certain extent, ignored by the leading composers of each country. IN CHESS, AS IN ALL OTHER THINGS, GENIUS WILL NOT BE BOUND BY ANY FIXED RULE. IT MAKES ITS OWN RULES; AND RIGHTLY SO." Verily! "Genius will not be bound by any fixed rule!" W. T. P. is not; for No. 417 in his own collection of English Chess Problems is a position where five captures must have been made to arrive at the diagram, when there are only four men off the board. Mr Pierce is the author of this impossible position. I was much pleased with the following three-mover of Loyd's : White to play and give mate in 3 moves. The theme is elegant, but then to get the Black pawns in their respective places, eleven captures would have to be made. The diagram will show that it is an impossible position five times over, for there are only six white men off the board. Five times a fraud"! In composing this clever problem, Loyd virtually says:-"My genius will not be bound by any fixed rule, I appeal to the Messrs. Pierce!" Now certain problemists in Englandand I believe certain problemists in America-are agitating for fixed rules to fetter the geniuses of the chess world, Mr. W. T. Pierce being to the front in England. Mr. Cooke (Synopsis) asserts in his "Primer," that all the English chess clubs adopt the 1862 rules. This is hardly correct, for Brighton does not. The 1862 rules are given in extenso in the "Primer," and the "Primer" has been heartily welcomed by all the English chess editors and strongly recommended by them. "The great International Chess Congress of 1862," as Staunton calls the "authority" which passed these rules is thus described by him in his chess column of February 22nd, 1862, in the Illustrated London News:-"The list of the managing, standing and co-operative committees for the Grand International Chess Congress and Tournament of 1862 has just appeared and presents an array of names, which, while pleasingly testifying to the extraordinary interest exerted by the project, AMPLY GUARANTEES ITS EFFICIENT FULFILLMENT." Yet like Mr. Pierce, he refused to be bound by the laws which this Congress set its seal to. Now I ask what evidence have we that the leaders in this movement to formulate a restrictive code of problem laws, will cordially accept any law which may happen to disagree with their chess stomachs? For myself, it is enough for me that the London clubs all round abide by these laws, and that such men as Steinitz, Zuckertort, Blackburne, &c. stand by them, and that these rules governed the play at the three great European Tourneys of Vienna, Baden-Baden and Paris. Chess players in England, who scout these laws of the game, and there are a few, are not to my mind, quite the men to take the lead in laying down laws for problems. If they will not be bound by the majority, what will bind them? In last week's "Design and Work" chess column, edited by my friend, W. R. Bland, are particulars of a Problem Tourney. Mr. W. T. Pierce is the judge of the threemovers and Mr. Andrews of the two movers. Both these gentlemen reject the 1862 laws and they do not agree between themselves! As an instance, Mr. Andrews awarded M. E. Pradignat the best problem in the Huddersfield College Magazine Tourney, and stoutly defended the double promotion which is required to lead up to the diagram. (See No. 101, AMERICAN CHESS JOURNAL.) Mr. Pierce as stoutly objects to the promotion theory in problems; so, we have this funny outcome-contestants in their two-movers may have a promoted piece and Mr. Andrews will pass it, but contestants in their three-movers may have a promoted piece and Mr. Pierce will not pass it, though "in chess, genius will not be bound by any fixed rule!" In the matter of castling, too, they disagree. Mr. Andrews allows of castling in the defence of Rev. H. Bolton's problem "Ghuznee," Mr. Pierce objects to castling in problems! The "Design and Work contestants will have to look to this too, when sending in their three-movers and two.movers, for one judge will accept and the other judge reject. Loyd favors casthing in problems. Castling is far more possible than is the two-mover at the head of this article. To sum up, I would accord more liberty not less to the composer. I prefer to fol low the Pierce of 1976 rather than the Mr. Pierce of 1880, and let "Genius make its own rules!" FRED THOMPSON, Derby, England. P. S. In the Messrs. Pierce collection of their own compositions are five problems where the Bishop has jumped over the pawns, viz: Nos. 68, 141, 169, 234 and 265. How do these square with Mr. Pierce's objection to the promotion theory? 6. Kt to KB 3 7. B to K Kt 5 8. B to Q Kt 3 6. B to Q 3 7.0-0 8. B to K 3 9. BXB 9. K PXB 10. Q Kt-Q 2 10. 0-0 11. P to KR 3 11. B to KR 4 12. Q to K 1 12. Q to Q 2 13. Kt to KR 2 13. QR to K 1 14. P to KB 4 14. KtXK P (b 15. KtXKt 15. P to Q 4 16. Kt to B 6+ 16. PXKt 17. Q to Kt 3+ 17. K to R 1 18. Q to K R 4 18. B to K Kt 3 19. QXB P+ 19. K to Kt 1 20. Kt to K Kt 4 20. P to K R 4 21. Kt to R 6+ (c 21. K to R 2 22. Kt to B 5 22. R to K Kt 1 23. Q to K Kt 5 Resigns. a) We doubt very much whether it is good play to allow the Kt to retreat to K B 3. b) The fatal move of the game, and White takes good advantage of the same. c) Mr. Cohnfeld excites our admiration in the highest degree with the dashing style and correct calculation with which he played this game. 6. B to K 3 (a 10. B to K B4 11. B to Kt 3 12. BXP+( 13. Kt to Q 6 14. B to QB 4 15. Q to R 5+ 16. Q to R 3 17. Kt to Kt 5+ 18. K R to K 1 19. K to Kt 1 20. BX Kt 21. RXKt 22. Q to K 7+ 23. Kt to Q 6+ 24. K R to Q 1 25. KtXB P 26. Q to K Kt 5 27. Q to K B 4+ 28. Kt to Q 6+ 29. KtXK R 30. K to R 1 6 B to Kt 5+ 7. BxKt+ 8. K to Q 1 9. Kt to B 3 10. Kt to Q4 11. Q Kt to K 2 12. KtXB 13. Q to K 3 (c 14. K Kt to Q 4 15. P to Q Kt 3 16. K to B 2 (d 17. K to Q 1 18. Q to R 3+ 19. R to QB 3 (e 20. KtXB 21. B to R 3 22. K to B 1 23. K B 2 24. QR to Q1 25. K R to K 1 26. R to Q B1 27. K to Kt. 2 28. K to R 1 29. QxP+ 30. RXKt 31. B to Q 6 Resigns. a) B to K 2 is recommended here by German authorities, but Staunton doubts whether it is the proper mode of continuing the attack. We can hardly have any objection to the above innovation. b) A very brilliant move; the method of continuation is exceedingly interesting. c) Q to K Kt 3 is certainly much better. d) The object of this move we fail to see; what Mr. Forster gains through it is nicely demonstrated in the next few moves. e) Black cannot prevent the loss of his piece any longer, and the game is now completely in the control of his opponent. 3. PXP 4. Q to K R 5 6. B to Q 4 5. Kt to Kt 5 5. QxP+ 7, Kt to B 3 3. Q to R 5+ 4. P to Q3 5. Q to R 4 6. P to K Kt 4 7. Kt-K 2 1. P-K 4 21. Kt–K Kt3 22. Kt-K R 5 1. P-K 4 4. P-K R 3 (b 16. Ktf'm K4to KKt 3 21. Kt f'm K2 to Q B3 23. Q-K 3 24. Q-Q2 25. Kt - K Kt3 White announced mate in three moves. a) The proper method of conducting b) Here we prefer P-Q 4 in order to c) Well played. This Kt will demon- d) Here again we claim 18) P to Q 4 as |