IRLchess

Prospecting for chess reportage one occasionally finds a gold nugget in an unlikely place, though there might have been a certain logic in going there. Recently I found one such little treasure in the Saturday 4th February 1905 edition of the “Kilkenny Journal” (or “Kilkenny Journal, and Leinster Commercial and Literary Advertiser”, to give its full title).

James Mason was one of the most significant chess players in the final quarter of the 19th Century. Although his origins are shrouded in mystery, it is widely believed that he was born in Kilkenny before emigrating to the United States, where he found fame over the chess-board. Having done so, he then returned to the Old World, residing in England and playing in many of the major European tournaments. In this latter period he paid a number of visits to Ireland – these included playing in the 3rd Irish Chess Association Congress in Dublin (1889) and the North of Ireland Chess Congress in Belfast (1892).

Mason also had a residency at Morphy’s Divan in Dublin during the summer of 1888, which included playing a short match with Porterfield Rynd, generally recognised as the Irish Chess Champion from 1865 to 1886, and again from 1892 to 1913.

Porterfield Rynd edited a chess column in the (Dublin) Evening Herald (to be precise, the Saturday Herald) for about 20 years, and the item I discovered in the Kilkenny Journal contained a verbatim repetition of one that presumably had previously appeared in Rynd’s column. The strange thing is that searching for the Herald original in the online British Newspaper Archive and Irish Newspaper Archives drew a blank. The explanation for this seems to be that both online sources for the relevant date are a late edition of the Saturday Herald (“Last Extra Football” is the legend above the masthead on page 1) and though Rynd’s chess column had appeared in an earlier edition that day, it was later excluded to give space for the extra football. This replacement may have occurred on other occasions and possibly some more of Rynd’s chess columns did not find their way into bound archives and subsequently modern online sources.

Anyway, here is the “gold nugget”: Porterfield Rynd’s obituary, or perhaps it might be more accurately described as a personal memoir, of James Mason.
[Source: Kilkenny Journal, Saturday, Saturday 4 February 1905, page 4]

A GREAT CHESS PLAYER.
CAREER OF A KILKENNY MAN.

The following interesting sketch appeared in the Herald of Saturday night last :- “The career of a great Irish chess-player has ended. James Mason, native of Kilkenny, is no more. Many in Ireland have profited by his “object-lessons” in chess, those contained in the books entitled “The Principles of Chess” and “The Art of Chess.” As it was our privilege to meet Mason in literary and other work done for the Liberty and Property Defence League, we were the means of inducing Mason to visit Dublin. A little match was the outcome resulting in a draw with the score Mason, 2; Ourselves, 2; and 2 drawn.

[Rynd’s recollection appears to be slightly faulty here, in that the match score was Mason 2 wins, Rynd 2 wins and just one draw. A sixth game had been scheduled but Rynd’s professional commitments as a barrister meant that the game could not be fitted in before Mason travelled to Bradford, England for an international tournament there. It is possible that in these circumstances Rynd considered the sixth game to have been deemed drawn.]

It was during that period that his chess-works were conceived on lines thrashed out in Dublin. One important item has been neglected, however – that was to allow each diagram to tell its own case, as it were, before investigation; in other words, to answer the first question always asked: “Whose move is it?” By stating at the top or bottom of the diagram whether White or Black has to play first. If judged by the enormous sale his books obtained, they must have done an immense good in diffusing the love of chess, and thus leading to mental developments.

As a player Mason stands among the greatest; and there is no knowing what he might have done but for a little weakness to which unfortunately his early life in America but made him a prey. When nothing more than a poor street vendor, his potential faculty for chess was accidentally discovered by kindly yet imprudent patrons. The influence upon the lad was irresistible. It made him at the same time a chessist and a precocious cocktailer. It was sad. He sometimes strove might and main against it; but was beaten. He always felt that in the long run be would be better emancipated; and yet whenever he made the attempt he was speedily shown that be could not – even in Chess do so well “without” as “with.” He could not get over the irritative collapse. In tournaments and matches his best bits were under moderate stimulation. Unfortunately success, or approaching success, seemed to require such celebration as generally defeated itself gloriously. Thus the sceptre of Chess was never gained by Mason, though he often proved his capacity for it. It is well known that all the great Masters feared Mason more than any other man. Some of them could never win a game on him, He was exceedingly honest and modest and frank to men of mind. As to his life principles, may we tell of a little occurrence which happened a few years ago in connection with one of Simpson’s handicaps – at the Strand of course — when Mason’s exclusion for disorder was got over by our intervention on his behalf, quite unknown to him at the time?

