The new plays of the month are About Town, by Mr. Bertie Vyse, at the Court; Time's Triumph, by Mr. Byron, at the Charing Cross; and the New Magdalen, by Mr. Wilkie Collins, at the Olympic. About Town is a play not easy to criticise, for the simple reason that one forgets all about it the day after one has seen it. It has no particular faults, and no particular merits. While we listen to it with a certain amount of pleasure, we see the curtain fall on one act, without concerning ourselves as to what will happen in the next. In the lighter portions of About Town, Mr. Bertie Vyse is an evident disciple of Mr. Robertson, and his melodrama reminds us strongly of that peculiar mixture of thunder and lightning which Mr. Arthur a'Beckett used to furnish the public with in the pages of the Tomahawk and the Britannia Magazine, both now, alas! no more. But About Town shows that Mr. Edgar Bruce is a good actor, and that Miss Litton is not only a very charming actress, but also a very tantalising one, as she will persist in assuming parts that are not worthy of her abilities. She is unfair to her own audience at the Court, for she has no scruple in going to distant Greenwich and Marylebone to delight the dingy playgoers of those districts, whilst she contents herself with the most humble of characters in Sloane Square. Equally marked is her managerial taste, for the scenery and general decorations in About Town are perfect in their way. Mr. Byron's Time's Triumph is the very reverse of About Town, being full of merits, and full of faults. No apathetic indifference will be the state of the critic listening to Time's Triumph. On the contrary, he will be a prey alternately to delight and irritation; delight at certain passages, which are not to be surpassed in any play that Mr. Byron has written; irritation at the utter and apparently wilful disregard of all probabilities of construction, and the wild excess to which the author carries his love of repartee. The climax of absurdity is arrived at in Act 3, when all the characters assemble, for no reason whatever, in the lodgings of the hero, bring chairs to the front, and sitting in order, after the fashion of the Christy Minstrels, give and take sarcasm and retort, whilst the story is held in abeyance. Clever as it is, altogether charming as it is, Time's Triumph cannot be called a play; but what it can be called we are puzzled to say, and must leave to the ingenuity of the reader, whom we recommend to go and see it, if he has not done so already. He will learn one truth, that the actors of old, who toiled wearily through the provinces before venturing themselves on the London stage, were wiser than many of those of to-day who think to achieve dramatic excellence in a week. Let the London stage look to its laurels, for it is evident that a company of strolling players, accustomed to work together, acquire that harmony in representation which atones for many individual defects. One instance of this we have already had, when Mdlle. Beatrice and her followers astonished London by their close and admirable performance of Nos Intimes, at the Olympic; and in Mr. Younge's band, now acting in Time's Triumph, there is hardly one indifferent performer. Those who were known to London before, as Miss Irwin, and Messrs. Robson, Beveridge and Temple come back improved, and those that are strangers surprise us in being strangers. Mr. Younge and Miss Alice Ingram have nothing to learn, and the lady has more capacity for high comedy than many an actress who is at present considered adequate in London. Mr. Allen Beaumont, though his histrionic ability is less marked, speaks his words with an accentuation that proves an education of the best sort, and indeed all the company are well-looking, well mannered and well dressed. Perhaps the most promising of them all is Mr. Grahame, who as a representative of the young men, not only of the new but of the old drama, will make a good name, so long as he works hard, and is not over bold.

