summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
-rw-r--r--.gitattributes4
-rw-r--r--LICENSE.txt11
-rw-r--r--README.md2
-rw-r--r--old/54145-0.txt1875
-rw-r--r--old/54145-0.zipbin36032 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/54145-h.zipbin509995 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/54145-h/54145-h.htm2583
-rw-r--r--old/54145-h/images/cover.jpgbin470280 -> 0 bytes
8 files changed, 17 insertions, 4458 deletions
diff --git a/.gitattributes b/.gitattributes
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..d7b82bc
--- /dev/null
+++ b/.gitattributes
@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
+*.txt text eol=lf
+*.htm text eol=lf
+*.html text eol=lf
+*.md text eol=lf
diff --git a/LICENSE.txt b/LICENSE.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6312041
--- /dev/null
+++ b/LICENSE.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+This eBook, including all associated images, markup, improvements,
+metadata, and any other content or labor, has been confirmed to be
+in the PUBLIC DOMAIN IN THE UNITED STATES.
+
+Procedures for determining public domain status are described in
+the "Copyright How-To" at https://www.gutenberg.org.
+
+No investigation has been made concerning possible copyrights in
+jurisdictions other than the United States. Anyone seeking to utilize
+this eBook outside of the United States should confirm copyright
+status under the laws that apply to them.
diff --git a/README.md b/README.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..84c9b0f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/README.md
@@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
+Project Gutenberg (https://www.gutenberg.org) public repository for
+eBook #54145 (https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/54145)
diff --git a/old/54145-0.txt b/old/54145-0.txt
deleted file mode 100644
index 57de3f9..0000000
--- a/old/54145-0.txt
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,1875 +0,0 @@
-The Project Gutenberg eBook, The Decline and Fall of Whist, by John Petch
-Hewby
-
-
-This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most
-other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
-whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of
-the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at
-www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you'll have
-to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this ebook.
-
-
-
-
-Title: The Decline and Fall of Whist
- An Old Fashioned View of New Fangled Play
-
-
-Author: John Petch Hewby
-
-
-
-Release Date: February 10, 2017 [eBook #54145]
-
-Language: English
-
-Character set encoding: UTF-8
-
-
-***START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE DECLINE AND FALL OF WHIST***
-
-
-E-text prepared by Emmy, MFR, and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team
-(http://www.pgdp.net) from page images digitized by the Google Books
-Library Project (http://books.google.com) and generously made available by
-Internet Archive (https://archive.org)
-
-
-
-Note: Images of the original pages are available through
- Internet Archive. See
- https://archive.org/details/declineandfallw00hewbgoog
-
-
-
-
-
-THE DECLINE AND FALL OF WHIST
-
-An Old Fashioned View of New Fangled Play
-
-by
-
-THE AUTHOR
-OF “WHIST OR BUMBLEPUPPY”
-
-
-
-
-
-
-London
-G. E. Waters 97 Westbourne Grove
-Simpkin Marshall & Co. Stationers’ Hall Court
-1884
-
-
-
-
-
-CONTENTS.
-
-
-[2]
- Page
- Introductory 7
-
- Wooden Arrangement, No. 1—
- The Signal and the Echo 9
-
- Wooden Arrangement, No. 2—
- Tampering with the Discard 12
-
- The Modern Game 19
-
- Wooden Arrangement, No. 3—
- Original Lead of the Longest Suit 20
-
- Wooden Arrangement, No. 4—
- The Lead of the Penultimate and its Congeners 25
-
- Some Pillars of the Modern Edifice—
- Pillar No. 1—The Philosophy of Whist 33
- Pillar No. 2—Illustrative Whist Hands 41
- Pillar No. 3—Developments, Generalizations,
- and Extensions of Principle 47
-
- Whittling at the Small End of Nothing 52
-
- A Whist Player’s Wail 56
-
- Arithmetic Applied to Whist by a Small Boy 70
-
- Conclusion 73
-
-
-
-
-
-PREFACE.
-
-
-AS it has been taken for granted, because no abhorrence of the recent
-proceedings of the New Academy has been openly expressed, such feeling
-is non-existent, this opuscule has been written in the confident belief
-that it expresses the opinions of a majority of civilized Whist-players.
