By Andrew Galligan (Boston College)
On a chilly February night in 1855, two shots rang out from a popular Broadway bar. Multiple men ran out the side door and into the darkness of lower Manhattan, one wincing in pain. A short time later, the place was packed with over a dozen police officers and doctors. They arrived to find a large, muscular man lying on the floor with gunshot wounds to his chest and leg. The man was quickly identified as none other than prized pugilist and nativist leader, Bill “The Butcher” Poole. The affair, however, had begun long before the final shots. John Morrissey was a Democratic politician and boxer, famous for his defeat of James “Yankee” Sullivan in 1853.[i] He emigrated from Ireland when he was five and began boxing in his teenage years.[ii] Morrissey became deeply involved in the New York City Democrats, based out of Tammany Hall, and was regarded as the “chief of the foreign-born politics.”[iii] Poole, on the other hand, detested the influx of immigrants, especially those who sought office. This disposition was shared among other nativist party supporters, including members of Poole’s Bowery Boys gang. Morrissey and Poole squared up in August of 1854, and after only twelve minutes, Poole emerged victorious.[iv] Morrissey left with a broken rib and an eviscerated ego, providing the necessary fuel for their encounter almost seven months later.
The fatal night began with Morrissey finding Poole after eating supper in Stanwix Hall. The two exchanged heated remarks as a large crowd formed, culminating in both pugilists holding each other at gunpoint. Morrissey pulled the trigger, only for his gun to misfire. Both were briefly jailed in the Eighth Ward Station before being released. Poole went back to the bar, and about an hour and a half later, Morrisey’s “enforcers”—James Turner, Patrick McLaughlin, John Hyler, James Irving, and Lewis Baker—cornered Poole. Turner raised a pistol to Poole and proceeded to accidentally shoot himself before firing again, striking Poole in the right leg. Baker delivered the crucial blow, a shot to the chest.[v] Poole hung on for eleven more days before finally muttering, “If I die, I die a true American – and what grieves me most is the thought that I was killed by the Irish.”[vi] With these words, he closed his eyes and said goodbye to the world.
Figure 1. The Murder of Bill Poole, in George Washington Walling, Recollections of a New York Chief of Police (New York: Caxton Book Concern, 1887), 50.[vii]
This paper will examine the tension and corruption between Irish immigrants and nativist Know Nothings in New York City in the 1850s, exposed by the murder of Bill Poole, through the eyes of newspapers. Scholars have long documented the journey of Irish immigrants from when they first fled to the United States on boats to their assimilation into American society. Historians such as Lawrence J. McCaffrey have established how three million Irish immigrants made the journey as a result of the Irish Famine of 1847-52 and settled in “urban ghettos,”[viii] where “open sewers drained the streets, tuberculosis, cholera, and alcoholism took their toll.”[ix] With nothing to lose and everything to gain, these poor immigrants often turned to crime. As many as half of the inmates in the Boston House of Correction between 1856 and 1863 were Irish.[x] These opposing groups sparred often, culminating in the murder of Bill Poole by the friends of Irishman John Morrissey. Elliot Gorn argues that this event highlights the conflict between native Americans and immigrants in a time of economic stress. Nativists were quick to call Poole a hero,[xi] further blaming the city’s problems on the Irish, while the Irish defended themselves as gangs continued to collide. Deeper than the fighting itself, young men sought the brotherhood and distraction that gangs provided, while the majority of New York City residents sought an end to the evils of pugilism, gambling, and alcohol.
Amid mounting nativist hostility that framed Irish immigrants as the source of urban disorder, Irish communities increasingly turned toward collective political action as a strategy for survival and upward mobility. Many Irish immigrants banded together as a bloc, uniting under the common struggle of being one of the lowest rungs on the social and economic ladder in a brand-new country.[xii] William V. Shannon argues that Irishmen became Democrats because they were the least anti-immigrant party. The Irish quickly rose to the top of the party ranks. New York state’s count of Irish elected officials jumped from one in 1850 to eighteen only two years later.[xiii] Irishmen embraced the changing concepts of politics in an era focused on gaining the vote of the people, holding mass meetings and political parades, and stopping at nothing to secure election day votes. To demonstrate this, Shannon shares the story of Irish politician Mike Walsh, who formed a gang of Irish boys nicknamed the “Spartan Band” to help him enforce his presence at violent mass Democratic meetings.[xiv] Daniel J. Walkowitz depicts 1850s New York City as defined by tensions between nativists and newly arrived Irish immigrants, leading to the emergence of gang violence. The Irish had embedded themselves deep into the Tammany Hall political system, controlling the police force and carrying out ballot box stuffings to ensure Democrats continued to dominate.[xv] The Know Nothings, therefore, worked overtime to reverse the efforts of Tammany Hall. To these Anglo-Americans, “to be called ‘Irish’ was not much better than to be called ‘n*gger’; racist commentary made little distinction.”[xvi]
In nineteenth-century New York, the true test of a man’s masculinity and character depended on whether or not he could withstand his enemy’s blows and deliver the decisive knockout punch. Newspapers regularly reported on the violence, which was more likely to occur in specific districts of New York City. The New York Daily Tribune circulated that one fight occurred “in an open lot in the Nineteenth Ward, between a couple of young rowdies unknown amongst pugilists.”[xvii] Fighting was also often the answer to political disputes, with the two most often sparring groups being immigrants and nativists. A Know-Nothing parade was “assaulted by a gang of rowdies, and some of the banners seized and destroyed…the procession peaceably proceeded up 1st avenue, and when at the corner of 13th street, they were assaulted by a numerous gang of Irishmen from the 17th Ward.”[xviii] This occurred in the densely populated Seventeenth Ward, yet another petri dish of violence. A fighter became more well known as he won, and would compete semi-professionally in “prize fights,” although the activities were completely illegal. “Michael Cenway, a second rate pugilist,” the New York Dispatch highlighted, “was arrested by the Sixth Ward Police, the officers having heard that he was about to engage in a prize fight with one of the ‘roughs’ of that district.”[xix] Despite the criminality of fighting, parties faced minimal punishment, enabling it to continue.
