The Invented Advertisement

“Necessity, the mother of invention,” is responsible for many a good thing in science, art, mechanics, medicine and advertising; and Farquar expressed the truism in the play of “The Twin Rivals” quite as well as I could have done it myself. How many a fair star owes her first column interview to the loss of her diamonds which she never had, or has wept over jewels held by her uncle instead of the feather-fingered or the burglar? How many, many times has the same old story, the josh of the jewels, found its way into print? The tale comes under the heading of “too numerous to mention.” And still, without scarce a variation, it long served its purpose. In one particular version, I recall an exceedingly clever departure from the routine, and truth may have added the zest.

Fanny Davenport‘s diamonds were purloined at an inn in St. Paul [when] the star was out. And now comes the romantic twist to the tale. The priceless jewels were appropriated by a clerk of the inn and the clerk was possessed of a small wife and a large and interesting family. Being caught, the misguided husband and parent confessed and sued for mercy at the Court of Beauty and he got it.

“I forgive you. Go and sin no more.”

Truly, I have no doubt that the event ... occurred and, in fact, I don’t care two-plus whether it did [or] not. As an advertisement it was A-1 and the comments of the press would have enriched a clipping bureau had any been in vogue at the time.

It is “no fool of a job” to invent a pure fabrication that will enlist the attention of the press and the public; for it is just as important to interest the editor as it is to excite the citizen. I will admit that in these latter days, since the columns of the yellow journals are so readily open to anything sensational about the profession, be it good, bad, indifferent, false or true, it is an easier matter to float a story than it was in the first years of the seventies. And, then again, in those days a showman was not quite so ready to deceive the newspapers as he was to fool the people.

Previous to the advent of William C. Coup in the East, in company with his Wisconsin partner, Dan Castello, the popular one-ring circuses of L. B. Lent and John H. Murray held their own undaunted. The reintroduction of P. T. Barnum into the sawdust arena at once put a new aspect on affairs. Lent’s New York Circus, by reason of its metropolitan reputation and excellent entertainment, covered a wide area during each vacation tour, extending its operation to the big cities of the far West. John H. Murray’s Circus, fully as well conducted as Lent’s, had grown out of an exhibition, the original owners of which were Den Stone, Frank Rosston, John H. Murray, and one Hutchinson (an athlete and working partner of Murray’s), and my very good friend, Mike Coyle.

In 1873 Murray put out his show on the rail, using the company cars and, as usual, visited his favorite Down East stamping grounds, including New Jersey, New England, the lower provinces [of] Canada, New York, and Pennsylvania, touching nothing west of Buffalo.

Prior to P. T. Barnum’s World’s Fair on Wheels, (40) Lent and Murray had considered the combination of the circus and menagerie as an alarming competition. Neither the Great European, a show too large for its day, or the several shows of George F. Bailey & Co. and VanAmburgh & Co. had been strong enough to overbalance the universally admitted excellence of the highly artistic performance furnished by these two conscientious and experienced legitimate circus managers.

Although the Barnum show, from its birth, swept the country like a cyclone, it being necessary to give three performances a day, there was still a vast number of people who preferred their circus straight, with no cats and in one ring. But with the big Barnum boom there was a foreshadowing of danger ahead. The amount of money distributed by the Barnumites was something enormous and in keeping with the prodigious receipts. As a result, lots, licenses and billboards took an upward tendency, to the disadvantage of the owner of the one-ring show. And, if possible, a still worse feature of the situation was that the single-circle fellow looked very small indeed with his little ad in the newspaper counting room.

Again, P. T. Barnum and company were well nigh monopolizing all the native circus talent and that is, as always was, a limited quantity. Besides, the Barnum party did not halt for a dollar if they wanted anyone and they wanted all the performers in sight. The condition of affairs sent Murray to Europe in the winter of 1872-73; and he returned with a number of artists, including John Henry Cooke, the equestrian of style and finish, already favorably known in this country. To strengthen his reputation in the land of frugality and beans and carry conviction everywhere in the circulation zone of the Boston dailies, Murray resolved to appear at the Hub and risk the stake. P. T. Barnum & Co. and George F. Bailey & Co. had like intention and Murray’s only safety depended on the excellence of the performance and anticipating his rivals. W. C. “Bill” Coup, as they used to call him out of Indiana, looked with contempt upon the invasion of George Fox Danbury Bailey, even at 25 cents a card; and the appearance of John H. Murray’s Railroad Circus was altogether the best joke of the season.

For years the Stone & Murray Circus and the shows out of which it had sprung had exhibited annually in all the Boston suburbs. So John H. Murray was no stranger to the surroundings. Still, to look back upon the venture, it was an audacious one for Murray, [traveling] with one tent and one ring, to beard the lion, P. T. Barnum and the rest of his menagerie in many dens and in many tents.