-
-LONDON, _Christmas, 1884_.
-
-
-
-
-THE DECLINE AND FALL OF WHIST.
-
-
-IF we only live long enough we all pass through at least three
-stages—one authority says seven;—we grow, we attain our prime, we
-decay; and Whist, apparently, is not exempt from the common lot.
-
-Somewhat obscure in its origin, it gradually developed, it arrived
-at its zenith, then began to go down hill, and became the piteous
-spectacle we now see, until, flying from the whist-room as from a
-pest-house, the players are betaking themselves in shoals to other and
-unholy games.
-
-There is an opinion that Whist is at the present moment so exceedingly
-popular that it is fast becoming a serious rival to afternoon tea, and
-this, so far from being inconsistent with my original statement, rather
-strengthens it; for it is quite possible that a certain percentage of
-the more reputable refugees from the clubs, averse to gambling, may
-have sought—and I hope I may add, found—consolation in the family bosom
-and the domestic rubber.
-
-The golden age of Whist lasted from the time when Cavendish arranged
-in a systematic form his selections from the wisdom of our ancestors,
-until the death of Mr. Clay, twelve years ago; then the age of wood
-began, and if the whole subsequent literature of Whist had been
-publicly burnt by the common hangman, including _nostri farrago
-libelli_, it would have been an unmixed boon; so greatly has the evil
-preponderated over the good.
-
-
-
-
-WOODEN ARRANGEMENT, NO. 1.—THE PETER.
-
-
-THE peter, simple in its inception, and ineffably stupid in execution,
-was already on the scene, and though among decent players it soon found
-its level, and became comparatively inoffensive, was the pioneer of the
-mass of wood-paving which has since been laid down; echoes, tampering
-with the discard, penultimates, antepenultimates, developments,
-extensions of principle, rules for exceptional play, with a few other
-matters _quod nunc perscribere longum est_, all equally inelastic, but
-differing from the signal in this, that while its mission is to supply
-your partner with brains and to dictate to him, regardless of the state
-of his hand, to play trumps when you think fit, theirs is to do away
-with all necessity for any brains whatever.
-
-The call for trumps appeared in this form, and in this form
-Bumblepuppydom believes in it to this day. “Whenever a player is
-strong in trumps, whether he has any reason for wanting them out or
-not, he informs the table of the fact, and it is imperative upon his
-partner to take the most violent and extraordinary steps to get in and
-lead him one.” However, the proceeding—when not useless—turned out so
-injurious to the perpetrator, that it had to be mitigated (for in that
-benighted day it had not been discovered that it was philosophical
-to lose on principle), and now reads something like this,—“whenever
-a player is strong in trumps, and considers from the fall of the
-cards that it is expedient they should be drawn, he makes those facts
-public,” and as his partner is usually in possession of the lead at the
-moment, he is able to play a trump without unduly straining himself.
-
-Compulsory peters, anticipated peters, and peters late in the hand, are
-matters of common sense and intelligence, and attempts to lay down
-arbitrary conventions as substitutes for those qualities are the main
-causes of the present decadence of Whist.
-
-
-THE ECHO.
-
-THE echo is reported to be an extension of the signal, and is the most
-innocuous of the series; it does very little harm, and always amuses
-somebody.
-
-When the signal-man holds half the trumps and the echoer the remainder,
-it amuses them and does not hurt the adversary; for weight will tell,
-wholly irrespective of conventions.
-
-When there is a possibility of saving the game, and it comes into
-play before the hand is over, which it seldom does, its usual effect
-is to induce the signal-man (seeing his partner drop a high card) to
-endeavour unsuccessfully to force him; then they suffer grief and pain,
-and the adversary in his turn is amused.
-
-
-
-
-WOODEN ARRANGEMENT, NO. 2.
-
-
-THIS resulted from tampering with the discard. Though Mathews (_circa_
-A.D. 1800) in two short sentences laid down the true and only principle
-of discarding: “If weak in trumps, keep guard on your adversaries’
-suits; if strong, throw away from them,” fifty years afterwards it was
-discovered by the “little school” that “the old system of discarding
-was just this—when not able to follow suit, let your first discard be
-from your weakest suit.” Rough on poor Mathews! but the absent are
-always wrong.
