The Kibitzer 
by Tim Harding

A History of The City of London Chess Magazine (Part 1)

This month's Kibitzer column takes a look at chess in London,
England, in the mid-1870s through the medium of an interesting
but short-lived publication. Many years ago, I happened to pick up
two bound volumes of The City Of London Chess Magazine which
was edited by one W.N.Potter, commencing in 1874 and
terminating early in 1876. June's Kibitzer column will conclude
the story by looking at volume 2; this month I select the highlights
of volume 1.

The magazine dealt exclusively with the game of chess and
included articles on a number of topics, news, games, problems
and the whole range of events about which the editor was able to
get information. Some American and European news was included.

William Norwood Potter (1840-1895) was a barrister's clerk by
profession, and was probably only a relatively weak master player,
but he was one of the best writers on chess in the 19th century and
the pages of his magazine are lively and entertaining. He was a
friend of Wilhelm Steinitz and the two were the principal players
on the victorious London side of the correspondence match with
Vienna played from 1872-74. Analysis of these games appears at
length in the first volume of the magazine and will be the subject
of a separate article I am preparing for Chess Mail. 

By the time he began the magazine, Potter was already a well-
established chess journalist. His gifts as an annotator were on
display in the Westminster Papers from about 1868 onwards.
However he saw a need for a different type of magazine, one which
gave no space to other games such as cards and billiards. (An
example of a similar tension could be seen more recently in Soviet
chess magazines which typically included articles and news about
draughts too.) 

At the start of the first issue, after a literary flourish of
Shakespearian allusions typical of the era, Potter got to the point

"The first point upon which we claim the support of the public is,
that our Magazine will be devoted entirely to Chess; and we say
this without any disparagement of our contemporary, the
Westminster Papers, which, while it appeals to a more general
class of readers than is contemplated by us, nevertheless, never
ceases to bestow the greatest possible attention upon that portion of
its pages which is devoted to Chess... Secondly, we shall publish,
every month, a varied selection of games, by the finest players of
the day, and which will be annotated by some of the most
competent of living authorities. Our problems will be by British
and foreign composers of the highest standing; while our Chess
intelligence will be, as far as unsparing effort and untiring energy
can make it so, a succinct but complete r‚sum‚ of all the doings in
"our petty burgh;" and we intend taking especial pains to collect for
that purpose all kinds of interesting and useful information. We
shall also publish analyses of the openings, in which the most
recent discoveries will be elucidated; and it is our intention, from
time to time, to give a few useful hints to the receivers of odds,
whereby they may avoid many of the pitfalls into which they are
accustomed to fall. Thirdly, the Magazine will be published at a
cheap price, so as to be within the reach of the humblest income. It
would seem desirable to add that our purposes are not in any way
local, or even merely Metropolitan; on the contrary, we aspire to
be, if possible, the organ of all English Chess circles, and,
therefore, shall hope for the generous support of the provincial, as
well as of the London players."

He asked whether there were sufficient players of the game to
support such a magazine and he observed not only that chess was
growing in popularity in mid-Victorian Britain, but moreover that
the level of play was rising, especially among the very young.

"However, we can scarcely, we think, be accused of exaggeration,
if we fix the number of Chess players in the United Kingdom at
about 100,000. Assuming this figure, or even, out of deference to
pessimists, dividing it by two, it is clear that the amount of Chess
provender at present provided for such an important body is
altogether insufficient; and the force of this consideration is
strengthened by the fact that the Chess player, unlike his brother of
the cue, requires a great amount of literary nourishment... Another
important fact is that Chess players, as a body, belong to the
middle and upper classes; and there must be few among them to
whom such a small subscription as that charged for this journal can
be any object whatever... We are amongst those who would be glad
to see the ancient game burst through the barriers of social rank
and gladden every walk of life, so that the handicraftsman and the
labourer, after the day's toil, might find pleasure in a recreation
which would give them no headache next day, and would leave
their pockets in a satisfactory condition... Still it is a fact, and this
more concerns our present object, that Chess, as a game, is
becoming extensively practised, and is making gigantic strides in
the public esteem; so much so, that it has upon more than one
notable occasion of late aroused the general attention of society,
and compelled the not very willingly accorded ministrations of the
daily press. It is a curious concomitant circumstance, and one not
necessarily to have been expected, that the level of Chess strength
has correspondingly risen... It is comical to watch a Chess playing
Rip Van Winkle struggling in the grasp of some stripling, innocent
altogether of facial vegetables. Amusing, but painful, is the
contrast presented by the aimless wanderings, feeble little dodges,
and blind gropings of the one, in comparison with the scientific
precision, ingeniously conceived combinations, and clear-eyed
foresight of the other. No fact is more obvious to the observing
mind, than that we of this generation shall find ourselves sorely
tried ere long by the young knights who are now putting on their
armour."

