Did Jack Johnson plot against Joe Louis?

[KOJOE90]

I recently saw a Boxing documentary that suggested that former Heavyweight Champion Jack Johnson gave 'tactical assistance' to Max Schmeling in his first fight against future Champion Joe Louis.

Schmeling of course beat Louis in their first encounter.

Does anyone know anymore about this?

[humanrobot]

I read something similar - Johnson was pissed because he was desolate and a bit crazy and he used to hang out at the gym where an up-and-coming Louis used to train. Nobody paid Johnson any mind and apparently Johnson was always pissed about being treated shoddily by the Louis people.

Something like that.

[Sherlock]

What I heard was that Jack Johnson publicly said Louis was easy to beat, that he was ecspecially open to the overhand right. Max then used this to beat Louis pretty easily, but not only with the right.

[tonyevs]

The documentary was quite contradictory in so much as they implied Jack Johnson after being told to stay away from Joe Louis told Max Schmeling about Joe Louis’s defence deficiencies, then they said Schmeling did something nobody up to that time had done, he studied previous films of Joe’s fights to look for a glitch in his fighting technique.
Much like the previous weeks episode when they said John L turned to alcohol only after his fighting days, John L was notorious for his drinking during his reign, didn`t he turn his back on the liquor and preach prohibition in later life?

[klompton]

So now Johnson, who is about to be pardoned for a crime he was guilty of, is the man who crafted the strategy to beat Louis??? Please, Schmeling saw Louis' deficiencies himself. He didnt need Jack Johnson. Talk about taking credit away from one of boxings true rennaisance men.

BTW, Schmeling was most certainly not the first person to study films of an opponent for a tactical advantage this had been going on since at least the twenties if not earlier.

[tonyevs]

There was a documentary on UK Tv, these are their claims, just want to know if their claims have substance

[humanrobot]

So now Johnson, who is about to be pardoned for a crime he was guilty of, is the man who crafted the strategy to beat Louis??? Please, Schmeling saw Louis' deficiencies himself. He didnt need Jack Johnson. Talk about taking credit away from one of boxings true rennaisance men.

BTW, Schmeling was most certainly not the first person to study films of an opponent for a tactical advantage this had been going on since at least the twenties if not earlier.

A crime that he was guilty of????

The US government created that "law" in order to get something on him.

And since when is travelling across statelines with your fiance/wife a crime despite what her colour is?

[dempseyfire]

Johnson had said simply in interviews that Louis kept his left too low after the jab. No 'conspiracy' here. Maybe Max read the interviews or not, but there was no secret meeting . . .

[klompton]

Please read your history. The US did not create the Mann act to "get Johnson" thats utter bullshit. The first two men prosecuted under the Mann act where white men from California. It was enacted in 1910 as a means of regulating interstate prostitution and "immorality". The "immorality" part gave it a wide berth and the two white men first prosecuted by the act had taken their girlfriends across state lines for a romantic weekend. Neither had any ties to prostitution. On the other hand Jack Johnson DID have ties to prostitution both as the owner of purported bordello in Chicago and as a frequent patron of women of the night. Both of the women he was pursued for were known prostitutes. On top of this fact he fled the country illegally while out on bail. Sorry but thats guilty. If you want to go back and judge people from 100 years ago using modern standards then pardon everyone prosecuted by the Mann act, not just an asshole who had the image of a hero projected on him by a sadly misinformed public.

If the Mann acts wording is that it is unlawful to transport a woman across state lines for immoral purposes then Jack Johnson was guilty. Period. Furthermore, if his "girlfriends" were whores and he was running a whorehouse, then he was guilty under any interpretation of the law. If these whores were white and as you say the law was enacted to prevent "white slavery" then I think it goes without saying that pardoning a convicted fellon such as Johnson who was guilty, lost his court case in absentia due to the fact that he had fled the country, and eventually served a relatively light sentence for his crimes doing a cake walk in leavenworth, should be considered by even the most liberal minded people as a joke. Some people may have hated Johnson because he was black but I guarentee you most people hated Johnson because he was selfish asshole. The man wasnt a martyr, he wasnt a hero of any civil rights movement, and he wasnt any kind of visionary or revolutionary. He was a great fighter. Thats it. Beyond that the man was a piece of shit as a human being who mellowed only mildly with age.