-
-However, by a process of evolution, to the first step of which no
-exception can be taken, we are next told—(_a_) “When you see from the
-fall of the cards that there is no probability of bringing in your own
-or your partner’s long suit discard originally from your best protected
-suit.” “You must play a defensive game.”—_Cavendish._
-
-Then, as the evolution proceeds, and we come to (_b_), we catch the
-first glimpse of the woody fibre, “for the sake of a short and easily
-remembered rule,” it is the fashion to say, “discard originally from
-your strong suit when the adversaries lead trumps, but this aphorism
-does not truly express the conditions.” (It does not indeed; far from
-it! for the adversaries may lead trumps and the strength may turn out
-on the other side; and why, under any circumstances, currency should
-be given to an erroneous fashion is a question I have repeatedly asked
-in vain), and here the pupils rush in, with that zeal which outruns
-discretion, overpower the master and cut the Gordian Knot with (_c_)
-_strongest_. Fourthly, I am informed whenever I take my walks abroad in
-Whist circles, (_d_) that with trumps declared against me I must not
-only discard from my strongest suit, but by that discard point out to
-my partner—and I presume my adversaries—the suit I wish led, and we
-are all on our backs on the wood pavement.
-
-Is this a defensive game? Surely it is pedantry run mad! Why am I, in
-these frightful circumstances, fighting for dear life, and breathing
-with the greatest difficulty, to disclose my vital parts to a powerful
-and remorseless enemy? Where am I to get a suit from that I wish led?
-Why am I to be debarred from using my common sense—if I have any—and
-holding on to everything in obedience to my old friend Mathews and
-Cavendish on Whist, for both of whom I have the highest respect? If
-by good luck I do hold a very strong suit, I used to be able to point
-out that fact by discarding the head of it; now I am told “you must
-not do that; it is not _the game_”—whatever the game may be; “it shows
-the adversary too much;” so that I am in this absurd dilemma—if I
-have a really strong suit, I am to keep it dark; if I have a suit in
-which I hope to make a trick by remaining very quiet, I am to invite
-my partner to put me under the harrow by making me third player. _O
-tempora! O mores!_
-
-Bad in itself, and ensnaring to others, this outrageous latter-day
-discard is cowardly to a degree; for while it does no particular injury
-to the player with a strong hand, it knocks down and jumps upon the
-weak vessel.
-
-What am I to do with a suit in which I hold absolutely nothing, say
-the two, three, four and five? Did the doctrinaires never hear of such
-a suit? One would imagine not. Am I to discard from king, queen and
-another, or from knave to four, in order to keep four cards like that?
-How about retaining every card of a powerful suit, regardless where
-the trumps may be, knowing that unless it can be brought in somehow or
-other, the game is gone? When I am compelled to discard from a weak
-five suit, is that an order to my partner to lead in a singly or doubly
-guarded king?
-
-If these difficulties—and there are numbers of others—only occurred
-to me, with my natural modesty, I should consider myself the victim
-of some congenital defect; but this is not the case; far from it. The
-confusion on this head alone is awful, and what do the authorities
-teach us? I have already quoted Mathews and Cavendish on Whist; the
-second edition of Clay does not mention the forced discard, but it is
-mentioned in the last new and _improved_ edition with a vengeance:
-here I learn to my horror and amazement that “the discard from the
-_strongest_ suit * * * _is admirably explained and developed in the
-‘Laws and Principles of Whist,’ by Cavendish_.”
-
-Now this statement, which was made in 1881, is puzzling. I have already
-pointed out that the “laws and principles of Whist” by Cavendish
-neither explain nor develope anything of the kind, admirably or
-otherwise, before and after that date, Cavendish in _The Field_ has
-contradicted it in toto. His latest utterance, on which I can lay
-my hand, is this. “The aphorism—discard from your strong suit to an
-adverse trump lead is very imperfect”—as any aphorism, attempting to
-lay down a fixed law for such an intricate subject, is bound to be—“and
-misleading, and often gives rise to misunderstandings between partners
-as to the true character of the discard. A player should carefully
-consider the aspect of the game at the time the discard is made. With
-no indication to guide him, he may assume his partner’s first discard
-to be a protective one, if the adversaries have led, or called for
-trumps; but if, notwithstanding an adverse lead, he can place the
-command of trumps with his partner, or must so place it in order to
-save the game, he should assume the reverse.” Here, though somewhat
-verbose and obscure, he recognizes that the subject bristles all over
-with difficulty.