The very first contribution published by Potter was the first part of
a series "Analytical Excursions" by J.H.Zukertort, dealing with the
Guioco Piano at a fairly elementary level. This series kept popping
up through the year, sometimes postponed by the pressure of space.
Problems followed, and then some games.

Game scores were of course presented in the English descriptive
notation, with the moves tabulated and annotations appended as
footnotes. The abbreviations '+' for check, '-' for "to" and 'x' for
captures were unknown and Kt (not N) was employed for knight.
Thus instead of PxR they would write "P takes R" and instead of
Q-B5+ the fashion was "Q to B5 ch". The use of punctuation such
as ! and ? was not employed in The City of London Chess
Magazine and I don't know if any English publications used that
convention at this period.

Curiously, the numeral 1 was not used for the back rank; f1 for
example was regarded as the king's bishop's square so if the queen
went there it would be "Q to B sq" and possible ambiguities could
be resolved thus "R from K sq to K7". Nevertheless, compared
with the way games were written a few decades earlier (e.g. "the
knight of the king to the seventh square of the bishop of the king"),
the chess notation of the 1870s was fairly efficient shorthand.

Even in the space of a few years, the notation had simplified. As it
happens, my copy of the second volume also has - bound in at the
back - a single issue from 1866 of The Chess Player's Magazine.
This has such forms as "Kt. to K. R. sixth (check)". By dispensing
with the full stops, using numerals and abbreviating checks, Potter
saved a lot of space and effort.

The most difficult thing for a player of today deciphering the
scores of this period is when knights or rooks could move to the
same square, because it is necessary to keep track of which was
originally the king's knight (or rook). Thus the queen's rook could
be on h3 and the king's rook on g6 when the notation says "Q R to
g3".

Potter included few games of his own over the two years but early
on he perhaps felt it necessary to show one example so he modestly
presented the following draw and got Steinitz to wrote the notes.

Potter,W - Mr Coburn & Dr Ballard Dutch Defence London,
1874

1 d4 f5 2 g3 Nf6 3 Bg2 c6 4 Nh3 d6 5 f3!? 

This move spoils the modern appearance of Potter's previous
choices! Steinitz however did not criticise it in his notes.
Nowadays Nh3 would normally be followed by Nf4 at some point,
with the bishop left unobstructed on its diagonal. Potter, however,
is thinking in terms of preparing e2-e4.

5...g6 

So we now have an anticipation of the Leningrad Dutch!! 

6 c3 Bg7 7 Na3 Be6 8 Nf2 

The point of move 5 but Steinitz preferred Ng5.

8...Bf7 9 e4 fxe4 10 fxe4 Qc7 11 Be3 Nbd7 12 Qe2 0-0 13 0-0?! 

Steinitz indicated 13 Nd3 to meet 13 e5 by 14 dxe5 Nxe5 15
Nxe5 dxe5 16 Bc1.

13...e5! 14 b3 a6 15 Rac1 Kh8 16 Rfd1 Rfe8 17 Nb1 Rad8 18
Qd2 

Potter can only wait. 

18...d5 19 exd5 Bxd5 20 Bg5 Bxg2 21 Kxg2 exd4 22 cxd4 Nb6
23 Na3 Rd5 24 Nc4 Ne4 25 Nxe4 Rxe4 26 Re1 Nxc4 27 bxc4
Rdxd4 (See Diagram)

28 Qxd4

"A capital resource".