Saloons played a key role in exacerbating violent encounters in the city. Alcohol only served to make those predisposed to violence less capable of listening to reason. The Irishman William Shane, the New York Herald claimed in an 1857 City Intelligence section, “was to a certain extent under the influence of drink, when two colored men who were passing him made some tantalizing gestures. Shane in return, put himself in a pugilistic attitude, when one of them immediately stabbed him.”[xx] Numerous fights were reported to have originated inside or near the nineteenth-century bars. One John O’Connor was shot in the head leaving No. 37 Bowery, a basement saloon, after resisting payment on his evening drinks.[xxi] The New York Dispatch noted yet another alcoholic outrage, stating “a desperate affray took place on Tuesday evening last, about 9 o’clock, at the drinking saloon kept at No. 40 Bowery, between Councilman Kerrigan and one John Matthews, in the course of which the latter was shot in a delicate portion of his person and dreadfully injured.”[xxii] Certain gangs, which will be revisited later, set up their headquarters in these saloons, providing further opportunities for physical clashes[xxiii].
Although pugilism was normalized in 1850s New York City, it was certainly not accepted. Nearly as often as newspapers detailed these malevolent interactions, they condemned them. The New York Herald concluded its report of a damaging fight between two men by critiquing, “such disgraceful affairs between men claiming the name of pugilists are eternally contending for the manliness of fistic weapons of defence is perfectly ridiculous.”[xxiv] No administration was successful at curbing pugilism throughout the 1850s. The issue became a hot political topic that was repeated ad nauseam by New York City papers. Of a violent assault in 1855, the New York Dispatch asserted: “We must, however, say that the ruffians who beat the man in the 13th ward deserve the fullest punishment the law will warrant. These outrages are becoming entirely too frequent. If the law is not strong enough to put a stop to them we shall have to organize a Vigilance Committee to rid our city of the presence of these desperadoes.”[xxv] Immigrant groups, mainly Irishmen, were heavily linked to these fights, which only served to furnish more evidence for the cases of nativists. The New York Daily Tribune claimed that “for many years past there have flourished in our midst a class whose trade is the most ruthless of all robberies, that of the poor immigrant; flourished, not by cunning craft, but by might of muscle.”[xxvi] Newspapers were the leading voice of reform for a crime that pillaged many neighborhoods of New York City.
One of the main reasons for the continued existence of pugilism was the blind eye turned by the Municipal Police. By the mid-1850s, newspapers were well aware of the negligence and corruption that had overtaken the police force. “There seems to have been a want of vigilance on the part of the police of the Nineteenth Ward, who, in the first place, should not have allowed the fight to take place, and, it having taken place, should have taken pains to secure persons who were at it, in order that they might be used as witnesses,” the New York Daily Tribune insisted, after another fight went unresolved.[xxvii] The New York Herald remarked that “though the police were conversant with the matter, no mention is made of [a fierce encounter between two pugilists] in Captain Carpenter’s report to the Chief, made yesterday. There have been several cases that have occurred of late, that would go to show some understanding between the police and certain well-known disturbers of the public peace.”[xxviii] The police force, primarily staffed by Irish immigrants, was more than eager to let certain offenses go unpunished. This did not stop the administration from attempting to curb corruption, however. The Mayor’s Office launched investigations into specific policemen and their actions, promising reform if their conclusions were substantiated.[xxix] Nonetheless, efforts were largely unsuccessful, even after the restructuring of the Municipal Police into the Metropolitan Police in 1857.[xxx]
As competing ideologies in New York City arose, gang formation based on ethnicity occurred. Irish immigrants naturally banded together out of survival, with the most notable gang being the Dead Rabbits. The gang held about 100-200 members, primarily between the ages of 16 and 20.[xxxi] They resided in the Five Points, a majority-immigrant slum, and were less likely to have been regularly employed, with The New York Times claiming that they were composed of “burglars, rival thieves, rowdies, some firemen, and a small proportion of persons who have regular employments.”[xxxii] The Bowery Boys, on the other hand, were from the economically similar Bowery neighborhood, only a few blocks from the Five Points. Its members were white Americans by birth and generally held working-class professions such as mechanics.[xxxiii] They were largely members of the Know-Nothing party. “The fights between these rival factions have been numerous, and at times severe,” the New York Daily Tribune observed when comparing the two forces.[xxxiv] These gangs would come into contact often, resulting in injury and death.