-
-Now let us return for a moment to the _improved_ Clay. “The discard
-from the strongest rests upon, * * * and upon the very reasonable
-argument, that the partner is directed to lead the suit indicated by
-the discard.” That a protective discard is a direction to my partner
-to make me third player in the suit may seem reasonable to the modern
-doctrinaire, but it is not the view ordinarily taken of it; then having
-produced his highly objectionable animal in _puris naturalibus_, the
-Editor winds up by _thanking Cavendish for his imprimatur_.
-
-This way madness lies! What Cavendish? how many Cavendishes are there?
-there is certainly a Cavendish on Whist, and there is a Cavendish in
-_The Field_; that makes two, on this point pretty much of one mind.
-Is there a third, who appears for one brief moment, without father,
-mother, or descent, mysterious as Melchizedek, just to contradict both
-his namesakes, and then disappears for ever in the ewigkeit? This
-conundrum is too much for me; I give it up, merely enquiring with an
-ancient philosopher:—
-
-
- Quousque tandem abutere patientiâ nostrâ?
-
-
-
-
-
-THE MODERN GAME.
-
-
-BECAUSE a game has been overlaid by petty detail, and injured by
-having its square pegs driven into round holes, it does not on that
-account become a modern game, any more than the Trojan priest, when
-the serpents set upon him and strangled him, became a modern Laocoon.
-First, this figment of a modern game is devised, and then used as a
-convenient peg to hang other figments upon.
-
-Whist, as far as I have been able to ascertain from a tolerably careful
-study of the leading authorities, “has slowly broadened down from
-precedent to precedent;” there has been no solution of continuity; and
-other investigators hold the same belief. “We suspect that Cavendish
-very often objected to that ancient plagiarist Mathews for stealing his
-ideas.” “In the bulk the two systems agree.”—_Westminster Papers._
-
-“There is no essential difference between modern and old-fashioned
-Whist, _i.e._, between Hoyle and Cavendish, Mathews and J. C.”—_Mogul._
-
-So “the modern game” would appear to be an imaginary line, on one
-side of which stand all the authorities from Hoyle to Clay, including
-Cavendish on Whist;—recently designated fossils—on the other, “the
-great twin brethren,” Cavendish in _The Field_ and the ‘Theory of
-Whist.’
-
-
-
-
-WOODEN ARRANGEMENT, NO. 3.
-
-
-THE ORIGINAL LEAD OF THE LONGEST SUIT:—This, according to all accounts,
-is the essence of modern Whist, and if not too much modern it is
-certainly modern enough; for take any fossil you please, again
-including Cavendish on Whist,—you must keep in mind the doubtful
-personality of the three Cavendishes—and you will find no such lead;
-that it is generally advisable to lead from your strongest suit, a
-dogma old as the everlasting hills, is quite another matter.
-
-All authority is dead against the strongest, and _a fortiori_ against
-the longest suit, _always_ being led.
-
-In the Westminster Papers for February and March, 1878, the point was
-thoroughly ventilated; it is not my intention to quote the articles in
-extenso, I have given you chapter and verse, and if you are anxious to
-master the subject, you can either read it for yourself, or consult the
-originals.
-
-The editor shows that Hoyle, Paine, Major A., Mathews, Clay, and
-Cavendish on Whist, all teach that, though the strong suit should
-_generally_ be led, the lead depends upon the hand and the score. He
-points out that “Mathews recognizes the fact, which we all deplore,
-that we must in the nature of things, have bad hands or peculiar hands,
-such that the ordinary lead must be departed from;” that Hoyle, giving
-directions how to play for an odd trick, says, “Suppose you are elder
-hand, and that you have ace, king and three small trumps, with four
-small cards of another suit, three small cards of a third suit, and one
-small card of a fourth suit, how are you to play? You are to lead the
-single card.” That Major A.—whom Clay describes as likely to be very
-formidable among the best players of the present day—goes so far as to
-say, “with a bad hand, do _not_ lead from three or four small cards.”