Old Bird was pretending to be sorry that Mason was excluded, and yet he was implying that his admission would mean troubles and expense — even to himself, Bird, such as getting Mason home in a cab, etc. We came forward naively to inquire: “If the gentleman referred to was necessarily subject to fits?” “Yes,” at once answered Bird, “Tight fits.” When we had finished laughing with the crowd, we went downstairs to the manager and guaranteed responsibility for Mason’s good conduct and paid his entrance fee of half a sovereign. Some three weeks later (Mason having won the handicap) we were surprised to find that Mason had made the manager tell him who paid the entrance fee, and that Mason in a very nice letter conveyed his appreciation, and sent us on the no longer required guarantees and also the half sovereign. That was Mason; and that also was Bird.”

Now we move on to the Simpson’s tournament that Mason won, after Rynd’s and Bird’s help.

The Simpson’s Divan Handicap Tournament, London 1884

In its June 1884 issue (Volume V pages 289-291) the Chess Monthly reported on the tournament’s birth:

As far as we can recollect, this is the first important contest which has been arranged without the customary tedious preliminary negotiations. As soon as the idea was broached, a few gentlemen were asked if they were inclined to play and on their replying in the affirmative a few necessary rules were drawn up; a committee elected; the proprietors of the Divan promised £5 towards the prizes, and the preliminaries were thus settled. Some of the competitors suggested that, in order to shorten the contest during the present season, the players should be divided into two sections, this was agreed to, and the drawing by lot for the sections were preformed by Messrs. Blackburne, Hoffer, and Walton. The handicapping also met with no objection whatsoever.

The entrance fee was 10 shillings and sixpence. So, Rynd’s recollection on the fee was out by sixpence – the fee equalled half a guinea rather than half a sovereign which amounted to 10 shillings only. For those unfamiliar with Old Money, the modern equivalent of a guinea is one pound and 5 pence, and a sovereign exactly one pound. Four prizes were on offer.

Play was to commence on Wednesday 21st May 1884. The Conditions of Play included a time limit of 20 moves per hour, if required by either player, and not less than two games per week to be played by each competitor. All games were to be played at Simpson’s Divan, with two sessions available (1pm to 6pm and 7pm to 11pm).

The players were divided into two sections of ten each, with the winner of each section to play for the first and second prizes, and the second placers for the third and fourth prizes. The play-offs to be for the best of three games.

That issue and the following one of July 1884 (at pages 322-323) reported on the progress of the preliminary sections. The August edition (the final one of Volume 5) at page 357 carried the news as to the winners of the two sections and the progress of the final match stage:

Mr. Guest is first in Section A, and Mr. Mason is first in Section B. According to the conditions, the best out of three games  to decide the order of merit. Mr. Mason lost the first game, the others will be played as soon as Mr. Guest returns from the “Counties” meeting. Messrs. Blackburne and Gunsberg’s score is equal; but Mr. Blackburne having resigned to Gunsberg the latter is second in Section A and Mr. Donisthorpe second in Section B . Both gentlemen agreed to a division of the third and fourth prizes.

It is apparent that already the tournament had lasted longer than the three weeks of Rynd’s recollection. Perhaps Mason had returned the entry fee once he was certain of at least the second prize.