Mr. Wilkie Collins' new play has been so elaborately criticised, and so generally, and as we think justly, condemned, that it becomes unnecessary for us to dwell at any length upon its features. But there are many of the usual inconsistencies both in his admirers and detractors, and we will state, as briefly as possible, where we agree and disagree with either side. We do not agree with those who urge that sinners of the type of the New Magdalen should not be written about. Mr. Collins' purpose was a noble one, for society is very hard on these sinners, and in fact gives more scorn, and shows more hostility to the woman who repents of her sin than to her who remains and glories in it. And if the play is objectionable, so is the novel, which has appeared for months past in a magazine without comment. But Mr. Collins has ruined his cause, and played into the hands of the enemy by the extraordinary manner in which he has conducted his case. What is the value of a case that is not stated fairly? It is not fair to the repentant sinner he wishes to delineate to make her strive to cancel one crime by committing another; it is not fair to society to make the virtuous woman, who is robbed of her name and existence by the sinner, a cold-blooded, selfish and disagreeable person. It is unjust, it is illogical, and what is perhaps worse in the eyes of Mr. Collins, it is not artistic. Again, it is contested even by those who condemn the moral of the author, that the play is at least well constructed. We demur to that. Surely it is not good construction when an author, instead of allowing his men and women to develope their characters to the audience by the share which they take in the story, puts long and heavy speeches into their mouths on their first entrance, detailing their history, habits, manners and ideas. Is it good construction when Julian Grey pours into the ears of such a woman as Mercy Merrick his notions on the wrongs of agricultural labourers; and is it good construction when the woman flies within five minutes from the arms of one lover into those of another, and when the God-like curate, who would at least have been consistent in keeping up his character of comforter and brother, shows his feet of clay by becoming a mere puling lover. Such are a few of the incongruities, taken at random, from a play which will unfortunately have the opposite effect to that intended by the author. Miss Ada Cavendish and Miss Ernstone both act very well, and

Mr. Archer, who made a perfect picture of the polished gambler in Money, at the Prince of Wales', shows his versatility by giving a creditable representation of the young parson.

Two new theatres are added to the long list of London playhouses this month. Awkwardly enough both bear the name of Alexandra, one being near Regents Park, the other at the new Palace at Muswell Hill. As the latter boasts that it has a stage as large as that of Drury Lane, the theatres might be conveniently distinguished as the Greater and Lesser Alexandra.

ANSWERS TO CORRESPONDENTS.

We particularly request all our correspondents to address their letters to the Editor, 67 Barbican, E. C., and not to any one who is, or who is supposed to be, connected with the Papers.

NOTICE.

The present is the Second Number of Volume VI., and Subscriptions should be forwarded to W. W. MORGAN, 67 Barbican, London. A few copies of the earlier Volumes can still be had, at 7s per Volume, and we recommend intending purchasers to make early application, as, in consequence of the great expense attending the reproduction of the numbers out of print, it is in contemplation to double the charge for those that have been published more than 12 months.

White.

GIUOCO PIANO.

J. H. ZUKERTORT.
IP to K 4

2 Kt to KB 3
3 B to Q B 4
4 P to QB 3
5 P to Q Kt 4
6 P to Q R 4
7 P to Q 3

Black.
Dr. BALLARD.
I P to K 4
2 Kt to Q B3
3 B to Q B 4
4 P to Q 3
5 B to Q Kt 3
6 P to QR 3
7 P to KR 3
8 Kt to K B3
9 Q to K 2
10 B to Q 2 (b)
II P takes Kt
12 P to Q Kt 4
13 P takes P

14 Castles K side
15 K to R 2
16 P to K Kt 3
17 Kt to Q sq

THE members of the City of London Chess Club are fortunate in possessing a Committee who know how to march with the times. It is no fault of theirs, but greatly to their credit, that notwithstanding "every reason" of a contemporary for believing so, they did not "select" the players for the first consultation match. In such a case, and more especially if as we believe-it was intended for a compliment, the choice of the term "select" should never have been made by one unaccustomed to patronage of any kind, and therefore most unlikely to inflict it upon others. So, accepting our contemporary's "every reason" in their fullest, and even in his own undefined sense, it is clear that he still suffers from an imperfect appreciation of the value of words. We beg him therefore to learn, before he again invokes his trinity of graces, with whose attributes he seems utterly unacquainted, that he satisfies none of them by scattering compliments, the sincerity of which can only be established at the cost of his reputation for good sense. All this is by the way however, for we were about to observe that although the Committee have not selected any of the players, they have since very wisely encouraged and promoted consultation matches, and indeed the entire management of this Club indicates a desire to foster the growing interest of the rising generation in the game. To this end matches and tournaments are frequently organised among the members. In our last number we recorded a blindfold battle at the City Club, in which Mr. Blackburne successfully encountered ten members, and on the 6th ult., Dr. J. H. Zukertort performed another of those marvellous feats of memory and imagination for which he and Mr. Blackburne are so justly famous. Without sight of the board, and simultaneously, Dr. Zukertort conducted ten games against as many players, most of them experienced practitioners, and yielding to five of the number the advantage of the first move. The gentlemen opposed to the blindfold player, were Messrs. Vyse, Lovelock, Manning, Rabbeth, Rudderforth, Gastineau and Coburn, the Rev. A. C. Pearson, Major Martin and Dr. Ballard. When it was close upon midnight only three of the games had been decided, and an adjournment to the following night of meeting was arranged. On that evening the remaining games were concluded, Dr. Zukertort, we understand, winning 7, losing 1, and drawing 2. We give, in the margin, one of the best of the series, with notes by the blindfold player. The performance attracted a large number of members and visitors, whose applause was at times enthusiastic, and was certainly deserved. A consultation match was

