Much argument has been built up against Paul Morphy on his non-appearance in the tournament, and one writer has endeavored to prove from it that he was afraid to meet Mr. Staunton. Before leaving London, the latter gentleman a.s.sured his young opponent _that he should not enter the lists, but should confine himself to simple consultation games_. Why Mr. S.

changed his mind, it is not for me to say; although I might argue that Mr.

Staunton sallied forth courageously when he was certain that "Achilles keeps his tent." However, Paul Morphy's first reason for not entering the tournay was that, his main object being to meet Mr. Staunton, and that gentleman having stated his intention of confining himself to a mere consultation game, as in past years, there was no chance of their crossing swords, and, consequently, no use of his spending two or three weeks in a contest which never could be a decisive test of skill. But, when repeated telegrams a.s.sured him that the English champion had decided on becoming a contestant, there were still stronger reasons for his continued declination. These reasons were the consequences of Mr. Staunton's own acts, added to the opinion of nearly every London player, that that gentleman was seeking an opportunity to evade the match. All these occurrences had somewhat shaken Mr. Morphy's faith, and he could not but be suspicious of his antagonist's movements. _He therefore declined positively and finally to enter the tournament, under the belief that, whether he won or lost in that contest, it would be equally to the prejudice of the challenge. Mr. Staunton might say, "I have beaten Morphy; what is the use of further contest?" or "He has beaten me, I am consequently out of play. It would be madness to attempt a set match."_ This, and this only, prevented Paul Morphy from visiting Birmingham at the commencement of the tournament. Had he gone there when requested, every influence would have been brought to bear to induce him to alter his determination, and he merely consulted the interests of the contest he had so much at heart, by keeping out of temptation until the tournament was too far under way to admit of his entering it.

But the meeting of the a.s.sociation afforded an admirable opportunity to obtain from Mr. Staunton the naming of the day on which the match should commence. Part of the proceedings of the anniversary was a public soiree, and Paul Morphy resolved that he would then ask his antagonist, in the face of all present, to fix the date. I had the pleasure of accompanying our hero to Birmingham, and I witnessed the disagreeable _contre temps_ which upset this admirable intention. Crossing the courtyard of the college on the morning of the soiree, we met Lord Lyttelton, Mr. Staunton, Mr. Avery, and, I think, Mr. Wills. Now I do not know whether Mr. Staunton had got wind of what was to occur, but his action certainly frustrated Morphy's plan, and, for the moment, gave him the advantage. In all such rencontres the man who gets the first word has the attack, and Mr.

Staunton instantly availed himself of it. He opened fire by declaring that he was entirely out of play--that he had long been engaged on a great work--that he was under bonds to his publishers accordingly--that he might subject them to a loss of many thousands in playing at the present time, and so forth. But he never stated aught that appeared to intimate the possibility of the match not coming off eventually, his plea being that he required further time, in order to put sufficient matter into the hands of the printers, and to prepare himself subsequently for the contest. It was now Morphy's turn, and the attack changed hands. The question was put: "Mr. Staunton, will you play in October, in November, or December? Choose your own time, but let the arrangement be final." The answer was: "Well, Mr. Morphy, if you will consent to the postponement, I will play you at the beginning of November. I will see my publishers, and let you know the exact date within a few days." The a.s.sociation now looked upon the affair as decided, and Morphy left Birmingham, firmly believing that the match would come off after all.

On the 28th of August, within a few days of the above conversation, the following extraordinary announcement appeared in the _Ill.u.s.trated London News_:

A SPECIMEN OF MR. STAUNTON'S STYLE OF PLAY.

ANTI-BOOK.--As you surmise, "knowing the authority," the slang of the sporting paper in question regarding the proposed encounter between Mr. Staunton and the young American is "bunk.u.m." In matches of importance it is the invariable practice in this country, before any thing definite is settled, for each party to be provided with representatives to arrange the terms and money for the stakes. Mr. Morphy has come here unfurnished in both respects; and, although both will no doubt be forthcoming in due time, it is clearly impossible, until they are, that any determinate arrangement can be made. 2. The statement of another contemporary that the reduction in the amount of stakes from 1000 aside to 500 was made at the suggestion of the English amateur is equally devoid of truth; the proposal to reduce the amount having been made by Mr.

Morphy.

I was perfectly astonished when I read this statement. "Mr. Morphy had caused the stakes to be reduced from 1000 to 500 a side." Without mentioning Englishmen, there were Americans in London and Paris who a.s.serted that Morphy could be backed against Mr. Staunton _for 10,000, and the money be raised within twenty-four hours_. I mentioned this fact to a n.o.ble lady in Paris, in order to show the confidence in which the young American was held, and she replied, "Oh, as regards that, you may tell Mr. Morphy from me, that for 10,000 against Mr. Staunton or any player in Europe, he must not go further than my house."