-
-So much for the books! His conclusion from observation is “In watching
-good players, we find them averse to leading from their long suit
-unless they have sufficient trumps or other cards of re-entry to
-enable them to establish that suit. So also with the score advanced;
-no one dreams of trying to bring in the long suit.” According to
-the play that we see, with great weakness the rule is rather to lead
-strengthening cards. For our own part we should be inclined to say,
-“Lead from your strong suit only when you are sufficiently strong to
-bring in that suit with the aid of reasonable strength on the part
-of your partner.” “The supposed orthodox lead is absurd.” My own
-opportunities for observation have been considerable, and I say “ditto
-to Mr. Burke.” In the teeth of this, we have Cavendish in _The Field_,
-and Dr. Pole, the great twin brethren again, affirming not only that
-the strongest suit should always be led, and that the strongest suit is
-the longest, but that “this system has stood the test of the experience
-of a century and a half.”
-
-
- The open, erect and manly foe,
- Firm we may meet, perchance return the blow.
-
-
-The three tailors of Tooley Street might have chanted in unison,
-
-
- Sic volo, sic jubeo, stet pro ratione voluntas,
-
-
-with impunity, if they had only given their correct names and address.
-It was because they attempted to pose as the people of England, with a
-large P, that the laugh came in.
-
-In the same way Brown, Jones and Robinson, collectively or
-individually, have an undoubted right to depose Clay from his pedestal,
-and substitute wood as a better material for our idol; but they have no
-right to palm it off on the worshippers as the real Simon Pure.
-
-I should like an answer to this simple question; if the longest suit is
-always to be led, how is it that every Whist book, without exception,
-gives minute directions for leading short suits?
-
-Another red herring trailed across the scent is that a four suit is a
-normal suit, and that being normal it must always be led. In the first
-place it is the strong suit, not the long suit, which is the normal
-lead; in the second place, what is ‘normal’ by no means invariably
-takes place, otherwise why does ‘abnormal’ still remain in our
-dictionaries?
-
-When you hold a bad hand, it is just as philosophical to acquaint your
-partner with that unpleasant circumstance by leading a strengthening
-card, as it is to lead a long weak suit and leave him floundering about
-in ignorance of everything but its length, and it has a much greater
-weight of authority at the back of it.
-
-Pondering where the Dioscuri got hold of such extraordinary notions, it
-flashed across my memory that in childhood’s happy hour, I had read in
-Lemprière, that though they spent half their time with the immortals,
-they passed the remainder “in another place;” hence these tears!
-
-
-
-
-WOODEN ARRANGEMENT, NO. 4.
-
-
-THE LEAD OF THE PENULTIMATE AND ITS CONGENERS.—Playing Whist some five
-and twenty years ago with Cam for my partner, he led the trey of a
-suit in which I held king, queen and another, I won with the queen,
-and on the return of the king, which was taken by the fourth hand, Cam
-played the deuce. From subsequent enquiry I found it was a lead of his
-own, to inform the table he had three remaining, and no honour in his
-own suit; I had never seen the device before; I did not think highly
-of it when I did see it, and am of the same opinion still; however,
-in 1865 it appeared in “What to Lead,” and was strenuously objected
-to, by Mogul among others; but it is only due to the memory of my old
-friend,—in his day an authority second to none—to state, that though
-tenacious of his proposition, I never knew him suggest for one moment,
-that it was an extension of any known, or unknown, principle.
-
-The credit of discovering a brand-new principle, and that the
-penultimate lead is a legitimate extension of that discovery is, as
-far as I am aware, entirely due to Cavendish’s unassisted ingenuity;
-and here we learn incidentally what, in his view, a principle is;
-for, after he had concluded to his own satisfaction, that from suits
-containing a sequence that does not head the suit, the lowest card
-of the sequence should be led—although Clay denied this flatly,
-and objected to the lead in toto—he straightway elevated it into a
-principle.