The most infamous clash between the Dead Rabbits and the Bowery Boys occurred over Independence Day weekend in 1857. The riots began one-sided when some Dead Rabbit thieves beat a few police officers in the Bowery. The officers ran inside No. 40 Bowery, the headquarters of the Bowery Boys, prompting a full Dead Rabbit assault on their foe’s base.[xxxv] Reinforcements from both parties flooded the scene. The New York Dispatch reported that Rabbits even “retreated to the tops of houses, and rained down bricks and other missils (sic.) upon the police, and fired at them with pistols and muskets.”[xxxvi] The Bowery Boys, upon realizing their territory had been encroached on, showed up in strong numbers to help the police and retaliate against their rival. “Three cheers for the new order!’ was called for by a man at the head of the Bowery Boys, and soon several officers who had cut their way through, joined them, and the crowd came rushing forward cheering, amid the din, for the Metropolitans,” witnesses testified in the New York Daily Tribune.[xxxvii] Overall, the riot was seen by multiple parties as a victory for the police and the Bowery Boys, with reports noting that significantly more Dead Rabbits were injured.[xxxviii] Newspapers presented a final death count of eight and a wounded count of at least forty-three.[xxxix] Attacks only began to cease when the Dead Rabbits were simply worn out, to which the Bowery Boys declared that the “Irish sons of bitches commenced it, and if they had said enough we were satisfied.”[xl] The fight symbolized the exposure of the deep tensions in New York City at the time, far beyond simply defending the police.
Figure 2. Dead Rabbits barricade at Independence Day Riots, New York City, ca. 1857 (Wikimedia Commons).[xli]
Predictably, the press reflected on the forty-eight hours of chaos in distress and with calls for activism. Most of the blame fell on the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, who, the New York Herald’s Executive Board emphasized, “is absolutely unfit for the prompt action needed for police emergencies as any other debating body or political wire-pulling organization.”[xlii] Furthermore, the New York Daily Tribune queried, “How can a few men with clubs be expected to silence a fire of brick-bats from house tops?”[xliii] The paper continued by delving into the specifics of how police response could be improved, suggesting stronger means of communication in times of crisis.[xliv] The Bowery Boys were viewed less critically overall for siding with law and order. “So, when the police called upon all good citizens to assist them in arresting the rioters, the [Bowery] Boys rushed in,” the New York Daily Tribune commented.[xlv] Gang violence was New York City’s outward sign of inward division and turmoil, and a hot topic in 1850s newspapers.
Also looming in the shadows of violence and belligerence in New York City was the manipulative machine politics system. As part of the Tammany Hall regime, pugilists were gifted stepping stones to positions in the city government. The New York Herald wrote that “under the new Street Commissioner several distinguished pugilists have, it appears, been appointed to high posts in the city government. This is the first time in this country that prize fighting has become a qualification for high office.”[xlvi] John Morrissey, aforementioned as the pugilist involved in the murder of Bill Poole, began an extensive career in politics after retiring from the ring. He made news regularly as both a state senator and a U.S. Representative for New York City. About a year later, the New York Herald touched on an “Aldermen-elect,” who “fled from his country to the land of the free and home of the brave,” and, after arriving, “set up business in a small way as a pugilist, and was engaged as a principal in several fights.”[xlvii] Despite having no formal education or political experience, these pugilists were thrust into positions of influence thanks to a lack of credible, merit-based appointment processes.
In addition to benefiting from patronage, these same violent men had the unique opportunity to sanction further corruption by acting as “enforcers” at elections and meetings. The New York Herald was not afraid to expose this truth, stating outright that the primary elections among all parties were “controlled by a set of rowdies and bullies in the different wards. If a respectable person attempts to show himself there, and offers any opposition to the infamous proceedings for which primary elections are proverbial, he is knocked down by these ward ruffians.”[xlviii] Less than a month later, when the paper was questioned on the purpose of John Morrissey running for office, they responded, “There is nothing surprising in this. On the contrary, is it not perfectly natural that our pugilists, ‘short boys,’ and such, should take a ‘prominent part’ in the election, especially of police justices?”[xlix] Through the paper’s sarcastic tone, the Herald expressed its clear frustration with how pugilists controlled supposedly democratic procedures. Improvement from election to election was absent, as only two years later, the Herald complained of the same issue prior to the approaching election, poignantly writing “all three of the political factions of this city—the democracy, the republicans and Know Nothings—are preparing their usual machinery for the work of our next municipal elections, and sporting men, gamblers, shoulder hitters, ‘short boys,’ pugilists, ‘dead rabbits,’ ‘live rabbits,’ and all the odds and ends of ruffianism, are coming again into the market for the spoils and plunder of our city treasury.”[l] This electioneering ensured that corruption remained in office.