I asked Morphy to demand an immediate retraction of the unblushing statements contained in the above paragraph, but he replied--"When a man resorts to such means as these, he will not stop until he has committed himself irremediably. Let him go on." Shortly after that Mr. Staunton changed his tactics. Let not the reader suppose I am about to represent things otherwise than they appear on the record. Let him take up the files of the _Ill.u.s.trated London News_ from the time of Morphy's arrival in England to his match with Harrwitz; let him examine the a.n.a.lysis of the games, the notes to the moves in that paper, and he will invariably perceive that the American's antagonists _could_ or _might have_ won, the necessary inference being--"There's nothing so extraordinary about Morphy's play, after all." A change appeared in the criticism on the eight blindfold games at Birmingham, but, then, Morphy stood alone, and interfered with no one's pretensions. When, however, the match with Harrwitz came off, Mr. Staunton's tone was suddenly altered, and this gentleman who, previously, had scarcely a word of commendation for Morphy, now talked of "combinations which would have excited the admiration of Labourdonnais."

"The force of 'language' could no further go."

Mr. Morphy judged from this unexpected change of tone that Mr. Staunton either believed that these contests with continental players would take up so much of his time in Europe, that he would have to leave without playing him; or that Mr. S. was experimenting on the maxim--"There are more flies caught with honey than with vinegar." He therefore addressed him the following letter, and in order that the public might no longer be under misapprehension as to the case in hand, he sent copies of the communication to those papers which had shown him marked kindness in Europe. At the suggestion of a very shrewd and attached American friend, a copy was also forwarded to the editor-in-chief of the _Ill.u.s.trated London News_.

The publication of the letter to Mr. Staunton, in so many journals, was a judicious proceeding. Newspapers are not fond of embarking in a discussion which may probably "draw its slow length along," and terminate angrily.

Besides, whatever the feeling might be on the merits of the case, Mr.

Staunton was certainly in the position of English champion, and John Bull does not like it to be proclaimed that one of his sons shows the "white feather." But, at the same time, rivalry exists between all journals as to precedence of news, and one paper would not willingly be behind the others in giving Morphy's letter. Accordingly, the following Sat.u.r.day, _Bell's Life_, _The Era_, _The Field_, and the _Sunday Times_ published it as follows:

MORPHY'S LETTER TO STAUNTON.

CAFE DE LA REGENCE, PARIS, _Oct. 6, '58_.

HOWARD STAUNTON, ESQ.:

SIR,--On my arrival in England, three months since, I renewed the challenge to you personally which the New Orleans Chess Club had given some months previously. You immediately accepted, but demanded a month's delay in order to prepare yourself for the contest. Subsequently, you proposed that the time should be postponed until after the Birmingham meeting, to which I a.s.sented. On the approach of the period you had fixed, I addressed you a communication, requesting that the necessary preliminaries might be immediately settled, but you left London without replying to it. I went to Birmingham for the express purpose of asking you to put a stop to further delay by fixing a date for the opening of our match; but before the opportunity presented itself you came to me, and, in the presence of Lord Lyttelton, Mr. Avery, and other gentlemen, you stated that your time was much occupied in editing a new edition of Shakespeare, and that you were under heavy bonds to your publishers accordingly. But you reiterated your intention to play me, and said that if I would consent to a further postponement until the first week in November, you would, within a few days, communicate with me and fix the exact date. I have not heard further from you, either privately, by letter, or through the columns of the _Ill.u.s.trated London News_.

A statement appeared in the chess department of that journal a few weeks since, that "Mr. Morphy had come to Europe unprovided with backers or seconds," the inference being obvious that my want of funds was the reason of our match not taking place. As you are the editor of that department of the _Ill.u.s.trated London News_, I felt hurt that a gentleman who had always received me at his club and elsewhere with great kindness and courtesy, should allow so prejudicial a statement to be made in reference to me--one, too, which is not strictly in accordance with fact.

Permit me to repeat what I have invariably declared in every chess community I have had the honor of entering, that I am not a professional player--that I never wished to make any skill I possess the means of pecuniary advancement--and that my earnest desire is never to play for any stake but honor. My friends in New Orleans, however, subscribed a certain sum, without any countenance from me, and that sum has been ready for you to meet a considerable time past. Since my arrival in Paris I have been a.s.sured by numerous gentlemen that the value of those stakes can be immediately increased to any amount; but, for myself personally, reputation is the only incentive I recognize.

The matter of seconds cannot, certainly, offer any difficulty.

I had the pleasure of being first received in London by the St.

George's Chess Club, of which you are so distinguished a member; and of those gentlemen I request the honor of appointing my seconds, to whom I give full authority in settling all preliminaries.

In conclusion, I beg leave to state that I have addressed a copy of this letter to the editors of the _Ill.u.s.trated London News_, _Bell's Life in London_, _The Era_, _The Field_, and _The Sunday Times_, being desirous that our true position should no longer be misunderstood by the community at large.

Again requesting you to fix the date for our commencing the match,

I have the honor to remain, sir, Your very humble servant, PAUL MORPHY.