-
-How the penultimate lead is an extension of it, I have no idea; he
-appears to have evolved both the principle and the extension from his
-own internal consciousness. Anti-Cavendish puts this with such force
-and perspicuity in the Westminster Papers, February, 1873, that the
-whole article is well worth reading, and in these convention ridden
-days is quite refreshing. I make an extract or two from his conclusion.
-“The reasoning on which Cavendish grounds this invention is so faulty,
-that one feels that in the pursuit of his hobby of ‘extension of
-principle’ he loses his head altogether.” “It is a purely arbitrary
-signal and might much more plausibly have been proposed as a means
-of giving information without all the rigmarole about ‘extension of
-principle,’ &c., &c., but then if so proposed, players would have
-refused to adopt it; now, as disguised by Cavendish under a cloud of
-words, too many will be ready to jump at it to save themselves the
-trouble of thinking.” “No greater mistake can be made than to imagine
-that it is desirable in every case to give information to your partner,
-and players who are always endeavouring to do this, without reference
-to the state of their hands, will surely in the long run suffer.
-Whether to give or withhold information frequently tries the discretion
-of the best players, and with weak hands the great necessity is to keep
-your adversaries in ignorance, without deceiving your partner. Now if
-this new signal were generally adopted, players would, as regards the
-lead in question, be deprived of all discretion, and be compelled
-either to give information to their adversaries, which might be used
-against them with fatal effect, or else deceive their partners, whereas
-the present lead, if it gives no information does not deceive your
-partner. Another disadvantage is that in nearly all cases where either
-adversary wins the second round, he will know whether or not he can
-force his partner in that suit without risk of being overtrumped, but
-if the original leader wins the second round his partner will rarely
-get any positive information as to his strength until the third round.”
-“These refinements of artifice are utterly opposed to the essence
-of scientific Whist, viz., the necessity of rational deduction. To
-substitute signals which convey information, without troubling the
-brains, must tend to spoil the game.”
-
-Objections have repeatedly been taken to these conventions on moral
-grounds, but as long as the Church and Stage Guild and kindred
-associations exist, there seems no reason why we should be troubled to
-look after our own morality.
-
-For my own part, although believing the principle to be extremely
-doubtful and the extension far from clear, I am quite prepared to admit
-that when you have a reasonable expectation of bringing in a five suit,
-it is desirable that you should make your partner acquainted with the
-exact length of it, but I am equally prepared to deny its expediency
-when there is no chance of bringing it in; if such a suit must be
-played, and you may be so unfortunately placed that it is unavoidable,
-it would be much better to keep the length of it buried in your own
-bosom.
-
-Oddly enough when another writer, emulous of extending the master,
-and seduced by the analogy that what was sauce for the goose must be
-sauce for the gander, suggested that if it was imperative to lead
-the lowest but one of five, it must be equally obligatory to lead
-the lowest but two of six; (indeed so clear is this next link in the
-chain, that it was the very first thought of myself and some half-dozen
-other light-minded persons, the moment we heard of the principle;
-but, by ill luck, the seed fell on barren ground, for so far were we
-from realizing the importance of our discovery, and taking immediate
-steps to protect the patent, that, sad to relate, _solvuntur tabulæ
-risu_), we find Cavendish in _The Field_ for a time deprecating such
-an eminently logical extension, till I wake up one Saturday morning
-and read that the antepenultimate does not go far enough, and that
-under pain of becoming fossils, we must all lead the lowest but three
-of seven, but four of eight, and so on until we arrive at the lowest
-but nine of thirteen, when further extension in that direction becomes
-impracticable.
-
-Fortunately this arrangement has been simplified, for the game would
-have become even slower than it is, if whenever a player had a ten
-suit, he had to repeat to himself, lowest but one of five, two of six,
-three of seven, till he eventually arrived at lowest but six of ten,
-and after much laborious whittling at the small end of nothing, the
-ultimate outcome is, with any number of a suit from five to thirteen,
-to lead the top but three.
-
-Apropos of this same ultimate outcome, in the Westminster Papers for
-January, 1875, there is a remarkable statement: “We have the opinion,
-never published, of a personal friend, that while you ought to lead the
-lowest card in four suits, you should lead _the third from the top_ in
-five suits;” and this anonymous genius is still “unwept, unhonoured and
-unsung.” Such is fame!