8 Kt to QR 3 (a)
9 B to Q R 2
10 Kt to Q B4
II Kt takes B
12 B to K 3
13 P takes P
14 Castles (t)
15 Kt to R 4
16 Q to K B 3
17 P to KR 3
18 Q to Q sq
19 Kt to B 3
20 B to Q 5
21 R takes R
22 Q to Q 2
23 P to QB 4 (e)
24 P takes P
25 K P takes Kt
26 P to Q B5
27 R to Q B sq
28 P to QB 6
29 Q to B 2
30 P to Kt 4
31 K to R 2
32 R to K Kt sq
33 P takes P ch
34 Kt to Q4 ch
35 Q takes P ch
36 Kt takes B (k)

38 B takes Kt
39 R to Kt 2

18 R to QR3 (d) 19 Kt to B 3 20 KR to Q R sq 21 P takes R 22 P to Kt 4 23 P takes P (f) 24 Kt takes B (g) 25 Kt to Q sq 26 B to Kt 4 27 P to K B 4 28 R to B sq

29 K to Kt 3

30 Q to B 3 31 Kt to B 2 (h) 32 P to K5 33 K takes P 34 K to Kt 3 (i) 35 K to Kt 2 36 P takes Kt 37 Kt to K 4 38 P takes Kt 39 K to B sq

40 P to KB 3

40 K to K 2

41 K to Q 3

42 R to K B sq

Resigns.

41 R to Q 2
42 K to Kt 2
43 Q to K 3

(f) It would have been better not to take this 36 Kt to K 6 ch

pawn.

(g) The best move is R to Q Kt sq.

(h) The best move here is to give the Knight for the two advanced Pawns.

BLACK.

37 B to Q 4

38 P to KB 4

38 P takes P

39 R to KL 6 and wins.

18 Kt takes K P

A.

(i) If:

19 Q takes P

35 Kt takes B

35 P takes Kt

36 B to Q4 ch

38 P to K B 4.

36 K takes B

23 P takes Kt

37 Q to Kt 2 ch and wins.

20 Q takes P with the better game.

(e) If :

23 Kt takes P ch

36 K to Kt sq
37 Kt to K 4 (best)

played on the 4th ult. at the City Club, between Messrs. Bird and Walton against Messrs. Potter and Ballard. The game, a very fine one, was won by the first named pair, but not until the "conclusion of the contest" as Land and Water impressively puts it.

A match between the Clubs of Colchester and Chelmsford was played on the 27th May, in which Colchester came off victorious. The full score we give in the margin.

The Recreationist appears this month under a change of management. Mr. J. White of Leeds, is still the Chess editor however, and presents his readers with two pages of good problems, and several games played at the Wakefield Meeting.

We understand that Mr. Bird has challenged Mr. Steinitz to play a match of five or seven games, and that the challenge has been accepted; but, as Mr. Steinitz contemplates attending the Congress of Chess players at Vienna, on the 15th instant, we see little probability of the affair coming off. This is much to be regretted, as Mr. Bird is in good practice at present, and against such an adversary as Steinitz some excellent games might have been looked for.

Can any of our readers inform a correspondent who is the author of the following fragment? It appeared on the outside of the cover of a small book on Chess printed in 1837, without the author's name.