The police were one of the most controversial professions, with papers constantly criticizing their employment history and job effectiveness. To start, an 1855 survey found that the Municipal Police Force was composed of 40% immigrants, with three-quarters of that group being Irish.[li] Since immigrants were so easily scooped up and controlled by political parties, this statistic likely alarmed the audience. Lewis Baker, a former municipal police officer and the principal murderer of Bill Poole, sparked concern over the dependability of the police force after newspapers like the New York Dispatch found out he was of Welsh origin. The New York Herald argued that “for the corrupt affiliations of the police with these pugilists, through the detestable electioneering machinery of our old political parties, Baker could and doubtless would have been arrested on the night or the morning of the murder. The evidence proves that he was spirited away through the treachery and perjury of the public agents bound under oath and under pay to secure him.”[lii] Just as Baker was linked with pugilist John Morrissey, the New York Herald maintained that “some of the ‘little villains’ in our Legislature at Albany” began to deliberately formulate “a plan to turn back again not only a portion, but the whole body, en masse, of our police force into the hands of the political bullies and ruffians who have ruled so long the caucuses of Broadway House and Tammany Hall.”[liii] As a result of undeserved appointments, the police force was contaminated with biased men unafraid to place their own or their party’s interests in front of the city’s security. The state legislature attempted to crack down on corruption with multiple investigations and committees,[liv] but as long as Tammany Hall and other factions controlled New York City, patronage was always present.
The press was highly observant of the different facets of corrupt machine politics. In straightforward terms, the New York Herald summarized, “we cannot shut our eyes to the truth, and, therefore, we are beginning to acknowledge that our governing power is the mob.”[lv] This came after years of constant disapproval over a lack of change. The paper had previously written, “No one in this city who looks at the various signs in the political heavens can fail to observe that the disposition on the part of the masses to throw off the thraldom of party is growing stronger every day, as the squabbles of party leaders, the corruption of the different factions, and the condition of serfdom to which the voters have been reduced at the will of knaves and demagogues, have disgusted the people to such a degree that before long we should not be surprised to see a general rebellion against all party authority.”[lvi] The administration, in the Herald’s eyes, had diminished voters to a point where they simply did not think twice about voting, and politicians could therefore say whatever they wished without consequence. It was only logical that an upheaval must follow, the Herald predicted. In 1859, when William Havemeyer was running for mayor on the Tammany Hall Democrat ticket, the New York Daily Tribune posted a half-page story calling out the illegalities of the infamous political machine: “The violation of the planned purpose of the organization of the Board; the violation of personal pledges which Tammany compelled its poor tools to disregard; the purchase of a corrupt political opponent; the seizure of all the offices; the nomination, to and through its creatures in the Board, of the [rout] of Irish and prize-fighting inspectors wholly unqualified for their duties, should stain the name of Tammany Hall with infamy.”[lvii] The press was the first voice of reform. “Is it not time, high time, for the parties who have to pay the piper, to begin to take a hand in the dance?—or are we still to go on and on, from bad to worse, till driven to the extremity of a provisional government?,” the New York Herald inquired.[lviii]
While the press was not shy to explore any and all corrupt affiliations of New York City’s authority, Tammany Hall and its relationship with the Irish in particular were highly publicized. Due to the influx of Irish immigrants and their tendency to vote together, the Irish bloc was viewed as an election-altering force. The New York Daily Tribune consequently claimed that “the work of converting Irish and German aliens into American citizens and Democratic voters is going on finely in a back room of Tammany Hall, every day from 10 till 3 o’clock…before this card, valued at 50 cents, is given gratuitously to the embryo citizen, he is made to promise faithfully that he will vote the Democratic ticket and none other.”[lix] While there is no doubt that the extent of this was likely exaggerated, this report nevertheless illustrates that Tammany Hall was skilled at securing the Irish vote almost immediately after immigrants arrived in the U.S. However, when it came to issues actually plaguing the Irish community, such as poverty, Tammany was less hesitant to repay its loyal supporters. “Tammany Hall,” The New York Herald contended, “gets up an excitement about an imaginary grievance to some citizen of foreign birth returning to his native land–a case that may happen to some inhabitant of New York, but has not yet occurred; while here is a case of real oppression to three or four hundred thousand foreign born citizens, and noisy Tammany is as silent as the grave.”[lx] Tammany evidently did little to dispel the idea that they exploited the Irish for their vote.
