§ MR. COBBI beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been called to the report in the Standard and other papers of 28th July of the prize fight for,£1,000 between Smith and Pritchard, which took place on the night of 27th July, from which it appears that, notwithstanding that gloves were used, Pritchard was in the first round felled to the ground by a "terrific body blow," and in the third round Smith was twice driven half across the ring "with terrific left-handers in the face," and held on to 764 the ropes for support, but that after this Pritchard knocked him down twice, so that Smith was hanging half out of the ring, and Pritchard was declared the winner; whether he is aware that the gloves which are used are mere evasions of the law, and that blows dealt with them are quite as damaging, and in some cases more so, than those dealt with fists; whether he is aware that prize fights under the name of glove fights have been on the increase during the last two years; whether the police were present at, or were aware of, the prize fight in question, and if the names of the promoters of the fight can be given; and whether he will take stringent steps to stop these fights, and to punish not only the combatants but those of all classes who promote and attend them?
§ MR. E. KNATCHBULL-HUGESSEN (Rochester)May I ask whether, if proper gloves were used, these boxing matches are not perfectly legitimate?
§ MR. MATTHEWSI have seen the paragraph quoted from the newspapers as to the prize fight between Smith and Pritchard. The police were not able to effect an entrance in time to be present at the encounter, which only lasted a few minutes, but they inform me that, having entered and seen both the pugilists immediately afterwards, the only injury they observed was a small swelling on Pritchard's face. They saw a pair of ordinary 4oz. gloves, and have no evidence to rebut the statement made by all concerned that these were used in the encounter. The names of the chief persons taking part in the proceedings appear to be correctly given in the newspapers. The law as to what constitutes an illegal fight has been laid down in the superior Courts. If evidence were forthcoming that the fight was of an illegal character, I should not hesitate to direct proceedings, whether it took place with or without gloves.
§ MR. CUNNINGHAME GRAHAMThe right hon. Gentleman must not think I am against boxing, because I used to be very fond of it, but I wish to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether in future, in any contest with or without gloves in which the finale consists in one of the combatants being "knocked out of time," it will be within the power of the police to interfere and regard it as a prize fight?
§ MR. MATTHEWSI am not quite sure that I appreciate the exact force of the expression "knocked out of time." I have not the special knowledge of the subject that is possessed by the hon. Gentleman opposite. I take it that the distinction is this: If two men for delight or for exercise, or to test their skill,' choose to box with or without gloves, it is not an illegal proceeding. If, on the other hand, they fight for the purpose of doing each other serious injury in order that one might be exhausted—that is, knocked out of time—the case is different.
§ SIR W. LAWSON (Cumberland, Cockermouth)I wish to know whether, if a man is killed in one of these encounters, it would be held to be a case of justifiable homicide?
§ MR. MATTHEWSI am afraid I must decline to answer a question of possible law.
§ MR. CUNNINGHAME GRAHAMAs a specialist, I must apologise for having used a technical word. I should like to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether the fact that these men were fighting for money does not alter the case?
§ MR. MATTHEWSI do not think the doing it for money has the slightest influence upon the question at all.