The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1895-10-08
BOXERS KNOCKED OUT.
Justice Douglass Holds Sim
Robinson and Pete Reilly
for the Grand Jury.

Justice Douglass has written an opinion
on the charge of prize fighting alleged
in the case against Peter Reilly and Sim
Robinson, who were arrested on July
Is last in the Oakland Rink at the ex-
hibit.on given by the Hudson County
Athletic Club. After quoting the law re-
garding prize fighting, Justice Douglass
says:-tsThe contest was not for money
or any other valuable thing. but merely
to test the skill or bodily powers of the
pugilists or contestants In the Ian
guage of the witnesses the men were
sparring for points, that is, to test their
skill The question to be determined is
this, was this such a fight or combat
with fsts,' as is commonly denominated
prize fighting? And [ take it that such
a fight or combat, merely to test the
skill of the combatants. is a pr-ze fight
within the meaning OF our statute, the
distinction of winning in such a contest
being the prize for which each contends.
A PARALLEL CASE.
st have examined with care the case of
the State of louisiana vs. Olympic Club.
The Louisiana statute provides that any
person who shall send a challenge to
fight. what is commonly called a prize
fight, shall be deemed guilty of a mis-
demeanor, etc. but adds a proviso in
these words: Provided that .sss act
shall not apply to exhibitions and glove
contests between human beings, which
may take place within the rooms of
regularly chartered athletic clubs The
decision was in favor OF the defendant,
a divided court holding that the ques-
ton whether the contests which was
shown to have taken place under the
auspices of the club Were within the
exception. was for the jury, and the jury
having found in favor of the defendant,
the Court refused to disturb that finding.
u must say that, I would rather rest
dissented, than upon the leading opinion
in the case, for it is evident, from pc
rusal of the latter, that the Judge was
professional standing of the defendant S
witnesses. The contests in the Olympia
prizes; the contests in the Oakland Rink
We're with gloves to test the skill or bodi
ly powers of the combatants- They were
statute unless the fact that gloves were
Worn by the combatants is material
Does this fact make any difference? Ii
they had contended with naked fists the
contest would undeniably have been III
violation Of the law, for it would have
Pee besn the aat @ or 6odg 6omRat With fso
combatants,' and this comes clearly
within the statute: If their fists had been
covered with thin, KID gloves, would
it still have been a fight or combat with
fists?'
FOR MORALITY
1.-THE question is important only in one
respect, that of conserving the moral
health of the community, and feeling
convinced that this combat was a VIOLA
tion of our statute. a statute passed in
the interest of good morals and to pre-
vent those brutalizing exhibitions that
were so common in past times, I am
compelled to hold the defendants to bail
to await the action of the Grand Jury.
It was. understood at the time the ex-
animation was held that the determine
tion in this case should govern the cases
of the other fighters and of Hurst, who
occupied the position. of umpire or ref
cree. If the other defendants are not
satisfied, but desire separate examina-
tions, they may be had