Figure 3. Thomas Nast cartoon, “Naturalization Mill”, in Tammany Hall, Encyclopædia Britannica, “Tammany Hall,” accessed October 1, 2025, https://www.britannica.com/topic/Tammany-Hall.[lxi]
Even though most of the blame fell on the dirty politicians themselves, there was a consensus that voters themselves needed to do more than be complicit in allowing corruption to continue. The New York Herald argued, “[The machine] is successful, because the more respectable class of voters are afraid to be brought in collision with such a collection of ruffians, and prudently remain at home. The result, however, would be very different if the fifty or sixty thousand taxpayers of the city would act in concert, and form an independent party of their own.”[lxii] The Herald further criticized voters for “not giving ten minutes from their business down town even to save half their annual tax bills,” allowing machine leaders to “work in the wards…and control the nominations,” winning elections “through the indifference of the respectable classes.”[lxiii] Before the 1859 Mayoral Election, the New York Daily Tribune, like many New York newspapers, practically begged voters to show up and push back against Tammany for a change: “We entreat every citizen who feels an interest and pride in the good government and moral well-being of our City to bear in mind that the cause of Municipal Rule independent of National Politics imperatively requires the defeat of Tammany Hall next Tuesday.”[lxiv]
Simultaneously, the Know Nothings rose to peak popularity in the 1850s, culminating in New York state senate seats and a very close second-place finish in the 1854 New York City Mayoral Race.[lxv] The outbreak of Irish-linked violence and the ethnic group’s connection to the top political machine in Tammany Hall, as stressed by newspapers, turned more and more voters towards the “party of America.” A writer from the New York Herald, when boiling down the state of the Know Nothing movement, alleged, “[hostility against Irish Catholics] is simply because the Irish are Catholics, and have, to some extent, allowed themselves to be managed as such by reckless demagogues, as a balance of political power, distinct from the homogeneous mass of the American people, that they feel most heavily the pressure of this Know Nothing reaction.”[lxvi] Other writers theorized that a lack of assimilation by immigrants was the cause of the Know Nothing’s newfound fame. “The great mistake of our adopted citizens has been the banding themselves together in political, military, and social cliques, as Irishmen, Germans, &c. The Know Nothing movement is directed against these associations; but when Irish and German citizens shall thoroughly blend themselves with the masses of the American people, this war of races will necessarily cease,” the New York Herald believed.[lxvii] Ironically, many sources even went as far as to paint the Know Nothings as beacons of integration rather than divisive nativists. “American elections,” the Herald later insisted, “were always free from [controversy] until the ‘Irish’ and ‘Germans’ came to the polls as such, to oppose American citizens on their own soil.”[lxviii]
Not only did Know Nothings critique the Irish as foreign invaders, but they also took serious offense at the Irish’s overwhelmingly Catholic beliefs. In 1855, the New York Herald published a detailed report on the Know Nothings, which included the statement, “It is generally understood that the Know Nothings have taken the field as the inveterate enemies of the Catholic Church and religion.”[lxix] A year later, the Herald reduced the party to those “who wish to abolish the Pope and hang all Catholics in the United States.”[lxx] The Know Nothings officially solidified their stance against Catholics in their “Know Nothing Almanac,” the contents of which were manifested in the New York Daily Tribune. The pieces, “American Books Destroyed by Catholic Teachers” and “Burning of American Bibles by Catholic Priests,” among others, were proudly advertised as “well-authenticated facts” that “every American should possess.”[lxxi] The Know Nothings did not stop at criticizing Catholicism; as part of their political agenda, they sought to limit, and in some cases eliminate, its influence in American society. The Herald accordingly wrote how the party’s purpose was “to introduce a purely American policy, in order to root out those balances of political power in our elections known as Roman Catholics, Irishmen, Germans, and so forth.”[lxxii] The religion of the Irish was another effective method for nativist Protestants to galvanize against the increasingly large presence of immigrants in nineteenth-century New York City.
While some writers embraced the tenets of the rising “American” party, others scrutinized it for being too radical. Even those at the New York Herald who seemed to support the Know Nothings overall viewed the potential legislation barring immigrants from office as crossing the line. The New York Dispatch attributed the success of the American party “entirely to the religious bigotry and anti-Catholic prejudices, which a large portion of the American people inherited from their English ancestors, and which are not the natives of this land of enlightened liberty.”[lxxiii] The New York Herald also published transcripts of different leaders castigating the party. “The Know Nothing movement,” Democrat-affiliating General John A. Quitman simply affirmed, “was calculated to endanger the liberties of the people, and produce anarchy and confusion.”[lxxiv] For the celebration of St. Patrick’s Day, the Herald posted the speech of Coroner Connery, part of which read, “Catholics and Irishmen had fought for American liberty, and should share in its benefits. The bar of New York was adorned by Irish talent and genius; and yet, said [Coroner Connery], these men could not hold office, if these damnable doctrines of the Know Nothings prevailed.”[lxxv] The status of lower-class immigrants, mainly the Irish, clearly divided New York City and pushed tensions to the tipping point.
As a result, New York City exploded with the news of William Poole’s fate. Not only was the murder itself sensational, but so were the events that followed. The aforementioned main man responsible, Lewis Baker, fled New York and evaded capture for almost two months. The New York Herald observed that “groups of friends to either the Poole or the Baker faction of the city pugilists, gather on street corners, and there hear, try, determine, and dispose of the accused in the most summary manner. One party execute him, and the other not only let him go ‘scott free,’ but let him off with honors.”[lxxvi] Poole’s funeral was described by the Herald as “one of the most extraordinary demonstrations ever made in a Christian country.”[lxxvii] The New York Daily Tribune claimed thousands of people lined the sidewalks as the Poole motorcade drove through Brooklyn.[lxxviii] At the service, the Reverend took a condemning tone on the death of Poole, representing a summary of how years of repeated violence and corruption took a toll on the city. He began by clarifying, “I come to bury William Poole, not to praise him.” While acknowledging Poole’s undying patriotism and generosity toward his community, he pointed out the obvious truths. He highly condemned Poole’s “pugilistic propensities, and others.” When proposing potential solutions, he cited “checking sporting gentlemen—pugilists—and preventing rowdyism,” “the dangers of carrying weapons of death,” and finally “the evil of keeping open saloons…til an hour late at night.”[lxxix] This spectacle of violence and public sentiment not only marked the end of William Poole but also symbolized the deep unrest simmering beneath New York City’s political and social order.