"James Robert Mann


Mann, James Robert, 1856–1922, American legislator, b. McLean co., Ill. A Chicago lawyer, he held many local offices before serving (1897–1922) as a Republican member of the U.S. House of Representatives. He was (1910) one of the sponsors of the Mann-Elkins Act, which strengthened railroad-rate regulation by the Interstate Commerce Commission, and he was author (1910), of the Mann Act, which forbade, under heavy penalties, the transportation of women from one state to another for immoral purposes. In the House, Mann introduced the Pure Food and Drugs Act of 1906 and led the fight for an amendment to the Constitution granting suffrage to women.

THE MANN ACT OF 1910

". . .In 1917 the provisions of the law {The Mann Act of 191 were further extended by the decision in the Caminetti v. United States to include even non-commercial sex. . . The result of such decisions was to change a law that had been designed to prevent white slavery to one designed to enforce morals, even declaring private amorous pleasure trips that crossed state lines to be illegal.

. . . The tendency of the U.S. Supreme Court for a time to include all sexual activity under the categories prohibited by the Mann Act undoubtedly reflected what was taking place in the United States. What had been intended to be an abolition movement had become a prohibition movement, far from the original intent of Mrs. {Josephine} Butler and her co-workers. The United States advanced further toward prohibition than any other country. The attack on illicit sex coincided with the movement to ban alcoholic beverages and just as the temperance drive became a prohibition movement so did the move against reglementation become prohibitionist.

. . .Even fornication was made a crime in many states. In 1920, for example, some twenty states regarded habitual fornication a punishable act, and in sixteen states a single act was enough to bring conviction. Such widespread legal measures against all aspects of sexual activity, however, made enforcement impossible. Most juries proved unwilling to convict for illegal fornication; moreover, the Supreme Court soon recognized that prostitutes had the same rights as other citizens and could be charged with or convicted of only a specific offense. Thus, simply police suspicion that a woman was a prostitute was not enough to have her arrested. Similarly, attempts of municipalities to enact ordinances that prohibited men from talking to suspected prostitutes on streets or sidewalks, or that states they could not walk along the sidewalk with prostitutes. have been ruled unconstitutional. As far as individual prostitutes were concerned, this meant that conviction could only come through the activities of vice officers who had to encourage a woman to solicit them to engage in sexual intercourse.

. . .the vice officer increasingly had to resort to dubious tactics to get a prostitute to commit herself; in the process he often crossed the thin line to entrapment.. . . Another difficulty with this kind of enforcement was that it was open to wide-scale bribery. An officer could appear to be unaware of prostitution taking place on his beat unless there was considerable public pressure for him to respond, and not infrequently this looking the other way by the police officer was something that could be and has been bought. "

"Prostitution: An Illustrated Social History " by Vern and Bonnie Bullough/ Crown Books 1978

Chuck Berry was one of the more high profile celebrities to be charged and convicted under the Mann Act."

The maximum penalty for the Mann act was five years in federal pen. Johnson served less than a year and that doesnt even address his flight from the country violating his bond.

The Mann act is actually still existence in an amended form, the maximum penalty is now 10 years.

"In 1917, the Supreme Court upheld the conviction of two California men, Drew Caminetti and Maury Diggs, who had gone on a romantic weekend getaway with their girlfriends to Reno, Nevada. Following this decision, the Mann Act was used in all types of cases: someone was charged with violating the Mann Act for bringing a woman from one state to another in order to work as a chorus girl in a theater; wives began using the Mann Act against girls who ran off with their husbands."



Hopefully this will convince some people to stop trying to rewrite history. Its unlikely that those with an agenda will have their opinions changed.

[wouter]

It wasn't suggested in the documentary that the Mann act was created to get Jack Johnson.
As for Johnson helping Schmeling. Prior to the first Louis v. Schmeling fight, Johnson had an article published in Ring magazine, pointing out how Schmeling could beat him. After the fight Schmeling said he had read the article and that it confirmed what he already saw.

[tonyevs]

It wasn't suggested in the documentary that the Mann act was created to get Jack Johnson.
As for Johnson helping Schmeling. Prior to the first Louis v. Schmeling fight, Johnson had an article published in Ring magazine, pointing out how Schmeling could beat him. After the fight Schmeling said he had read the article and that it confirmed what he already saw.

Thanks

[KOJOE90]

So now Johnson, who is about to be pardoned for a crime he was guilty of, is the man who crafted the strategy to beat Louis??? Please, Schmeling saw Louis' deficiencies himself. He didnt need Jack Johnson. Talk about taking credit away from one of boxings true rennaisance men..

I didn't say I believed the claim made in the documentary, just thought it was an interesting point and wanted to know if anyone else had heard this claim.

