Paul Morphy: The Pride and Sorrow of Chess

by David Lawson

  On September 18 he again encountered James Thompson at Knight odds, losing a fine game in seventy-six moves. A few days later they played three more games at the same odds, all of which Morphy won. He also gave the same odds to Frederick Perrin on October 10, and to Sam Loyd, winning all games.

  Louis Paulsen was also in New York at this time, and not by chance. Although at the Chess Congress of 1857 Morphy had a plus score against him of fourteen to one (counting casuals and blindfold games), Paulsen was nevertheless sure he was much stronger than the score indicated. As early as November 1858 he began thinking about a match with Morphy. In a letter to Henry Harrisse he wrote, “Having in view to see Morphy on his return to New York, I am studying chess with such zeal that I don’t like to lose five minutes of time.”

  Early in 1859 Paulsen wrote Harrisse of his intention “to visit Morphy at New Orleans in December, provided he agrees to play me a match on even terms. If I should beat Morphy I will write a complete work on the openings.” Morphy’s long stay in New York and late arrival in New Orleans may have changed his plans. Also, evidently he had heard from Harrisse that Morphy had no intention of playing except at odds, for Paulsen wrote Harrisse as follows on October 2, 1859:

  As soon as I received your letter I commenced analyzing the pawn and move game. I have not yet finished my work. Should the result prove that in the pawn and move game the advantage is really on the side of the player who receives the odds, as it is supposed to be, I will play a match with Morphy at these odds; and should I beat him he will be obliged to play a match on even terms.

  By the autumn of 1860 Paulsen had convinced himself (even if no one else agreed with him) that Pawn odds offered no advantage to the receiver.This decision was undoubtedly influenced by his great desire to play Morphy on even terms. He therefore wrote the following letter:

  New York, Oct. 3, 1860

  Paul Morphy, Esq., Dear Sir:

  In the hope of promoting the cause of Chess, permit me to invite you to a friendly contest over the board on the following terms:

  A match even, consisting only of open games, or, to make it more definite, a match of six Evans Gambits, each player to conduct three times the attack and three times the defense; and of twelve Gambits on the King’s side, attack and defense to be played alternately by each player throughout the match. I am aware that you have declined playing with our most prominent Chess-players, except at odds of pawn and move. Allow me in reply to express the opinion that the odds of pawn and move is a doubtful advantage, whilst it invariably and necessarily results in a kind of mongrel game, never advancing the cause of Chess and rarely proving interesting to the great majority of Amateurs.

  If your high and justly acquired reputation as a Chess-player makes it a matter of necessity on your part never to meet an adversary without imposing the condition of receiving odds, I beg leave to suggest an advantage, which without marring the beauties of our noble game, may still prove acceptable to you, viz:

  I shall receive as many games out of the match as in your opinion would make the chances of winning the match perfectly even, or yield your opponent an advantage equal to the pawn and move.

  In sincere hope that you will accept the invitation and favor me with a reply, I remain

  Very respectfully yours,

  Louis Paulsen

  Soon thereafter Morphy received the following letter from Harrisse pertaining to the above:

  51 Exchange Place, Oct. 6, 1860

  Paul Morphy, Esq. Dear Sir,

  At the request of Mr. Paulsen, I tried to see you twice on Friday and Wednesday last, at your residence, and not being able to find you left with the clerk of the Hotel a letter from Mr. Paulsen to be handed to you.

  The object of this note is to ascertain whether the above communication duly came into your hands.

  In the hope of a reply, I remain, Dear Sir,

  Your Admirer,

  Henry Harrisse

  Morphy replied to Harrisse as follows:

  New York, Oct. 6th, 1860

  H. Harrisse, Esq.

  I have received Paulsen’s letter, and am quite astonished that he should ask me to play a match with him on even terms, after my repeated declarations that I had not come North to play chess, and would only encounter him, if at all, at odds, and in an occasional game or two at the club. I am getting heartily tired of the subject, and would request you, should you see him before I do (I went to the club yesterday but did not meet him there) to inform him of the resolution I have taken. Regretting that I was not at the Fifth Avenue Hotel when you called, I remain, Truly yours,

  Paul Morphy

  As it happened, Morphy and Paulsen never encountered each other during this time (nor ever again), although both visited the New York chess clubs several times, each playing with others. Undoubtedly, D. W.Fiske, Morphy’s co-editor at the Chess Monthly, was expressing Morphy’s thoughts about Paulsen and chess in the following excerpt from an article in the New York Saturday Press of October 20, 1860. Paulsen probably read it before leaving New York.