-
-
-
-
-SOME PILLARS OF THE EDIFICE.
-
-
-PILLAR NO. 1.—THE PHILOSOPHY OF WHIST.
-
-IN case the _ipse dixit_ of Cavendish in _The Field_, or “the preface,”
-should fail to convince, we have also had the sacred name of Philosophy
-dragged in to countenance these proceedings.
-
-Ever since there has been any record of philosophers, their schools
-appear to have been about as numerous as themselves. Plato for his
-own share had five different sets of followers. All the systems
-contradicted each other, and the disciples of each master usually held
-different views as to his tenets; as this has continued down to our own
-day, for the dogmatic philosopher who recently died in Chelsea spent
-more than half a century in contradicting himself, while two of the
-most prominent disciples of Comte are fighting tooth and nail at this
-very moment, when we hear of _the_ philosophy of Whist, the enquiry
-naturally arises, which philosophy? The Whist philosophy of Cam,
-propounded day by day, was, that there is no absolute never or always.
-The same idea runs through the entire treatise of Clay; and if there is
-one point more especially distinctive than another in the teaching of
-that great master, repeated again and again, and constantly insisted
-upon, it is that all the maxims of Whist are open to innumerable
-exceptions, that the coat must be cut according to the cloth, and that
-he is the finest Whist-player who can most readily grasp that fact.
-(Here I may remark, in a parenthesis, that though the late Mr. Clay
-eventually gave a qualified assent to the penultimate lead and the
-forced discard, it has yet to be shown that he assented to either the
-one or the other, in its present uncompromising and preposterous form,
-a form which is utterly repugnant to his every public utterance).
-
-This is considerably opposed to the fearful and wonderful philosophy
-of Dr. Pole, the basis of which appears to be that it is always
-imperative to lead your longest suit, which he naively admits to be a
-losing game. It is unfortunate that his lines are drawn in a commercial
-age, for if he had only lived in the time of Don Quixote he might have
-taken high rank.
-
-To ignore the teaching of a long line of illustrious dead, to set
-precedent at defiance, and deliberately to go out of your way in order
-to lose, is an extension of the old stoical principle, “under all
-circumstances to keep your temper,” in the very best latter-day manner;
-but reasonably doubtful as to the success of such an appeal if left to
-stand upon its own bottom, he invokes elementary algebra to his aid.
-Now elementary algebra is not devoid of good points; by its means we
-learn that a man may—either in time or in eternity—hold 635,013,559,600
-different whist-hands. Moreover, every hand, he will have an entirely
-different purpose; sometimes to win the game; sometimes to save it, and
-with that end in view, will lay himself out to make tricks varying
-from three to eleven—below and above that number, since the invention
-of short Whist, he has no need to trouble himself—and the moral most
-people would draw, would be that in that portentous number of hands,
-some of them would require very different treatment from others; the
-philosopher of Whist, however, thinks not, but would fit all those six
-hundred and thirty-five thousand odd millions of hands into the same
-Procrustes’ bed, and would always lead the longest suit. Again, Whist
-is an art; if in any sense a science, it is certainly not an exact
-science, and the application of algebra to art is somewhat limited.
-There are far too many unknown quantities in the equation.
-
-Take our old friend king and another in the second hand; Permutations
-and Combinations will inform us sooner or later—I should imagine later,
-for to my certain knowledge, a series of four thousand two hundred and
-nineteen is not enough—as to the number of times we shall make it or
-lose it, whether we play it, or do not play it; but they will give us
-no clue as to the extent of damage we may receive when it is played
-and taken by the third hand, or as to the loss we incur when the ace
-is in the fourth hand, by importing uncertainty into the game. When we
-do not put it on and lose it, we may—or may not—lose one trick; when
-we put it on and lose it, we may lose any number. The whole system of
-the newly suggested play of the first and second hand is undermined
-by the fundamentally false assumption that the lead is always from a
-long suit; that everybody, irrespective of the score, has merely to
-ascertain which is his longest suit, and then to take immediate steps
-to put the table in possession of its exact length is so transparently
-simple, that such extreme simplicity in a game of skill is enough of
-itself to arouse the gravest suspicion.