"Arms and the men I sing, who, called to light,
Rush from their rest to wage the mimic fight.
Bedecked with mitre, sceptre, shield and sword,
Types of the puppets on the world's wide board,
On either stage intrigue and craft are seen,
On each the mighty bow to beauty's Queen;
On both the simple Pawns are trodden down,

In cause of might and right, and church and crown;

The snares of guile the feet of peace perplex,

The schemes of Kings are crossed by adverse checks ;
Castles and crosiers form attractive bait,
And all is risked to save or gain-a mate;
True, every chief in Chess supports his brother,
Ebon and silver only spoil each other;
While on the chequered field of sterner labour,
The hand of man is mostly on his neighbour."

The sentiment is cheerful at all events, and moreover we have a huge suspicion that that "spoil" should be in italics. The eighteenth annual meeting of the West Yorkshire Chess Association was held on the 26th May last, at Wakefield. The programme included separate tournaments for first and second class players, and at six o'clock in the evening an adjournment took place to the Great Bull Hotel, where tea was in readiness for between forty and fifty guest. The president (Mr. Tomlinson) expressing his belief that their tea should be accompanied with a toast, gave the health of the Chess players from other towns, which was cordially received and responded to by Mr. Brown, of Sheffield. Before play was resumed, Mr. Watkinson took occasion to direct the attention of the assemblage to the literature of the game, and more particularly to four magazines. "The first was the Westminster Papers, which was the best Chess magazine he had ever seen, and it also devoted space to Whist, Billiards and the Drama, as well as Chess. Then there was the Chess Players Chronicle, a magazine that was well worthy of their support; and there was the Recreationist, and the Huddersfield College Magazine, both of which devoted a portion of their space to Chess. The College Magazine was promoting some interest in the game among the pupils of the College, and as the pupils came from different parts of the Riding, it might do the West Yorkshire Chess Association much good, in the future, amongst different Chess circles."

The International Congress at Vienna is announced to assemble on the 15th inst., and all entries must be made prior to the roth. The entrance fee is 50 florins (Austrian currency), and each player will be required to contest a match of three games with every other competitor-drawn games not counting. The amount of the prizes have not yet been definitively settled, but although not in money, they will be at least of the following values in Austrian currency:-1st prize, 2,000 florins; second prize, 600 florins; 3rd prize, 300 florins; 4th prize, 200 florins. As announced in our last number, all the arrangements for the Congress have been placed in the hands of Herr Kolisch. We have not heard that any of our English players purpose taking part in this tournament, but many amateurs have expressed a desire that Mr. Bird should represent us against the German Paladins of Chess.

The second and third numbers of the Chess Record (Philadelphia, G. Reichelm editor) have come to hand, and the contents of these fulfil the promise of the first. Besides games and problems, and a treatise on the defence when receiving odds, they contain a couple of brilliant articles on "Paul Morphy and Chess," and the commencement of Mr. Ernest Morphy's work, "The Logic of Chess Openings." In the latter-a most important contribution to the literature of the game-the design of the author, is to distinguish Chess strategy under two heads; the first player's theory, in which the student will be put in possession of the first move, with none but the best attacks against every plausible defence; and the second player's theory, wherein the student is recommended the safest tactics against every attack." This design is bold and original, and, in the hands of so fine a player as Mr. Ernest Morphy, cannot fail to be permanently useful to advanced theorists as well as to young scholars. The Chess Record is published monthly, 323 Walnut Street, Philadelphia, and the subscription is one dollar and a quarter per annum for residents in this country: In referring to Mr. Miles's letter on the classification of problems which appeared in our number for May, the editor of the Chess Record

charges Mr. Miles, and by implication ourselves, with a blunder, of which neither are guilty. When writing of second-class problems, Mr. Miles did not assert, nor did we print, that these are problems "in which the attack may be carried on in only one way." So if the editor is "still unable to detect any difference between first and second-class problems," neither Mr. Miles nor ourselves can be held responsible for the calamity.