The graphic and abrupt manner in which Poole died served to help his public image. The New York Herald sympathized, “In this last melee the unfortunate Bill Poole was evidently the chosen victim of a fictitious conspiracy of jealous rivals in the same business. Apprised of his danger, he exhibited an extraordinary degree of forbearance against the insults designed to provoke him to an attack.”[lxxx] The New York Daily Tribune further inflated his reputation, calling him “always well dressed and gentlemanly,” while being “popular among his acquaintances, always conducting himself peacefully towards them.”[lxxxi] They added that he was “seldom, if ever, known to assault any person who was not a reputed fighting man, and with that class of men he occasionally had conflicts.”[lxxxii] With the future of the city in mind, the New York Herald remarked, “While it is painful to reflect upon the timely end of this young man, it is consoling to know for certainty (sic.) that the bloody affray in which he received his death wound has resulted in ridding our city of several of its least desirable inhabitants.”[lxxxiii] The murder was a gifted opportunity for the Know Nothings to point their fingers at Irish immigrants and Tammany Hall Democrats. “And thus it devolves upon the Know Nothings to make their work complete in the total overthrow of the secret machinery of Broadway House and Tammany Hall,”[lxxxiv] a writer from the Herald argued, under the clear influence of the post-murder “blame game.”
Poole’s innocent death did not fool everyone, as some, like the previously mentioned reverend, were quick to point out the true life he lived. A columnist from the New York Herald was indignant: “To see the fuss and noise that is being made about the death of the late Poole, one might suppose that he had been a patriot, a useful citizen, a man to be proud of. Instead whereof, as every one knows, he was one of a set of ruffians who have cursed this city for many years; and met his death at the hands of another ruffian in a drunken frolic.”[lxxxv] When the manhunt for Baker was on, a hefty five-thousand-dollar reward was announced for information leading to the whereabouts of the murderer. The Herald responded by yet again criticizing Poole’s track record, aspiring for a smaller sum. “I wish [Poole] had lived like a true American. Is it a true American, who will sell himself as a political rowdy to a set of demagogues, or are they true Americans who hired him?” a writer from the Herald rhetorically questioned.[lxxxvi] As citizens became less removed from the murder, more and more denunciations of Poole appeared.
In true 1850s New York City fashion, the murder was underlined by reported corruption. Papers took these infamous events as a chance to connect inconsistencies with those of previous tragedies. The New York Daily Tribune called out the murder as directly stemming from “the fruits of the hydra of vices which has been tolerated in our midst,” which “constitute a fearful power in this City.” As long as “drunkenness, gambling, prostitution, prize-fighting and their associate evils continue,” New York City could never outrun the “characters who constantly heap upon the City taxes and disgrace.”[lxxxvii] The New York Herald placed blame on the machines, passionately proclaiming, “We ought every one of us to feel deep burning shame for what is going on around us…[the cause] must be sought in old political parties.”[lxxxviii]
Despite its publicity, the murder was not a turning point in New York City politics. Rather, it acted as a graphic and almost predictable visualization of a city enshrined in political and social turmoil. New York City experienced an influx of Irish immigrants in the early and mid-19th century, marking one of the first large waves of migration to the city. This forced the city to deliberate on how far it would accept these immigrants and their place in New York City’s sociopolitical life. In this polarizing ideological climate, anti-immigration became the main pillar of the rising Know Nothing party, acting as an “American” response to Irish-associated Democrats. These political parties grew to dominate New York City politics as well-oiled machines, limited by almost nothing in terms of control, violence, and publicity. Democrat Tammany Hall was most notable for their corrupt methods, building their influence through patronage, voter intimidation, ballot stuffing, police and court control, and weaponization of immigrant citizenship. Machine politics were also visually reinforced through pugilists and heritage-based gangs. These violent interactions became the primary method of confrontation among disagreeing parties. In retrospect, Poole’s murder served less as a disruption of the status quo and more as a morbid confirmation of its presence. Throughout the mid-nineteenth century, corruption, bigotry, and violence grew to be woven into the fabric of the city. By sensationalizing violence and openly reflecting on the anxieties of the readers, mid-nineteenth-century New York newspapers captured not only the events themselves but also the toxic political culture that sustained them, making them a crucial primary source for digesting a city driven by conflict. 1850s New York City, like the dying William Poole, was bleeding out.
Bibliography
Primary Sources
Library of Congress. Chronicling America: Historic American Newspapers. Accessed July 24, 2025. https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/.
The New York Times TimesMachine. “The ‘Dead Rabbits.’” Accessed 3 March 2025. timesmachine.nytimes.com.
Secondary Sources
Gammie, Peter. Pugilism and the City: Boxing, Masculinity, and Urban Disorder in Nineteenth-Century New York. New York: University Press, 2003.