The Chess Monthly for September 1884 (Volume VI at pages 2-3) detailed the conclusion of the first Simpson’s Divan Handicap Tournament:

The following are the winners:

First Prize, £8 8s James Mason
Second Prize, £5 5s Antony Guest
Third Prize and Fourth Prize (£3 3s and £2 2s) Tie and division between Wordsworth Donisthorpe and Isidor Gunsberg

Although this contest has been arranged to tide over a part of the dead season, it created, nevertheless, a great deal of interest, and it is contemplated beginning the winter season with another Handicap on a larger scale. The individual merits of some of the competitors have been ascertained and some of them have shown considerable skill and tenacity. Notably so Messrs. Mundell and Hirsch. Messrs. Donisthorpe and Guest were well-known as dangerous opponents, at the odds of Pawn and move., before the contest. Mr. Blackburne resigned to Mr. Gunsberg, owing to his desire to go out of town for the sake of his health, and Mr. Mason beat Guest in the tie for first and second prizes, two games to one. The following is the final score:

Simpson’s Divan Handicap 1884

Leopold Hoffer, the joint-editor of Chess Monthly, had been appointed by the organising committee to be the umpire for the tournament. He was therefore in the perfect position to report on the event for his magazine. The British Chess Magazine had not been quite so fortunate.

In its August-September issue – page 19 of Volume IV (1884), the BCM had reported that Guest had beaten Mason in the play-off for the first prize. In the following October issue, this correction appeared:

I can assure you readers that I have had a lively time of it over my unfortunate blunder anent the Divan Tourney. My friend of Purssell’s was the first to give me the pleasing intelligence of my error. “Seen Mason lately?” was his greeting as he met me in the Strand, “I know he’s looking for you.” “No!” was my response, “I haven’t seem him for some time.” “Ah I thought not! or you wouldn’t be smiling so,” and a very grim smile lightened (or darkened) my friend’s face. “Smiling! why shouldn’t I smile when I see him?” “Why wouldn’t you smile? Why, didn’t he win the first prize in the Divan tournament and haven’t you put him down as being defeated by Guest and only winning the second? Smile! why he’s going to lynch you!” However Mr. Mason was made of other stuff and bears no malice for my blunder, which after all was not so much mine as that of a person who assured me that he was present when Mr. Guest actually won the deciding game. In this he was mistaken and I fell into error by following his statement. As a matter of fact Mr. Mason defeated Mr. Guest after very fine play and therefore comes out the winner of the first prize … Mr. Mason is to be congratulated on his victory which will add even to his great reputation. Mr. Guest too, though just missing first place, has proved himself to be little beneath the strongest of our first class.

Three of Mason’s games appeared in the Chess Monthly, and we present them below with selected annotations therefrom.

Rudolf Loman – James Mason
Simpson’s Divan Handicap Section B, London 1884
White received the odds of Pawn and Move: Remove Black’s f-pawn

1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6 3.Nc3 e6 4.Bg5 Be7 5.e5 Nfd7 6.Bxe7 Qxe7 7.exd6 cxd6 8.Qh5+ g6 9.Qh6 Nf6 10.Bd3 Rf8 11.Nf3 Na6 12.0–0–0 Bd7 13.Rhe1 Nc7 14.h3 0–0–0 15.Nd2 Kb8 16.Nb3 Rc8 17.Qd2 Bc6 18.Be4 Bxe4 19.Nxe4 Nxe4 20.Rxe4 Rf5 21.Rde1 Rb5 22.Kb1 Qd7 23.c4 Rb6 24.c5 Rc6 25.cxd6 Qxd6 26.Qe2 Qd5 27.g3 b6 28.Re5 Qd7

29.a4
The object of this move is not quite apparent, unless it is that White underrated the strength of Black’s position. This advanced Pawn forms a handy peg to hang on Mr. Mason’s pretty final combination.
29…a5 30.Qd3 Qd6 31.Qe4 Rc4 32.Rc1 Qb4!
RR Not 32…Rxa4 because after 33.Rc6! Qb4 34.Qc2! the threat of Rexe6 would leave Black in a lot of trouble.
33.Rxc4 Qxc4 34.Nd2 Qxa4 35.Qd3?