28...Rxe1 

If 28...Bxd4 White gains at once two rooks for the Q with a fine
attack by 29 Rxe4; and if 28...Rxd4 White replies by 29 Re8+
followed by Rf1 with a winning position. 

29 Qa7 Re8? 

The allies here missed an opportunity of winning the game by
checking first: 29...Re2+ when if 30 Kg1 (or Kh1) 30...h6 must
have won with the pawn ahead, and if Kf1 or Kh3 "Black could
then have retreated the Re8 with greater effect, threatening a
formidable check with the Q".

30 Re1! Qf7 

30...Rxe1?? would of course allow mate in 4 by 31 Qa8+. (See
Diagram)

31 Qxb7! 

Beautifully played, observes Steinitz. 

31...Qxb7 32 Rxe8+ Bf8 33 Bh6 c5+ 34 Kg1 Qb1+ 35 Kg2 «-«.

"Black can do no more than draw the game by perpetual check, for
if he attempt to take the QRP, White would escape with K to R3
and even win the game". 

The magazine, during the year, included games of all kinds:
amateur against amateur, amateur against master, exhibition and
correspondence and tournament games, and also some classic
games. These included a previously unpublished win by Morphy
against Boden in 1858 and from Calcutta, Mr. Cochrane sent in
from time to time some previously unpublished games he had
played against his regular sparring partner, Moheschunder
Bannerjee, who was probably the first Indian to master the western
form of chess.

John Cochrane - Moheschunder Bannerjee King's Indian
Defence, Four Pawns Attack Notes based on those by Steinitz &
Potter

1 e4 d6 2 d4 g6

"The Indian player seems to be thoroughly aware of the strategical
principle often ignored by strong players of the present day,
that...e6 cannot with advantage be played in combination with
...g6". 

3 c4 

"This move renders the Queen's Pawn very weak. 3 c3 is much to
be preferred". Modern theory does not agree with that appraisal.

3...Bg7 4 Nc3 Nf6 5 f4 0-0 6 Nf3 Bg4 

Not the most critical move, yet this position sometimes arises even
today. White should break the pin with 7 Be2 after which he is
threatening 8 e4-e5. Steinitz and Potter fail to remark on this.

7 Bd3? e5!

They do see that this is "A good move, breaking up White's
centre". 

8 fxe5 dxe5 9 d5 Nxe4!?

"A very bold sacrifice but we question its soundness." 10 Bxe4
would have given White the better game claimed Steinitz &
Potter10...f5 11 h3 fxe4 (11...Bh5 12 g4 fxe4 13 Nxe4) 12 hxg4
exf3 13 gxf3 Qf6 14 Rh3. To a modern eye, it is not that clear that
White is safe here and Cochrane's choice could be just as good.

10 Nxe4 f5 11 Neg5 e4 12 Ne6 (See Diagram)

12...exf3! 

"Played in fine style; losing the exchange, but obtaining an
enduring attack." Unfortunately we do not know how
Moheschunder intended to continue after 13 gxf3 Qh4+ 14 Ke2
and the magazine's annotators neglect to mention this possibility.
Black obviously has a lot of possibilities for piece or exchange
sacrifices and the heavy defensive commitment this would have
imposed on White would not have appealed to many 19th century
players. Objectively, however, Black's play may be unsound.

13 Nxd8?! fxg2 14 Rg1 Bxd1 15 Ne6 Bg4 16 Nxf8 

Maybe Nxg7 (as Cochrane said later) was better but Black then
remains a pawn ahead. 

16...Kxf8 17 Rxg2 Nd7 18 Bf4 Nc5 19 Kd2 Rc8 20 Kc2 Bf3 21
Rf2 Nxd3 22 Kxd3 Be4+ 23 Ke3 b5 24 cxb5 Bxd5 25 Rd2 Bc4
26 Rad1 Bf6 27 Bh6+ Kg8 28 Kf4 Re8 29 b3 Bxb5 30 Rc1 
(See Diagram) 

30...Be2! 

Threatening ...Re4+ followed by ...g5.

