CHESS PATRONS

There have in recent years been annually about eight or ten

chess patrons who have contributed more to promote high class

chess than all the rest of her Majesty's subjects, and remarkable

as it may appear, with one exception there is not one titled, or

what would be deemed very distinguished name among them.

250 pounds to 300 pounds a year is an ample sum for necessary first

class chess competitions, but nothing like that has been raised

under present auspices in this great Metropolis since 1883, or on

the average for many years. There are some who will buy chess

books who would not care to play at least in a public room on any

conditions; there are, on the other hand, some who drop their

shillings freely at chess without the slightest instruction or

improvement who would scorn to buy a chess book. Even "California"

who greatly desired to improve and apparently cared little about

expense, and with his double or quits propensity in play would not

deign to notice a chess book. One said that this amateur possessed

all the requisites of a loser playing very fastly, very badly and

risking very rashly. One morning about twelve before chess hours

at the Cafe International, New York, whilst writing I was accosted

by a tall and fashionable looking American whom I had seen once

or twice before playing with Mackenzie or Mason, but had never

spoken to. "I see you are busy," said he. "It is not particularly

pressing for the moment," said I, placing my work aside. He

then commenced to interview me concerning Morphy, asking my

opinion and description of him in every conceivable manner;

Staunton, Buckle, Anderssen, Steinitz and Blackburne followed

in rapid succession. All things temporal have an end and a

welcome pause came in this case. Taking up a chess book lying

by my side which happened to be a gilt copy of Chess Masterpieces,

just out, he said, "How much might that book be?" "Oh! about

a dollar," said I. He replied, "I guess that's a pretty tall book,

but times are bad and I guess I cannot invest a dollar on that ere

book." I found he was one of the non-purchasing class but had

the gambling element. "I will play you a game for a dollar if

you will give me the odds of a Rook." "I cannot give it you,"

said I, "but will try the Knight for the usual quarter." He

would take nothing less than a Rook and for half-a-dollar, so I

made the attempt and he seem'd to play far too well for the odds,

kept his advantage for a time well and my prospects or the

prospects of my half-dollar were not encouraging, the game

toughened, however, and I got a passed Pawn. It was as Monsieur

would say "nothing," but it seem'd to bother him immensely. He

brought four pieces to stop that poor little Pawn when one would

have done, utterly ignoring the policy of economy of force, his

game consequently got disarranged and he lost, after about an

hour's fighting, No. 1. He proposed another, played wretchedly,

and lost No. 2; worse and worse he played always wanting to

increase his stake, but I remained true to the classics and would

not deviate from the time-honoured stake. As it was I had to draw

seven dollars which my opponent parted with most pleasantly,

asked me to have a cigar and a nerver, and said I was a wonderful

player. He felt that he had a fair look in. Had he bought the

book the bare possibility of an injudicious purchase might have

preyed upon his mind; the book however was fairly priced. In

New York the ten dollar game arose in this way, receiving Rook,

Pawn and three moves, I lost on balance ten games, 5 dollars, and

demanded double or quits which I was forced to comply with.

Passed pawns bothered him also. I was New York Sun Chess

Editor and not a chess book investor.

Some have been known to accumulate chess libraries which

frequently get dispersed, a copy of Lolli sold for 5 pounds,

another equally good for 2/6. The difference between two-pence and

170 pounds for Caxton represents the largest profit yet recorded

on a chess book. A copy of Mr. Christie's little work on the Greek

and Roman Theory (1799) should be valuable.

------

Chess History and Reminiscences · 第 55 / 67 题