35…Qd1+! 36.Ka2 Nd5! 37.Ka3
A blunder, of course, but White’s game is lost anyhow.
37…Qa1+ 38.Kb3 a4 checkmate 0–1
[Source: Chess Monthly Volume V (July 1884) pages 333-334]
[Click to replay the game]

Antony Guest – James Mason
Simpson’s Divan Handicap Play-off (Game 2), London 1884
White received the odds of Pawn and Move: Remove Black’s f-pawn

1.Nf3 Nf6 2.d4 d6 3.e3 Bg4 4.Bd3 Nc6 5.c4 e5 6.d5 Nb8
RR 6…e4 would have been objectively better but after 7.Bxe4 Nxe4 8.dxc6 bxc6 the resulting position would provide less opportunity for Mason, already one game down, to win the game and match.
7.Nc3 Nbd7 8.h3 Bxf3 9.Qxf3 Nc5 10.Bc2 Be7 11.h4 0–0 12.b4

12…Ncd7
RR Again here the obvious 12…Nfe4 would be best in normal circumstances but after 13.Qh5 g6 14.Qh6 Nxc3 (or 14…Nxf2) Guest could have claimed a draw with 15.Bxg6 hxg6 16.Qxg6+ and a perpetual check.
13.h5 Nb6 14.g4 Nfxd5 15.Qe4 Nf6 16.Qd3 d5 17.cxd5 Bxb4 18.Bd2 Bxc3 19.Bxc3 e4

20.Qf1
RR A strange move. The straightforward 20.Qd4 would have been much better.
20…Nfxd5 21.0–0–0 Qe7 22.Bb3 Qc5 23.Qe1 a5 24.a4 Rad8 25.Kb2 Nc4+ 26.Kb1 b5 27.Bxc4 bxc4 28.Bd4 Qa3

29.Qxa5
Abandoning her consort to his fate. White had, however, no saving move; if 29.Rd2 then 29…Rb8+ 30.Rb2 c3
29…Rb8+ 30.Kc2 Rxf2+
Hastily played: Black mates in two moves with 30…Qa2+ 31.Kc1 (or 31.Bb2 Qxb2#) 31…Rb1# mates.
31.Rd2 Qd3+
RR As the prosaic 31…Qb3+ also works, perhaps Mason chose this flashy finish for the onlookers instead of the annotator’s mate in two.
32.Kc1 Rb1 checkmate 0–1
[Source: Chess Monthly Volume VI (October 1884) page 42]
[Click to replay the game]

Antony Guest BCM July 1909 Vol XXIX p281

Antony Guest – James Mason
Simpson’s Divan Handicap Play-off (Game 3), London 1884
White received the odds of Pawn and Move: Remove Black’s f-pawn

1.e4 d6 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.h3 Nf6 4.Nc3 e6 5.d4 Be7 6.Bc4 d5 7.Bd3 Bb4 8.Bg5 h6 9.Bxf6 Qxf6 10.0–0 Bxc3 11.bxc3 0–0 12.e5 Qf7 13.Nh4 Ne7 14.Qg4 Bd7

15.Ng6 Nxg6 16.Qxg6 Qxg6 17.Bxg6 Bb5 18.Bd3 Bxd3 19.cxd3 Rac8 20.Rac1 c5 21.dxc5 Rxc5 22.d4 Rc4 23.Rb1 b6 24.Rb3 Rfc8 25.Ra3 R8c7 26.Rc1

26…Kf7
RR Mason could have played 26…Rxd4 27.cxd4 (The counterstroke 27.Rxa7 is also possible) 27…Rxc1+ 28.Kh2 Rc7 – after his 30th move a similar position arose.
27.Kf1 Kg6 28.Ke1 Rxd4 29.cxd4
RR 29.Rxa7 does not work here because of 29…Re4+
29…Rxc1+
If White had played 28.Ke2 instead of 28.Ke1 he would not have lost a Pawn immediately. As it is, however, Black takes the Rook checking and has time to defend his own Pawn.
30.Kd2 Rc7 31.f4 Kf5 32.Ke3 h5 33.g3 g5 34.fxg5 Kxg5 35.Kf3 Kf5 36.g4+ hxg4+ 37.hxg4+ Kg5 38.Kg3 Rf7
Black’s game is now practically won, and the remainder only a matter of time. White’s King is shut out from the defence, and Black forces the game by the simple process of advancing his Pawns.

39.Rd3 Rf4 40.a3 Rxg4+ 41.Kf3 Rh4 42.Kg3 Rf4
and after a few more moves, White resigned. 0–1
[Source: Chess Monthly Volume VI (September 1884) pages 20-21]
[Click to replay the game]