hating someone for wrongs they have perpetrated against you is not exactly akin to hating someone just because they are different.

But we're not talking about "Hating someone for wrongs they have perpetrated against you", we're talking about racism, which is hating entire groups of people. Do you excuse racism if individual members of the "race" have perpetrated wrongs against you?

dr_devious · Post by **dr_devious** » 01 Mar 2007, 08:45

Sullivan was a child of his times, and most people from his background and community held views which we today see as racist and abhorrent. Then again, that is the view of our times, its called progress

UpWithEvil · Post by **UpWithEvil** » 01 Mar 2007, 09:32

Besides, Sullivan was Irish. It isn't as if he was white. :P

SteveO · Post by **SteveO** » 01 Mar 2007, 10:36

Charles Hadley- February 22nd, 1883 ['KO' 6th round win for Godfrey]

Joe Lannon- February 4th, 1889 [12 round pre-arranged draw]

Sullivan was the referee in both fights; Sullivan, as mentioned before, almost had fights/offers with George Godfrey---the first was to be a fight to the finish but police intervened, the second time Godfrey challenged Sullivan but Sullivan refused, the third time Sullivan challenged Godfrey and Godfrey refused.

Thank you, but Joe Lannon was a white Canadian so it was not a 'coloured' title fight.

UpWithEvil · Post by **UpWithEvil** » 01 Mar 2007, 10:57

He wasn't white, he was Irish!

dr_devious · Post by **dr_devious** » 01 Mar 2007, 12:46

You already said that once fvckwit

John L. Sullivan: No Racist!

John L. Sullivan: No Racist!

re

Re: John L. Sullivan: No Racist!

Re: John L. Sullivan: No Racist!

re