31 Re1 Re4+ 32 Kg3 Bh4+ 0-1.

"An exceedingly interesting game, and one in which great fertility
of resource is displayed by the Indian player". 0-1

 After the games, an item entitled "The Month" dealing with items
of news, including the announcement of the establishment of two
new metropolitan chess clubs, one of which was the Athenaeum
Chess Club of which I was team captain 100 years later.

A slight problem for me is that my volumes have been bound
without whatever covers originally existed and there is nothing on
the pages themselves to state which month or issue is being
considered.

A later issue (but I am not sure of which month) reported that on
March 14, 1874 Blackburne played a blindfold simultaneous
against eight members of the Athenaeum club, winning all the
games in a time of four and a half hours"The contest excited
considerable interest among the spectators, a large proportion of
whom, as we were glad to see, were ladies". A later issue reported
that Blackburne played ten opponents blindfold in The Hague on
June 9th in the presence of the Prince of Orange. Play commenced
at 6.30pm and concluded at 3.30am so evidently either the Dutch
were more formidable opponents or Mr Blackburne had drunk too
much whisky or genever (or both!); anyway the Dutch club took a
draw and a win off the celebrated master. Further accounts of his
Dutch tour followed; he also visited Rotterdam. "He speaks in the
highest terms of the hospitality and friendliness which he met with
on all hands, and his description makes it evident that Chess,
amongst the Dutch, is accompanied by the utmost sociability and
cordiality of character". Indeed the Dutch people throughout the
20th century and to this day have been true friends of chess and
chess players, and there is probably no western country where the
game is held in higher esteem.

Supporters of chess variants like Fischer-Random would be
interested to learn that London amateur Mr.Lewis offered two
prizes for a tournament to be held in the celebrated Caf‚ de la
R‚gence, Paris, where games would start with knights and bishops
in each others' places. The first issue, which had 24 pages,
concluded with news of the City Of London Chess Club and
Answers To Correspondents.

The Magazine reported that on Friday March 27, the second annual
match between the Oxford and Cambridge University Chess Clubs
was held, over seven boards; this has been a truly annual event ever
since (except perhaps for war years) and still continues. Sad to
report, Cambridge scored a crushing win in 1874. Successful on
board 2 for Cambridge was J.N. Keynes, who later wrote a book on
logic and fathered the world-famous economist Maynard Keynes.
Volume 2 of the Magazine shows that in 1875 J.N. Keynes played
board 1 for Cambridge. In later years, other famous names were
featured in this match, including (in the 1890s or thereabouts) the
writer and magician Aleister Crowley, alias "the great beast 666".
But this was after Potter's time, fortunately.

Coverage of the London-Vienna correspondence match took up
nearly the whole of one issue, but regular reports resumed in the
summer. Apart from Blackburne's visit to Holland, the death of
Staunton was reported, news of various American matters were
included (including the genealogy of Paul Morphy) and even news
from Australia. An inter-colonial match between New South Wales
and South Australia was to take place, the third of its kind, and a
chess tournament was being held in Adelaide. The inter-colonial
match was possibly played by telegraph, as were the Victoria-New
South Wales and South Australia-Queensland matches mentioned
later in the year.

The following game was "played by correspondence between the
late Incognito Chess Club and the Bermondsey Chess Club".

Scotch Gambit Notes by Blackburne & Potter

1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 d4 exd4 4 Bc4 Bc5 5 0-0 d6 6 c3 Nf6 

6...Bg4 was the correct reply to White's last move.

7 cxd4 Bb6 8 Nc3 Bg4 9 Be3 0-0 10 Bb3 Qe7 

Waste of time; better 10...Qd7.

11 Bc2 Qd7 12 Kh1 Kh8 13 Re1 

"The object of this move is not apparent. We should have preferred
Ne2 or Rc1."

13...Bxf3 14 gxf3 Ne7 15 Rg1 Nfg8? 16 Ne2 Ng6 17 Ng3 c6 18 f4
Nf6 19 Nh5! Nxh5 20 Qxh5 Ne7 21 f5 f6 (See Diagram)

22 Rg6! 

Else comes ...Qe8 "in which case White's advantage would have
become much attenuated". 

22...Ng8 

If 22...Nxg6 23 fxg6 h6 24 Bxh6 gxh6 25 Qxh6+ Kg8 26 g7 wins.