Gorn, Elliott J. The Manly Art: Bare-Knuckle Prize Fighting in America. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1986.
McCaffrey, Lawrence J. The Irish Catholic Diaspora in America. Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press, 1997.
Shannon, William V. The American Irish: A Political and Social Portrait. New York: Macmillan, 1963.
Walkowitz, Daniel J. Working with Class: Social Workers and the Politics of Middle-Class Identity. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1999.
Endnotes
[i] “The Great Prize Fight Between Sullivan and Morrisey,” Sunday Dispatch, 16 October 1853, 2. The newspapers for this essay come from the Library of Congress’s website, Chronicling America, at chroniclingamerica.loc.gov and the New York Times TimesMachine at timesmachine.nytimes.com.
[ii] “Senator Morrissey Dead.” The Sun, 2 May 1878, 1.
[iii] “Senator Morrissey” The Sun, 2 May 1878.
[iv] “Prize Fight in New York,” The Lancaster Ledger, 9 August 1854, 2.
[v] This detailed description was accumulated from “The Murder of WM. Poole,” New York Daily Tribune, 12 March 1855, 6, and “Stanwix Hall Tragedy,” New York Herald, 11 March 1855, 1.
[vi] “Stanwix Hall Tragedy,” New York Herald, 11 March 1855, 1.
[vii] George Washington Walling, Recollections of a New York Chief of Police (New York: Caxton Book Concern, 1887), 50, https://archive.org/details/recollectionsofn00wallrich/page/50/mode/1up
[viii] Lawrence J. McCaffrey, Irish America: The Historical Travel of a People (Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1985), 79.
[ix] McCaffrey, Irish America, 79.
[x] McCaffrey, Irish America, 79.
[xi] Elliott J. Gorn, “Good-Bye Boys, I Die a True American”: Homicide, Nativism, and Working-Class Culture in Antebellum New York City, Journal of American History 74:2 (1987): 395.
[xii] William V. Shannon, The American Irish: A Political and Social Portrait (New York: Macmillan, 1963), 36.
[xiii] Shannon, The American Irish, 50.
[xiv] Shannon, The American Irish, 52.
[xv] Daniel J. Walkowitz, “‘The Gangs of New York’: The Mean Streets in History,” Reviews in American History 29, no. 2 (2001): 4.
[xvi] Lawrence J. McCaffrey, Irish America: The Historical Travel of a People (Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1985), 80.
[xvii] “Arrest and Discharge of the Principals,” New York Daily Tribune, 27 March 1855, 7.
[xviii] “Political Riot in the Seventeenth Ward,” New York Dispatch, 4 November 1855, 6.
[xix] “A Prize Fight Prevented,” New York Dispatch, 18 November 1855, 5.
[xx] “Serious Stabbing Affray in Cherry Street,” New York Herald, 10 June 1857, 4.
[xxi] “Shot by an Unseen Hand,” New York Daily Tribune, 3 January 1857, 7.
[xxii] “Outrages,” New York Dispatch, 27 April 1856, 5.
[xxiii] “How the Row Commenced,” New York Herald, 6 July 1857, 8.
[xxiv] “Another Disgraceful Affair” New York Herald, 6 April 1859, 4.
[xxv] “Trouble Among Politicians,” New York Dispatch, 9 September 1855, 5.
[xxvi] “A Great Good at Hand,” New York Daily Tribune, 14 May 1855, 7.
[xxvii] “Disgraceful Fight on Sunday,” New York Daily Tribune, 27 March 1855, 7.
[xxviii] “Row Between Pugilists in the Fifth Ward,” New York Herald, 6 April 1859, 4.
[xxix] “Inquisition Regarding the Misconduct of Policemen,” New York Herald, 4 May 1855.
[xxx] “The Metropolitan Police Law in Legislation,” New York Herald, 28 February 1858, 3.
[xxxi] “Riot by the ‘Dead Rabbit Club,’” New York Dispatch, 5 July 1857, 5.
[xxxii] “The ‘Dead Rabbits,’” The New York Times, 7 July 1857, 1.
[xxxiii] “The ‘Bowery Boys’ and the ‘Dead Rabbits,’” New York Daily Tribune, 6 July 1857, 6.
[xxxiv] “The ‘Bowery Boys’” New York Daily Tribune, 6 July 1857.
[xxxv] “Inquests on the Bodies of the Killed,” New York Herald, 7 July 1857, 1.
[xxxvi] “Fearful Riot,” New York Dispatch, 5 July 1857, 4.
[xxxvii] “Fourth of July,” New York Daily Tribune, 6 July 1857, 6.
[xxxviii] “Terrible Riots in the Metropolis,” New York Herald, 6 July 1857, 1.
[xxxix] “Corrected List of the Killed and Wounded,” New York Herald, 7 July 1857, 1.
[xl] “Fearful Riot,” New York Dispatch, 5 July 1857, 4.
[xli] Dead Rabbits barricade at Independence Day Riots, New York City, ca. 1857, Wikimedia Commons, accessed October 1, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_Rabbits_riot#/media/File:Dead_rabbits_barricade_new_york.jpg
[xlii] “The Board in an Executive Point of View,” New York Herald, 7 July 1857, 1.