  The Reasons for the declension of Mr. Morphy to play a match on even terms with Mr. Paulsen are, as we think, simply these:

  1. Mr. Morphy did not come North for the purpose of playing Chess, much less Chess-matches, and has given but a fraction of his time while here to the game in any shape.

  2. In a series of games, including an important match, played in 1857, Mr. Paulsen succeeded in securing only one game in twelve, or if we count the blindfold games, only one in fourteen of the contested parties. It seems eminently proper, and Chess-like, therefore that Mr. Paulsen, if a match be played, should be the last person to request that it be an even one.

  3. Mr. Morphy has again and again declared—a declaration which, as the acknowledged champion of two continents, he had a perfect right to make—that he would play no more even matches without having been first conquered at odds. If an exception were to be made to this rule, it certainly would not be right to make it in favor of one who has already been proven to be so greatly the inferior of the champion.

  4. It has not been said by Mr. Morphy, but it is the general feeling among those who have seen Mr. Paulsen play, even recently[,] that the fatigue of contending in a set match against that gentleman would be such that few persons would willingly undergo it. It is certainly to be regretted that so fine a player should be obliged to evolve his combinations so slowly. We say this in no spirit of censure.

  5. Mr. Morphy has said that he would gladly consent to play a few off-hand games with Mr. Paulsen, at the odds of Pawn and Move, an offer which we think all candid persons would have advised the justly distinguished Western player to accept, if his desire to meet Mr. Morphy be indeed based upon a wish to properly advance the interests of the game.

  At every stage of Mr. Morphy’s brilliant Chess-career, he has distinctly enunciated the fact, in words of manly utterance which are still ringing in our ears, that his life was not to be the life of a professional Chess-player. He has said that he looked upon the game merely as a highly intellectual pastime, and that the larger portion of his future years would be devoted to graver studies and more serious avocations. It seems to us that, at every step, he displays, steadily but gentlemanly, the consistency of his character in this respect. For, while he is proud of the honors he has received, and the honorable fame which he has acquired, even in the arena of a simple amusement, he still shows himself resolved to make that amusement occupy its proper place in the development of his life. Few persons, at his age, after having achieved such excellence and so great renown as a Chess player, could have brought themselves to form this resolution, and to firmly execute it.

  Morphy stayed on in New York a few weeks into October, and he and Paulsen left the city a day apart. Paulsen sailed for Germany via England on October 25, 1860, and Morphy returned to New Orleans. During his last days in New York, Morphy met J. A. Leonard and Otto Michaelis, offering both the Queen’s Rook. The New Orleans Times-Democrat of December 22,
1889, published a long letter from Michaelis describing his experience with Morphy, drawing some comparisons between Morphy and Steinitz, and giving one of the games they played together.

  With the close of the year 1860, the December issue of the Chess Monthly published a “Card” in which Daniel W. Fiske stated that he was withdrawing as editor of the magazine. Fiske also added:

  I am requested by Mr. Morphy to announce at the same time the withdrawal of his name from the title page. This will scarcely change his position towards the readers of the magazine, for he assures me that his best games, accompanied by his own notes and distinguished by his initials, will still be published in the Chess Monthly.

  However, the prospects for the coming year were none too good for the Chess Monthly, nor Morphy. As for the 1861 Chess Congress, it simply never came into being. As Wilkes’ Spirit of the Times of June 29, 1861, states:

  We do not see any prospects for the next Chess Congress to meet in Philadelphia in Fall, as previously announced. Should it be a fact, however, we still believe that Mr. Morphy would attend its meetings; and in that case, we should, without doubt, have also the presence of Herr Kilisch.