23 Rag1 Rf7 24 R1g3 Re8 25 Rh3 h6 26 Bb3 d5 27 exd5 Rxe3 

If 27...cxd5 28 Ba4! Qxa4 29 Bxh6 gxh6 (29...Nxh6 30 Rxh6+
gxh6 31 Qxh6+) 30 Rxh6+ Kg7 31 Rh7+ and mate next move.

28 fxe3 cxd5 29 Rg1 Rf8 30 Rhg3 Rf7 31 e4 Re7 32 Bxd5 1-0.

A fair amount of space in the magazine was devoted to problems,
to book reviews and to games played at odds. It was quite common
for masters to concede odds of queen's knight to amateurs and
handicap tournaments were held. In one such case, a Mr Cohen
employed the French Defence against Zukertort who answered (1
e4 e6) 2 f4 d5 3 e5 and won in 29 moves. Potter observed of
Black's first move

"This defence is much favoured by receivers of the above odds,
and the reason is obvious. Thereby they avoid the dangers of all the
gambits and obtain an apparently equal position with a piece ahead,
but what is the frequent, if not the usual result? The strong player,
pushing all his pawns on the King's Side, is able to deploy his
forces behind them with rapidity and effect, while on the other
hand, the weaker player's advantage on the Queen's side is slower
in developing, and its conduct requires a nicety of calculation such
as one who receives the odds of a Knight can scarcely be expected
to possess."

This logic is hard to fault and the paragraph shows the clarity
typical of Potter's expositions.

Even heavier odds were possible when the discrepancy of strength
between the players was large. In the following game against an
unnamed opponent, the future World Champion gave odds of
Queen's Rook. Resistance was perfunctory but Steinitz was able to
enjoy a pretty (though unnecessary) final queen sacrifice.

Wilhelm Steinitz - Amateur King's Gambit

1 e4 e5 2 f4 Nc6?! 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 fxe5 Nxe4 5 d3 Nc5 6 d4 Na6 7
Bc4 Qe7? 8 Nc3 h6 9 0-0 g5?? 10 Nd5 Qd8 11 Nf6+ Ke7 (See
Diagram)

12 Nxg5 hxg5 13 Qh5! Rxh5 14 Ng8+ Ke8 15 Bxf7 mate 1-0.

A "movement" was "set on foot" to raise and present a substantial
testimonial to the Hungarian-born master J.J.Lowenthal (1810-76),
who had been seriously ill. The initial subscription list included
several eminent names from the chess world and public life,
including Lord Randolph Churchill (father of Sir Winston).
Lowenthal had of course been the first master player encountered
by Paul Morphy (when he was 13) and had done important
administrative work in England, especially in the 1860s.

The same issue carried a laudatory three-page obituary of Howard
Staunton. This began

"The eventful career of the late Howard Staunton has naturally
been the chief topic of the past month, and very divergent views
have been put forward concerning him. The Westminster Papers,
Glasgow Herald and Liverpool Albion, concur in considering the
deceased, in his prime, to have been the finest player of his day.
The Figaro places him in the very foremost rank of European
players. Land and Water expresses no opinion upon the point;
while the Field considers that Buckle was Staunton's superior. We
ourselves usually place our faith in results; they are sometimes
fallacious, but explanations of them in a vitiating sense are usually
much more so. From 1843 to 1851 Staunton defeated all opponents
whom he came in contact with, and during that time he was
continually engaged in playing matches; moreover, during the same
period, it was claimed for him by his friends, and, as it would
appear, was the general opinion, that he was the strongest living
player. It was open to any one to question that proposition in a
practical manner; some, in fact did, and they were decisively
defeated. Appearances, therefore, would seem to indicate that at
this time there was no stronger Chess expert than Staunton, if
indeed, there were any so strong. "

From 1851, Potter admitted, Staunton could no longer be
considered pre-eminent. However, he served chess in other ways,
not only as organiser of the London 1851 tournament but also as a
writer.