[KOJOE90]

It wasn't suggested in the documentary that the Mann act was created to get Jack Johnson.
As for Johnson helping Schmeling. Prior to the first Louis v. Schmeling fight, Johnson had an article published in Ring magazine, pointing out how Schmeling could beat him. After the fight Schmeling said he had read the article and that it confirmed what he already saw.

Thanks.

[humanrobot]

My mistake. It was not created for Johnson - it was just rarely enforced before Johnson.

Don`t tell me that you are judging Johnson a criminal because he had taken a few hookers. If that`s the case then every athlete of the time give or take is a criminal. As far as I am concerned leaving the country when you are being unfairly castigated is not a crime. I would do the exact same thing.

[klompton]

Your right IM not judging Johnson because I live in a completely different age. People in the 1910s judged him according to their laws and he was found guilty after having fled the country. When he returned his sentence was nothing. Dont make it out like he was a martyr or innocent of the charges against him. Like Ive said before, if you have a problem with the Mann Act so be it. Pardon EVERYONE who was persecuted under Mann Act, dont try to make a hero out someone who was anything but...

"My mistake. It was not created for Johnson - it was just rarely enforced before Johnson."

There you go, popping off again before you even know anything about it. I suggest you read about the history of the Mann Act, how it was formed, and what its purpose served before you make ridiculous statements alluding to the idea that it was only used for Jack Johnson. You sound like Max Kellerman who constantly spouted this assinine revisionist history to suit his own platform. Rather sad, hopefully people will read about this for themselves, you included, and understand more about Johnson and the Mann Act. Not what Bert Suger and Max Kellerman tell us about Johnson and the Mann act. Two very different things...

[humanrobot]

Your right IM not judging Johnson because I live in a completely different age. People in the 1910s judged him according to their laws and he was found guilty after having fled the country. When he returned his sentence was nothing. Dont make it out like he was a martyr or innocent of the charges against him. Like Ive said before, if you have a problem with the Mann Act so be it. Pardon EVERYONE who was persecuted under Mann Act, dont try to make a hero out someone who was anything but...

"My mistake. It was not created for Johnson - it was just rarely enforced before Johnson."

There you go, popping off again before you even know anything about it. I suggest you read about the history of the Mann Act, how it was formed, and what its purpose served before you make ridiculous statements alluding to the idea that it was only used for Jack Johnson. You sound like Max Kellerman who constantly spouted this assinine revisionist history to suit his own platform. Rather sad, hopefully people will read about this for themselves, you included, and understand more about Johnson and the Mann Act. Not what Bert Suger and Max Kellerman tell us about Johnson and the Mann act. Two very different things...

I am not a politician or even an American for that matter. I am a boxng fan so when discussing boxers my experience comes from reading boxing writers, books , papers etc. It`s called research - if enough sources say one thing then there is a chance that it may be true. For your information , I was not implying that it was used ONLY for Johnson but that it was RARELY used before they (the us government) were trying to pin somethingf on him.

Funny enough, you`re the only one that I have ever come across who say that Johnson should have been prosecuted - not to mention how angry you sound about it - to me that is sad.

FYI - Johnson was a martyr to the liberal minded and what he accomplished during the time and under the duress that he was under and the hatred that he had to endure (not unlike the bullshit that George Dixon had to deal with while fighting championship fights against white competitors) is cause for celebration. I wouldn`t expect a flag waving , extreme right republican type to understand that though.

[humanrobot]

Mann Act
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
The Mann Act of 1910 prohibited so-called white slavery - the practice of European girls working in American bordellos. It also banned the interstate transport of females for immoral purposes. Its primary intent was to address prostitution and immorality.

The Mann Act gets its name from James Robert Mann, an American lawmaker.

The first person prosecuted under the act was heavyweight boxing champion Jack Johnson, who encouraged a woman to leave a brothel and travel with him to another state. Though he later married the girl, and took her away from a brothel, he was nevertheless prosecuted and sentenced to a year in prison

[humanrobot]

Mann Act and Jack Johnson
By Tom Donelson

Editor's note: Jack Johnson was one of the great heavyweights in the early part of this century. He was also the first African-American to be Heavyweight champion, something not tolerated very well by a significant portion of white America. The Mann Act was used to hound Jack Johnson and eventually put him in jail.