[Ill.u.s.tration: MR. STAUNTON. MR. BODEN. HERR LoWENTHAL.]

At the same time Mr. Morphy forwarded the following communication to the Secretary of the St. George's, requesting the Club to appoint his seconds in the match:--

MORPHY'S LETTER TO THE ST. GEORGE'S CLUB.

T. HAMPTON, ESQ., _Secretary of the St. George's Chess Club_:

SIR,--I beg respectfully to inform you that the New Orleans Chess Club has deposited 500 at the Banking House of Messrs.

Heywood & Co., London: that sum being my proportion of the stakes in the approaching match with Mr. Staunton.

I shall esteem it a great honor if the St. George's Chess Club will do me the favor of appointing my seconds in that contest.

To such gentlemen as they may appoint I leave the settling of all preliminaries.

May I request you to lay this communication before the members of the Club, and to oblige me with an early answer?

I have the honor to remain, Sir, Your very humble and obed't serv't, PAUL MORPHY.

CAFE DE LA REGENCE, PARIS, _Oct. 8th, 1858_.

It would be difficult to imagine a more respectful and kindly letter than that to Mr. Staunton. Since Morphy's arrival in Europe he had considered himself ill-used by that gentleman. His games had been annotated in an inferentially depreciatory manner, his victories _accounted for_, and his antagonists excused. He had been placed in a ridiculous light before the public by the utterly false a.s.sertion that he had come to Europe to challenge Mr. Staunton or any one else--_without a groat in his purse_.

And yet he never charges Mr. Staunton with being the author of the falsehood, although Mr. S. is the known editor of the chess column of the _Ill.u.s.trated London News_. He positively invites explanation in the most charitable and Christian-like manner; never even calling the statement in question, as he might have done, a positive untruth, but politely characterizing it as "not strictly in accordance with fact."

The _Ill.u.s.trated London News_ did not immediately publish the letter, or make any remark upon it, as did the other papers; but at the commencement of the week, Paul Morphy received a private communication from Mr.

Staunton, as follows:--

STAUNTON'S REPLY TO MORPHY.

LONDON, _October 9th, 1858_.

SIR,--In reply to your letter, I have to observe that you must be perfectly conscious that the difficulty in the way of my engaging in a chess-match is one over which I have no control.

You were distinctly apprised, in answer to the extraordinary proposal of your friends that I should leave my home, family, and avocations, to proceed to New Orleans for the purpose of playing chess with you, that a long and arduous contest, even in London, would be an undertaking too formidable for me to embark in without ample opportunity for the recovery of my old strength in play, together with such arrangements as would prevent the sacrifice of my professional engagements. Upon your unexpected arrival here, the same thing was repeated to you, and my acceptance of your challenge was entirely conditional on my being able to gain time for practice.

The experience, however, of some weeks, during which I have labored unceasingly, to the serious injury of my health, shows that not only is it impracticable for me to save time for that purpose, but that by no means short of giving up a great work on which I am engaged, subjecting the publishers to the loss of thousands, and myself to an action for breach of contract, could I obtain time even for the match itself. Such a sacrifice is, of course, out of all question. A match at chess or cricket (_proh pudor!_ why don't he say, "or skittles"?) may be a good thing in its way, but none but a madman would for either forfeit his engagements and imperil his professional reputation. Under these circ.u.mstances, I waited only the termination of your late struggle (with Mr. Harrwitz) to explain that, fettered as I am at this moment, it is impossible for me to undertake any enterprise which would have the effect of withdrawing me from duties I am pledged to fulfil.

The result is not, perhaps, what either you or I desired, as it will occasion disappointment to many; but it is unavoidable, and the less to be regretted, since a contest, wherein one of the combatants must fight under disadvantages so manifest as those I should have to contend against, after many years'

retirement from practical chess, with my attention absorbed and my brain overtaxed by more important pursuits, could never be accounted a fair trial of skill.

I have the honor to be, Yours, &c., H. STAUNTON.

PAUL MORPHY, ESQ.

P. S.--I may add that, although denied the satisfaction of a set encounter with you at this period, I shall have much pleasure, if you will again become my guest, in playing you a few games _sans facon_.

Now the sending of this private communication was a strange course for Mr.

Staunton to adopt. It seemed to be a bait for Morphy, in order that Mr. S.

might use his reply in the forthcoming article in the Ill.u.s.trated London News. The young American resolved that all the correspondence should be public and above-board, and did not even acknowledge the receipt of the letter. The Sat.u.r.day following, Mr. Staunton gave as excuse for not publishing Morphy's missive, the length of M.'s games, but promised it and his own response "next week."

On Sat.u.r.day the 24th of October, the two following effusions graced the columns of _Bell's Life_. They had also been sent to _The Era_, _The Field_, and _The Sunday Times_; but, being anonymous, and inclosing no name or address, were refused admittance.

ANONYMOUS LETTER, APPARENTLY FROM MR. STAUNTON.

TRINITY COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE, _Oct. 9_.