"As an author, Staunton's influence upon Chess play in this country
has been immense, and it is no exaggeration to say that his literary
labours are the basis upon which English Chess Society, as at
present constituted, stands. Had it not been for the educating
influence of his many and important Chess works, the practice of
the game would have been far from attaining to the high order of
excellence by which it is now characterised amongst English Chess
players as a body. On the contrary, the prevailing type of play here
would, in all probability, be miserably unscientific and barbarous."

On the question of Staunton's character, however, Potter was not
afraid to be negative.

"...The deceased often acted, not only with signal lack of
generosity, but also with gross unfairness towards those whom he
disliked, or from whom he had suffered defeat, or whom he
imagined likely to stand between him and the sun. His attacks upon
Anderssen, Williams, Harrwitz, Lowenthal and Steinitz must ever
be considered as a sad misuse of his vigorous intellect, especially
as they were often conducted in a manner not at all consistent with
a truthful spirit; nor were his innuendoes concerning Morphy
otherwise than an utterly unworthy means of getting out of an
engagement, which he could have either declined with a good
grace at first, or afterwards have honourably asked to be released
from. Nevertheless, all said and done, Staunton was, as we have
often heard a distinguished enemy of his say, emphatically a MAN.
There was nothing weak about him, and he had a backbone that
never curved with fear of any one. Of him may be averred, what
was said of the renowned Duke of Bedford by Louis the Eleventh,
when the courtiers of the latter were venting their depreciatory
scoffs over the tomb of the great Englishman, "There lies one,
before whom if he were still alive, the boldest amongst us would
tremble." For the rest we consider that Staunton was beginning of
late to change for the better in his pen and ink dealings with others,
and might, had life been spared him, have attained to a softened
and mellow old age."

The next issue reported on the Chicago Congress, won by Captain
Mackenzie. George Henry Mackenzie (1837-91) , a Scot by birth,
was a professional soldier in his youth. He emigrated to America
and fought on the Union side in the Civil War. Thereafter he
devoted himself to chess, according to Harry Golombek's
encyclopaedia.

Here is his win against the tournament runner-up who (says Potter)
normally played much more soundly. Indeed, in their game with
reversed colours Hosmer was the winner. Potter credits the
Hartford Daily Times as the source of the moves and other items
from that journal are often quoted in the magazine. It seems that
Mrs Gilbert of Hartford, Connecticut, was a good source of
American chess information for Potter.

George Mackenzie - Mr. Hosmer Chicago, 1874 Open Ruy
Lopez Notes by W.N.Potter

1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bb5 a6 4 Ba4 Nf6 5 0-0 Nxe4 6 d4 b5 7 Bb3
d5 8 dxe5 Be6 9 Be3 Be7 10 Nbd2 Nc5 11 Qe2 d4 

The advance of this pawn is tempting enough, but its wisdom is not
so certain as its boldness. (See Diagram)

12 Bf4 Nxb3 13 axb3 Nb4 

A move totally at variance with all sound principles. 

14 c3 Nc2? 15 Rxa6! 

A mortal wound. 

15...d3 16 Rxa8 dxe2 17 Rxd8+ Kxd8 18 Rc1 Bf5 19 g4 Bd3 20
Kg2 g5 21 Be3 c5 22 Ne1 Nxe1+ 23 Rxe1 (See Diagram)

23...h5 

Of what use is this desperate attempt to attack White where he is
strongest? If any chance remained, it could only be by moving the
King and bringing the rook round to the Queen's side. 

24 h3 hxg4 25 hxg4 f6 26 Nf3 fxe5 27 Nxe5 Be4+ 28 f3 Bd5 29
Rxe2 Rf8? 30 Rd2 1-0.

Continental news and games also featured occasionally. White in
the following game was Tassilo von Heydebrandt und der Lasa
(1818-1899), the principal editor of the German Handbuch des
Schachspiels and one of the foremost figures in the history of 19th
century chess as player, writer and historian.

Von der Lasa - G. Nielsen Copenhagen, 1874 Allgaier Gambit
Notes based on those by Potter

1 e4 e5 2 f4 exf4 3 Nf3 g5 4 h4 g4 5 Ng5 h6 6 Nxf7 Kxf7 7 Bc4+
d5 8 Bxd5+ Ke8 9 d4 f3 10 gxf3 Be7 11 Be3!? 