Who is James Robert Mann and why should we care about him as sports fan? For one, this congressman would have a significant effect upon one of America's great sportsmen in the early 20th century. Representative Mann fought for women suffrage and in 1910, he pushed a bill that bears his name preventing under heavy penalties the transportation of women from one state to another for immoral purposes. This act, began as movement to cripple prostitution, would end up as bill that would prohibit consensual sexual conduct outside of marriage. In the early part of the century, the prohibition movement extended from movement to ban alcoholic beverages, recreational drugs and other vices like sex. Fornication was made illegal in many states. By 1920, nearly half of the states regarded habitual consensual sex a punishable act and many of these states, one act was enough to bring conviction. Widespread prohibition against all aspects of sexual activity made enforcement impossible and many juries proved unwilling to convict for illegal sex acts. One boxing historian told me that the only other person ever convicted was the actor Charlie Chaplin.

Jack Johnson when he became champion scandalized America. According to Boxing historian Mike DeLisa, there were some within the black community that were equally scandalized by his behavior as many whites. He openly dated white women and he even married some of them. When Johnson defeated James Jeffries in 1910, the search for the great White Hope began. While promoters conducted tournaments to find the white boxer who could challenge Johnson, others decided to use the law- the Mann Act - to cripple the Champion. For many blacks, Johnson restored pride to them. The following poem detailed the feelings that many blacks had after Johnson slaughtered Jeffries:

O my Lord
What a morning,
O my Lord,
What a feeling,
When Jack Johnson
Turned Jim Jeffries'
Snow-white face
to the ceiling.


Many whites resented Johnson for his life style and many whites resented the positive effect that he had on blacks after the Jeffries' debacle. In the eyes of many whites, Johnson was the "uppity" black that needed to put back in his place. Johnson was convicted in 1913 for "transporting a woman across state lines for immoral purpose." The woman in question was his fiancée and soon to be his wife. The charges were trumped up and certainly the worst you could say, Johnson was found guilty of having consensual sex with a woman and then taking her cross state lines, which his job demanded. Johnson appealed this decision but in the meantime, fled the country. He first went to Canada, then to Europe, Mexico and South America. He defended his title in Paris twice and finally he agreed to fight Jess Willard in Havana, Cuba.

Under a scorching sun in a fight scheduled for 45 rounds, Johnson started quick against the taller and bigger Willard. He dominated those rounds but as the rounds went by, his years of running, lack of good training and age caught up with Johnson. After the 20th round, Willard began to take command and in the 26th round, he ended Johnson Championship reign.

But Johnson fight with the United States government did not end. He returned to the United States in 1920 and served eight months for violation of the Mann Act. While in Prison, he was appointed athletic director of the prison. He continued to fight after he was released from prison but his years as heavyweight contender were over. He finally called it quit in 1928 at the age of 50. He spent the rest of his life as a lecturer and show - business performer. Married three times to white women, he never had children.

The Mann Act was originally designed to stop prostitution but it broadened over years to cover consensual sex acts, targeting sex with "minor women." Johnson only real guilt was becoming the Heavyweight champion. His victory over Jeffries sparked race riots and the Texas Legislature banned films of his victories, because of the fear of even more violence. Johnson would die in a car crash on June 10, 1946 near Raleigh, North Carolina. As he was being buried, the Heavyweight championship was in the hand of another black fighter, Joe Louis. Joe Louis was one of America's beloved sport figures and he was the first African- American fighter to be accepted by white sport fans. Johnson, on the other hand, was one of most feared black athlete for he refused to play by the rules of White America. While White America would use trumped up charges to force Johnson out of the country and conspire to take his title, Johnson never surrender to White America. Representative James Mann gave White promoters the legal tool to stop Johnson but they could never take away the fact that a Black man for seven years was the reigning champion and best fighter in the world. History has judged Johnson and they found him to be a great champion

[humanrobot]

Jack Johnson (1878–1946)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The world's first African American heavyweight champion patented a wrench (U.S.patent#1,413,121) on April the 18th, 1922.
Jack Johnson, defeated Canadian Tommy Burns on December 26, 1908, in the World Boxing Championship held in Sydney. This initiated the quest to find a "Great White Hope" to defeat Johnson. James Jeffries, a leading white fighter, came out of retirement to answer the challenge. Jack Johnson won their fight on July 4, 1910. News of Jeffries's defeat ignited numerous incidents of white violence against blacks. However, black poet William Waring Cuney captured the exuberant African American reaction in his poem, "My Lord, What a Morning":
O my Lord
What a morning,
O my Lord,
What a feeling,
When Jack Johnson
Turned Jim Jeffries'
Snow-white face
to the ceiling.
To the right you can view the patent issued for Jack Johnson's wrench.



Jack Johnson was born John Arthur Johnson on March 31, 1878, in Galveston, Texas.