  On July 27, 1861, an article in the same newspaper attempted to explain the sudden diminishment of interest in chess in the United States:

  It is very easy to account for the aspect of things to which we have alluded at home. The Chess-mania which seized upon the whole nation when Morphy’s brilliant star first rose on the horizon, was violent and exaggerated; and as his star rushed up into the zenith of its world-wide renown, and then with equal rapidity withdrew itself from the public gaze in the obscurity of private life, from which there seems small prospect of its reappearance, the fever died away with it, and it is not to be wondered at that Chess Clubs and Chess Columns, that owed their existence to the excitement of the day, should dwindle away and disappear. Added to this sufficient cause, comes the Southern rebellion, and by common consent, all other interests sink into subservience in the one grand idea of maintaining the Government in its deadly struggle against anarchy and treason.

  The times were certainly not propitious for Morphy to embark on his professional life as a lawyer. The law was probably very little on his mind, what with his inner turmoil, related as it undoubtedly was to the political upheaval the country was experiencing. Louisiana had already aligned itself against the Union, and yet darker clouds were on the horizon.

  CHAPTER 20

  Kolisch, Secession, and Cuba

  Morphy’s withdrawal from chess activity, together with Fiske’s resignation from the Chess Monthly, resulted in a great loss of interest in the game in this country. Both had made a large contribution to American chess, and the game had brought them into close collaboration. But now they were to be driven apart by tragic events, to meet but once again after the Civil War.

  In the month of December 1860, South Carolina led a disastrous parade of eleven states from the Union by voting an ordinance of secession on December 20, 1860, although the fall of Fort Sumter was yet four months in the future. Louisiana followed, the sixth state to join the seceders, on January 26, 1861.

  But these dark rumblings hardly affected the chess scene abroad, where a new chess star was rising, magnitude yet unknown. Earlier, in July 1859, the Chess Monthly had noted that “a new player, Mr. Kolisch of Vienna, has just made his appearance at Paris. Of four games with Harrwitz he had won two, lost one and drew one [Harrwitz then got ‘sick’].” With Rivière his score stood Rivière five, Kolisch five; and he was invited to London, where he was equally successful. So successful was he that he thirsted to challenge Morphy and found a backer in Baron Rothschild. The Illustrated London News of March 16, 1861, stated, “We believe it is perfectly true that a wealthy foreign nobleman has offered to back Mr. Kolisch in a match against the American player Morphy for £500 a side, and that a challenge has been duly forwarded to the latter.”

  On April 13, 1861, the following announcement and correspondence appeared in the New York Wilkes’ Spirit of the Times, addressed to its chess editor, N. Marache:

  MATCH FOR $2500 A SIDE!!

  A probability of Morphy being challenged by Kolisch

  363 Broadway, New York, April 1

  Mr. N. Marache:—Dear Sir: I take the liberty to consult you in reference to a communication just received from London—the object of which is to ascertain whether or not Paul Morphy would accept a challenge from Herr Kolisch, for a match at Chess, £500 a side. Please ascertain if Mr. Morphy would accept, leaving the arrangements as to time and place for further consideration. I sail myself for England on Saturday, and you would oblige me very much by giving your opinion.

  Allow me, then, to call your attention to an extract of a letter, which I received from my brother in London, dated March 16.

  Yours respectfully, Edwin Mayall

  “. . . Could you inquire for me whether Morphy, the great chess player, would be likely to accept a challenge from Herr Kolisch, to play a match for £500 (five hundred pounds) a side; the winner of the first 11 (eleven) games to be declared the victor, and entitled to the stakes; and whether Mr. Morphy would come out here on being challenged? If not, would he play if Mr. Kolisch went to New York?

  “It is said here that Mr. Morphy would neither come here to play the match, nor play if Kolisch went to New York. Nothing certain is known as to this point. If you could make inquiry either at the New York Chess Club, or ascertain from a responsible person, it would save a great deal of unnecessary correspondence.

  “The question is: Would Mr. Morphy be likely to accept the challenge?

  “Yours truly John Mayall”

  P.S.—Mr. Marache, if you will kindly write to Mr. Morphy for me, and send his reply, addressed as follows, I shall be under a deep obligation to you.

  Edwin Mayall, 224 Regent Street, London

  Office of Wilkes’ Spirit of the Times

  New York, April 4, 1861

  Mr. E. Mayall:—Dear Sir: I will be most happy to fulfill your wishes, and will immediately write to Mr. Morphy concerning the matter referred to in your note. Whatever information I may receive as to the contemplated match, I will transmit to you at the earliest convenience.