[xliii] “A Few Facts of Importance,” New York Daily Tribune, 6 July 1857, 6.
[xliv] “A Few Facts of Importance,” New York Daily Tribune, 6 July 1857.
[xlv] “A Few Facts of Importance,” New York Daily Tribune, 6 July 1857.
[xlvi] “Pugilism in High Feather,” New York Herald, 20 November 1857, 4.
[xlvii] “Portraits of the New Corporation,” New York Herald, 20 November 1856, 4.
[xlviii] “The Frauds on the City Treasury—What Is To Be Done?,” New York Herald, 13 August 1858, 4.
[xlix] “Nothing New,” New York Herald, 31 October 1855, 4.
[l] “Our Taxpayers and their Apathy,” New York Herald, 8 August 1858, 4.
[li] “Sam’s Success in Seeking Knowledge Under Difficulties,” New York Dispatch, 25 March 1855, 6.
[lii] “The Verdict of the Jury—A Great Fuss for Nothing,” New York Herald, 19 March 1855, 612.
[liii] “The Police Implicated,” New York Herald, 17 March 1855, 596.
[liv] “Alleged Corruption Among Police Magistrates,” New York Herald, 26 June 1855, 1.
[lv] “The Governing Powers of New York,” New York Herald, 11 November 1858, 4.
[lvi] “The Party System Breaking Up,” New York Herald, 17 September 1858, 4.
[lvii] “The Gist of the Matter,” New York Daily Tribune, 1 December 1859, 4.
[lviii] “Our Taxpayers and their Apathy,” New York Herald, 8 August 1858, 4.
[lix] “Manufacturing Citizens,” New York Daily Tribune, 23 October 1857, 6.
[lx] “The Sunday Movement—Its Origins, its Objects and Results,” New York Herald, 20 July 1859, 4.
[lxi] Thomas Nast, “Naturalization Mill,” Cartoon, In Tammany Hall, Encyclopædia Britannica, Accessed October 1, 2025. https://www.britannica.com/topic/Tammany-Hall.
[lxii] “The [unintelligible] and Busted Libel Case,” New York Herald, 22 May 1858, 4.
[lxiii] “The Governing Powers of New York,” New York Herald, 11 November 1858, 4.
[lxiv] “An Appeal to Reformers,” New York Daily Tribune, 2 December 1859, 4.
[lxv] “The Elections Yesterday,” New York Herald, 8 November 1854, 1.
[lxvi] “The Know Nothing Revolution—Rapid Progress—Coming into Good Shape and Consistency,” New York Herald, 20 February 1855, 4 etc.
[lxvii] “The Know Nothings and their late Drawbacks—Their Prospects and Their Policy,” New York Herald, 12 February 1855, 332.
[lxviii] “The Riots in Louisville–Opinions of the City Press,” New York Herald, 9 August 1855, 4.
[lxix] “The Know Nothings and Their Late Drawbacks—Their Prospects and Their Policy,” New York Herald, 12 February 1855, 332.
[lxx] “Abuse of the Franking Privilege,” New York Herald, 18 October 1856, 4.
[lxxi] “Know-Nothing Almanac and True American’s Manual for 1855,” New York Daily Tribune, 17 February 1855, 1.
[lxxii] “Official Know-Nothing Manifesto—Their Principles Defined,” New York Herald, 12 March 1855, 556.
[lxxiii] “A Catholic Monthly on ‘Sam,’” New York Dispatch, 18 March 1855, 4.
[lxxiv] “Young Men’s Democratic Celebration,” New York Herald, 23 February 1856, 2.
[lxxv] “Celebration of St. Patrick’s Day by the Young Friends of Ireland,” New York Herald, 27 March 1856, 1.
[lxxvi] “The Excitement Throughout the City,” New York Herald, 17 May 1855, 1.
[lxxvii] “The Burial of William Poole,” New York Herald, 12 March 1855, 1.
[lxxviii] “The Poole Funeral in Brooklyn,” New York Daily Tribune, 12 March 1855, 6.
[lxxix] “The Religious Services,” New York Herald, 12 March 1855, 1.
[lxxx] “The Bloody Fracas in Broadway—Our New York Savages,” New York Herald, 27 February 1855, 452.
[lxxxi] “The Poole Crowd,” New York Daily Tribune, 10 March 1855, 5.
[lxxxii] “The Poole Crowd,” New York Daily Tribune, 10 March 1855.
[lxxxiii] “The News,” New York Herald, 9 March 1855, 532.
[lxxxiv] “The Bloody Fracas in Broadway—Our New York Savages,” New York Herald, 27 February 1855, 452.
[lxxxv] “The Burial of William Poole,” New York Herald, 12 March 1855, 1.
[lxxxvi] “The Poole Tragedy—The $5000 Reward Non-Concurred In,” New York Herald, 23 March 1855, 8.
[lxxxvii] “The Poole Tragedy,” New York Daily Tribune, 10 March 1855, 6.
[lxxxviii] “The Burial of William Poole,” New York Herald, 12 March 1855, 1.