Apparently 11 0-0 was "more in vogue but the move in the text has
its merits". 

11...Bxh4+ 12 Kd2 h5 13 Nc3 (See Diagram)

13...Nf6? 

13...c6 14 Bb3 Bf6 would be good for Black, thought Potter. 

14 Rxh4 Nxd5 15 Nxd5 c6 16 Qh1! 

Presumably overlooked by Black when he chose his 13th move.
White now obtains four pawns for a piece and should surely have
won. 

16...cxd5 17 Rxh5 Rxh5 18 Qxh5+ Kd7 19 Qxd5+ Ke8 20 Qh5+
Kd7 21 Qxg4+ Kc7 22 Qf4+ Kb6 23 Rh1 Ka6 24 Kc1 b6 25 Qf7
Bd7 26 Rh7 Qe8 (See Diagram)

27 Qc4+!? 

"Up to this point Freiherr von Heydebrandt has played with that
skill which his great reputation would have led us to expect, but
here we consider that he by no means makes the most of his
advantage. 27 d5 leaving his opponent, if he chose, to exchange
queens, must we believe have yielded a winning position, e.g.
27...Qxf7 28 Rxf7 Be8 29 Re7 Bh5 (29...Nd7 30 e5) 30 f4 Bf3 31
f5 and White must win.

27...Bb5 28 Qc7 Qc6 29 Qe7? 

29 b3 would still have won said Potter.

29...Nd7 30 Qa3+ Kb7 (See Diagram)

31 Rh1 

"Entailing the loss of a Pawn, but there appears to be no
satisfactory play for White at this juncture, as far as maintaining
his advantage is concerned."

31...Rf8 32 Bd2 Qf6 33 Qe3 Qxf3 34 Qxf3 Rxf3 35 b3 Rf1+ 36
Rxf1 Bxf1 37 Bg5 b5 38 Kd2 a6 39 a3 Nb6 40 Ke3 Kc6 41 d5+
Kd7 42 Kd4 Bg2 

"A good move, ensuring the draw" 

43 c4 bxc4 44 bxc4 Nxc4 45 Kxc4 Bxe4 «-«

Towards the end of the first volume, there is a tantalising tit-bit of
gossip which doubtless meant something to the readers of the day.
Apparently referring to a current court case, Potter wrote

"Most persons are well posted up in the Beecher-Tilton scandal,
but lest any, through much playing at Chess, should have had their
attention otherwise occupied, we give the following item, which
depicts one trait of Mr. Tilton's character, though we are not aware
that it casts much light upon the great point in debate. It is taken
from Mrs. Tilton's evidence. She says that her husband, at one
time, "was absorbed in Chess to such a degree that he would
sometimes be up all night; I have known him to stand up at night
ready for bed, engaged upon a problem in Chess, and to be found
in that same condition in the morning, without having gone to bed
at all." We cannot deny that Mr. Tilton, at this time, loved Chess,
"not wisely, but too well," though query whether his depreciation
of character did not begin after his devotion to problems had worn
off."

Does anyone know more about this case? 

Then the monthly news article continues with more serious
matters.

"It appears, by a letter in the Hartford Weekly Times, that an
"American Chess Association" is being formed, and that the
following gentlemen have been appointed as a Committee of
organization - viz., Jas. A. Congdon, Philadelphia; Capt. Geo. H.
Mackenzie, New York; Wm. W. Curran, Chicago; Dr. W.C.
Spencer, Chicago; and Alfred W. Sansome, Chicago. In a country
like America, where Chess finds its most enthusiastic and energetic
votaries, a National Association devoted to the game seems no less
necessary, than certain, if well conducted, to receive universal
support."

The final issue of the first volume (apparently January 1875)
reports that from February 1 the magazine will be enlarged from 24
to 32 pages with the same price as before. Subscribers in the
United Kingdom paid 6 shillings (post free), with single numbers
six old pence each. The price for the European continent, the
colonies and America was seven shillings and sixpence. A cloth-
bound volume 1 could be ordered for seven shillings.

It appeared at this stage that Potter's venture was prospering.