Johnson boxed professionally from 1897 to 1928, and boxed in exhibition matches until 1945. During his boxing career, Jack Johnson fought 114 fights, winning 80 matches, 45 by knockouts. He first won the heavyweight title by knocking out champion Tommy Burns in 1908, and held on that title until April 5, 1915. Johnson was knocked out by Jess Willard in the 26th round during the World Championship fight in Havana.

Jack Johnson received bad publicity by the press for his two marriages, both to caucasian women. Due to the racist attitudes of the times, interracial marriages were prohibited in most of America. Johnson was convicted in 1912 of violating the Mann Act by transporting his wife across state lines before their marriage and was sentenced to a year in prison. While out on appeal, Jack Johnson escaped fearing for his safety. Posing as a member of a black baseball team, he fled to Canada and later Europe. Jack Johnson remained a fugitive for seven years. Johnson defended his heavyweight championship three times in Paris before his fight to Jess Willard.

In 1920, Jack Johnson decided to return to the United States to serve his sentence. After his release from prison, Jack Johnson's boxing career declined. To make ends meet, Johnson worked in vaudeville even appearing with a trained flea act.

Jack Johnson wrote two memoirs of his life, "Mes Combats" (1914) and "Jack Johnson in the Ring and Out" (1927). He died in an automobile accident on June 10, 1946, in Raleigh, N.C.

John Arthur "Jack" Johnson
He became the first Black world heavyweight champion on December 26 1908 by defeating Tommy Burns in the 14th round

[humanrobot]

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/04196/346144.stm

[humanrobot]

http://www.press.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/h ... /12656.ctl

[klompton]

Considering Im not a republican, Im sick to death that George Bush won, and I voted straight ticket for Democrats in this election, combined with the fact that you again try to put forth the idea that Jack Johnson was the first convicted under the Mann act, illustrates again that your research and your facts are shaky at best.

As for Donnellson's article: Ill start believing everything written in an article for blackathlete.com, about Jack Johnson, when you start believing the stories written by redneck KKK members that Hitlers holocaust never happened...

[Sweet Scientist]

Considering Im not a republican, Im sick to death that George Bush won, and I voted straight ticket for Democrats in this election, combined with the fact that you again try to put forth the idea that Jack Johnson was the first convicted under the Mann act, illustrates again that your research and your facts are shaky at best.

As for Donnellson's article: Ill start believing everything written in an article for blackathlete.com, about Jack Johnson, when you start believing the stories written by redneck KKK members that Hitlers holocaust never happened...

The government wanted Johnson bad...they 'used' the Mann Act to get him...I find it somewhat repulsive that you insist that this whole situation was OK because it was the law of the day. Surely, you can see the injustice here, technically legal or not...Johnson was no angel...but using the Mann act to get him was bullshit...the laws in this country have not always been fair and just. The Constitution, which is what the US Supreme court bases it's rulings on, was written by a bunch of drunken slave owners...the whole thing was written by men who didn't exactly practice what they preached...Thomas Jefferson fornicated with a 15 year old black girl (that he owned) and impregnated her...surely this kind of behavior indicates some of our 'laws' throughout this country's history are suspect, to say the least...the 'law' they used to imprison Jack Johnson was so obviously misused, it's hard to believe anyone could possibly defend it in any way, shape or form...just my humble opinion, you can believe what you like...it just seems so out-of-date to take your position on this issue...

[wouter]

I don't think the government even bothered about Johnson.

[klompton]

Actually what I said, since your not reading my posts, is that if you have a problem with the man act then why not a pardon across the board for those prosecuted by an intrusive law? Why stop with Johnson who was actually on the wrong side of the law in every way you can imagine? Whether the govt wanted to "get" Johnson is irrelevant if he placed himself in a position to be "got". Its like saying that Al Capone was only prosecuted by tax law because he was a high profile citizen and thus we should pardon him as well, lets just ignore the fact that he was guilty.

"The Constitution, which is what the US Supreme court bases it's rulings on, was written by a bunch of drunken slave owners...the whole thing was written by men who didn't exactly practice what they preached...Thomas Jefferson fornicated with a 15 year old black girl (that he owned) and impregnated her...surely this kind of behavior indicates some of our 'laws' throughout this country's history are suspect, to say the least"


Have you any understanding of how obtuse that statement makes you look? Its a microcosm of what is wrong with your entire argument. You minimize the context in which all of these occurences took place, view them from your 21st century moral and ethical stance, and then comment upon them as if they happened yesterday in your living room.