  Yours truly, N. Marache.

  On June 8, 1861, Wilkes’ Spirit of the Times published the following letter from Morphy. It had been delayed, as Marache said, “Owing to both irregularities of the mails [Louisiana had voted itself out of the Union] and our ignorance of Mr. Morphy’s address direct, his letter only reached us in time for this week’s issue.”

  New Orleans, May 5, 1861

  N. Marache, Esq.:—Dear Sir: Your letter has come to hand, together with the accompanying paper. Both would have reached me much sooner, if addressed “Care of Sybrandt & Co.,” but of that you were probably not aware. With regard to the object of your communication, my answer may be readily anticipated.It is now nearly three years since I visited Europe, and during my trans-Atlantic sojourn I studiously availed myself of every opportunity to encounter the leading European amateurs. Had I then been afforded the pleasure of meeting Mr. Kolisch, I would cheerfully have accepted the proffered contest. Having now, however, returned to my home, and my attention being turned to more serious matters, I cannot be expected, much as I should be gratified to play with Mr. Kolish, to forsake everything for the purpose of contesting a match with that gentleman. Especially is this impossible at the present time, as a moment’s consideration will satisfy you [secession, of course].

  All I can promise (and I wish it to be understood as a special exception to the rule I have adopted, of playing no matches in future) is so to arrange my time, whenever I may again visit the Old World, as to devote a couple of weeks, or more if necessary, to the contemplated match. I must state, in this connection, that I positively decline playing for any stake whatever. The non-acceptance of this clause by Mr. Kolisch will be fatal to the match. In my contests with Messrs. Anderssen and Mongredien, as in nearly all my matches in Europe and Americ
a, no stakes whatever were pending. In the cases of Messrs. Lowenthal and Harrwitz, I was prevailed upon by friends to depart from the rule I have prescribed to myself, under the belief that the course pursued was best calculated to promote the immediate commencement of the play. With regard to the contemplated match with Mr. Staunton, the facts are well known to you. Stakes were offered by the New Orleans Chess Club, and the amount subscribed for by the members, without any participation of mine in the premises. To my mind, one of the supreme excellences of Chess, and, to me, the chief source of its attractiveness, is the fact that, being purely intellectual, it exercises over the mind of its votaries a fascination which it can never be necessary to enhance by allurements foreign to its spirit.

  A quiet, friendly match attended with no publicity, would afford me much pleasure, as I am sure it would to Mr. Kolisch. I shall with pleasure engage in a contest of that description whenever I may again have the good fortune to cross the ocean. Believe me, dear Sir

  Yours truly, Paul Morphy

  And so Morphy’s letter foreclosed any possibility of a match taking place, at least at that time, although his condition: “I positively decline playing for any stake whatever” might also have doomed the encounter.In any case, it would seem that Kolisch was not in Morphy’s class, as evidenced later that year in the former’s trials against Paulsen and Anderssen—he lost to both by one game.

  Kolisch’s match with Anderssen in July is of special significance, for this match ushered in the present method of time control. In Le Sport (later reprinted in Wilkes’ Spirit of the Times, August 31, 1861), St. Amant describes this momentous step forward in chess play:

  What particularly pleased us in this match was an innovation, a real progress, without which it is no longer possible to undertake a serious struggle. This innovation, which we have always advocated in the Palamède, and still more recently in Le Sport, consists in fixing a maximum of time for the moves; for it is necessary that a game should not be interminable, and that the conditions should be equal for both parties, which they were not when one of the players was allowed, by intentional slowness, to weary out the patience and facilities of his antagonist. As long ago as 1836 (see Palamède, t.l., p. 189), we ourselves were authorized to propose to the English, in the name of Deschapelles (our illustrious and regretted master), on the occasion of his challenge, to establish a measure of time. The practical means of execution selected was the hourglass of old Saturn, which he borrowed from the mythological deity to recommend it for adoption by our insular neighbors, who take for their device, ‘Time is money.’ A quarter of a century has elapsed before our idea has prevailed, simple and excellent as it is. The London Chess Club has now adopted the emblem of the fabled god, and we found Kolisch and Anderssen separated by two gigantic clypsedras, or rather sandglasses, each made to measure the space of two hours.