The Dubuque Chess Journal (O. A. Brownson editor) for May is more than usually interesting. Mr. Carpenter's article on the eight Queens problem is continued., There is an article on the mistakes of great Chess players, by Mr. Taylor, and a portrait and an amusing biography of Mr. Belden, the Chess editor of the Hertford Times. We fancy after all it must be an autobiography, for "none but himself can be his parallel."

The Brooklyn Prospect, a high class weekly paper, has commenced a Chess column, edited by the Brooklyn Chess Club. The games are carefully edited, and the problems are by the best American composers. The New York Clipper, edited by Miron Hazeltine, whose health we deeply regret to learn is impaired, notices the retirement of Mr. Walker from Bell's Life, and adds, "he was the Nestor of our ranks; and our kindest wishes follow him into his retirement, so well earned." The Clipper publishes part of a letter received from Mr. Carpenter, in reply to our contributor "X," whose comments on the classification of problems we published in our April number. We hasten to place Mr. Carpenter's answer before our readers, and in doing so take occasion to apprise our contributor that his anonymity has provoked some comment in America. We are quite certain that the disclosure of his name would greatly add to the weight and importance of his judgment in the United States.

The Canadian Chess Association Congress was held in the Shaftesbury Hall, Toronto, on the 13th of May last. There were twenty entries in the principal tournament, and the first prize, of fifty dollars, was carried off by Mr. Ensor, of Montreal, the second and third falling to Messrs. Jackson and White respectively. We learn from the Chess column in the Toronto Globe that the Congress has been a most successful one, and that the proceedings will be published in a book form as early as possible.

CLASSIFICATION OF PROBLEMS.

To the Editor of the WESTMINSTER PAPERS.

SIR, The interesting articles that have appeared in your columns on the above subject well deserve the serious consideration of all composers, and will, I trust, lead to a discussion productive of good results.

After due reflection it seems to me that the rules suggested by Mr. Carpenter and Mr. Miles apply merely to the mechanical part of a problem; as tests of its quality they are utterly useless, being, in fact, analogous to those which govern the grammatical construction of a poem, but which have nothing to do with its poetical merits. And just as a poem may be great, the "there let him lay" notwithstanding; so a problem defective in its mechanical construction may be great, and far superior to a so-called perfect one. I readily acknowledge that a problem is the better for being perfect in all its parts, but the genius of the composer being shown in his ideas, and not in the moves by which he works those ideas out, it is on them we must base our system of classification should we wish to decide on the real worth of a problem.

It is in this manner that "X" in his last dealt with the question, and in the main I agree with his views. although perhaps I would prefer to call problems embodying his points "highest class" rather than "perfect.

One quality however "X" omitted to mention, which always enhances the merit of a problem, and that is concentration. To the possession of this quality, in a marvellous degree, "J.B.'s" problems owe much of their beauty, and the following position (slightly altered) of the Indian problem by that master will illustrate, by comparison with the ordinary one as given by "X," what I mean by concentration--White: K at B 4, R at Q3, B at K Kt 7, P at K Kt 6; Black: K at K 3, P's at K 2 and Q Kt 5. White to play and mate in three moves. Here the idea is equally well expressed in three instead of four moves, there are four pieces less on the board, and the defeat of the three different defensive moves of the one Black Pawn is more elegant than the defeat of the Pawn and Knight in the other case.-I remain, Sir, yours, &c. J. MENZIES.

MR. CARPENTER'S REPLY TO "X."-From the New York Clipper.

DEAR SIR,-I have read the anonymous communication reprinted (from Westminster Papers) in your column. of 17th May. The writer of that con.munication puts a very difficult problem when he asks for some one to "define exactly what it is that constitutes a 'fine move,' an excellent conception,' a 'beautiful combination.' expressions that are frequently to be met with in the notes to printed games." If all "interested in the subject "gave their opinions as to what this wonderful "it" is, the "solutions received" would be so numerous and so various as to warrant the conclusion that the problem "X" proposes is an unsound one. Beauty and elegance are qualities difficult to grasp, and concerning which opinions do and always will differ. There is no disputing in matters of taste. No Michael Angelo, no Shakspeare, no Mozart, no Bayer was ever made by rules, nor can any rules be devised that shall serve as infallible tests of the degree of fineness or excellence of their works.