John Henry Cooke was riding the now famous act of “Bounding Jockey,” leaping from the horse to the ground and from the ground to the horse. And, it must be understood, the equestrian was riding the heralded new act for all it was worth, with almost unfailing precision and certainty and, to the amazement of the audience, “wearing his boots” as promised in the announcements. I want to say right here that the act was not a new one but I thought that it was when I enthusiastically advertised it. Some time afterward I read of it as a former feature before I was born. Thus does the circus act, as well as history, repeat itself.

As I had distaste to directly pulling the leg of newspapers, I [took] recourse to the advertising columns of the Herald, Globe and Journal and published in their amusement columns the following entirely fictitious correspondence:

$1,000 CHALLENGE
Boston Hotel, May 31, 1873

To the “Great John Henry Cooke:”

Having arrived in America, and desiring to ascertain how far your greatness extends, I hereby challenge you to ride me, for $1,000, three acts: 1. Your “Bounding Jockey” and carrying act with child. 2. Juggling and backward riding. 3. Hurdle, or six-horse act, as may please you best. As Murray’s Circus, with which you are connected, is shortly to appear in Boston, there will be an excellent opportunity to test our respective merits.

WILLIAM DOUGLAS
Late of Astley’s Amphitheatre, London,
Champion Equestrian of All England

Murray replied to Douglass’ challenge:

Webster, Mass., June 2, 1873
William Douglass, Esq.:
Dear Sir - In reply to your challenge I beg to say it is not my desire to enter into any newspaper controversy in merits of yourself or Mr. Cooke, which would serve to give you notoriety, which is quite evident by your preposterous cartel, as it is a well known fact that in England you have never been considered better than a TOLER-ABLY FAIR equestrian. I am opposed to all betting arrangements whatever, if from one reason more than another that you could ill afford the loss of your $1,000. If you wish to try your skill in the ring with Mr. Cooke during our stay in Boston, you can have the opportunity under the following conditions: Both are to ride the same horse, and in event of competent judges pronouncing you Mr. Cooke’s superior, I will make you a present of the ENTIRE RECEIPTS OF THE DAY. Furthermore, Mr. Cooke wishes me to say that he will ride IN HIS BOOTS, while you can take the advantage of his voluntary impediment and appear free of any such encumbrance. If this should meet your views, you can arrange preliminaries with M. Coyle, Esq., my general agent who is now in Boston. Respectfully,

JOHN H. MURRAY

At this distance the illusion may appear rather thin but to the press and public it looked like and read like the real thing. Boston knew John Henry Cooke and believed in him and when the gentlemen, who resided in the outlying districts and did business in Boston, saw Cooke doing the “Bounding Jockey” with his boots on, they all agreed: “John Henry Cooke is getting ready to meet the vaunted English champion, William Douglass, in Boston.” So said the circus loving suburbans to their city friends. And by the time the Murray circus pitched its one tent and built its one ring in the center of the Modern Athens, the merits of Cooke and Douglass were being discussed along with the latest literary topics of the time.

Along with this, Billy Irving, Murray’s boss billposter, in all the glory of a velvet coat purchased in Nova Scotia the previous summer, spent his evenings in touring Boston and impersonating William Douglass, champion equestrian of all England. Irving was possessed of a ready wit, an unparalleled gall, and was as handy a prevaricator as ever distorted the truth, as Mike Coyle, a friend and admirer of the qualification of the deceased in the direction of the distortion of the facts, will bear me witness. As the bogus Douglass, Irving was as good a walking advertisement as a perambulating billboard drawn by four horses to the music of a fife and drum.

The opening night, the still incredulous W. C. Coup came out to see the little circus under one tent. To his surprise it was closed, closed because no more could or would be admitted. Also and likewise came others high up in the councils of the circus: George F. Bailey, Charles W. Fuller, L. B. Lent, Col. Joe Cushing; and they, with one accord, expressed surprise and pleasure. But probably only one of the managerial party attributed any measure of the success to the invented advertisement. Lewis B. Lent was too old and shrewd an advertiser to have overlooked so important a factor. As he took his seat or rather, by reason of his bulk, two seats, he called the writer to his side and asked with a wink, “Can you inform me, Squire, at what hour the contest begins between John Henry Cooke, the great, and William Douglass, champion of all England?”

Footnotes

40. Barnum’s World’s Fair on Wheels was an expanded version of the Coup/Barnum organization, taken on the road in 1873.


Top

Copyright © 2005
William L. Slout and Circus Historical Society, Inc.