-
-
- Qui studet optatam cursu contingere metam,
- Multa tulit fecitque puer, sudavit et alsit.
-
-
-Just to see how the plan worked, six consecutive times have I with king
-and two others—using my best judgment as to the lead—passed the queen
-led, and six times have I lost a trick; this may show that my judgment
-was bad; but it shows, with much more absolute certainty, that the
-lead, in those six cases, was not from numerical strength.
-
-If the lead always were, it needs no demonstration to prove that the
-holder of the king has seldom anything to gain by heading the trick;
-that might be granted without the slightest demur; only how about the
-combination game? If the fourth player has to play the ace on the
-queen led, where is the king? certainly, not according to our present
-knowledge, in the second hand with one or two of the suit.
-
-As to not heading the queen with king and another, one of the latest
-Cavendish coups, it is really so puerile, he must be practising upon
-our credulity; the veriest bumble-puppist that ever crawled upon this
-earth is too well aware that, every now and again, a trick may be made
-by the most absurd and outrageous play—or rather want of play—otherwise
-the breed would have been as extinct as the dodo.
-
-There are positions enough, where the king is the only card of re-entry
-and where, unless the fourth hand can get in with the ace and draw the
-trumps, the game is over, but it is not so here; the coup succeeds,
-simply and solely, because, by a most improbable chance, the fourth
-hand holds one, while the second player holds two of the suit. Genuine,
-unadulterated bumble-puppy! Whenever I am induced to propound a system
-of Whist philosophy, enlivened with texts from the Gospel according to
-Cocker (_absit omen_), its fundamental principle will be that four in
-thirteen goes twice.
-
-If I with king and another head the queen and make it, and have nothing
-else to do, I can return the suit, ruff the third round and make three
-consecutive tricks; not a bad thing in these hard times when the rental
-of our estates is constantly diminishing, and the income tax has gone
-up another penny.
-
-Now suppose I pass it and my partner makes the ace, he must open a
-new suit. We have had a surfeit of statistics lately, still, if the
-gentleman at present in possession of the calculating machine of the
-late Mr. Babbage would kindly turn the handle, and let me know how many
-tricks on the average are lost by merely opening a suit, I should be
-much obliged to him. When the leader and his partner either hold the
-whole of it, or nothing at all, it may be done with impunity, but under
-ordinary circumstances it usually entails a loss of one trick and often
-two.
-
-I have considered at some length the original lead of the longest suit,
-and the lead of the penultimate, because on these two commandments hang
-all the latter-day law, but not the profits: for on the strength—for
-want of a more appropriate word—of these figments, at this very moment
-our guide is attacking the recognised play of the third hand, our
-philosopher is suggesting an entirely new set of proceedings for the
-second hand, while both guide and philosopher are doing their level
-best to assist our friend in New York to bouleverse the leads.
-
-
-PILLAR NO. 2.—ILLUSTRATIVE WHIST-HANDS.
-
-IF you watch a thousand ordinary whist-hands, the great bulk will be
-illustrative of (1) human stupidity; a few (2) of super-human cunning,
-and out of the remainder the faddist may pick out (3) one or two to
-countenance any form of mania from which he may be suffering at the
-moment.
-
-The first class—always provided that you meet it in the spirit and not
-in the flesh—is often amusing.
-
-The second is, if skilful, generally open to the objection that,
-as the same result might be attained by a more simple and equally
-legitimate method of play, there is an enormous amount of good skill
-gone wrong.
-
-The third class—and this is the class we have now to deal with—is never
-amusing, seldom skilful, and not uncommonly misses its tip altogether;
-for instance, two hands given in the ‘Theory of Whist,’ to illustrate
-certain leading principles of the game, were promptly gibbeted by
-another eminent authority, and are still hanging in chains in the
-Westminster Papers, for September and October, 1873, as “most striking
-examples of brute force and stupidity.”
-
-In any case they prove nothing. Suppose some malefactor, with a turn
-for leading singletons, were to bring before the public a dozen or two
-of hands illustrative of results which would make any leader of the top
-card but three livid with envy, at the same time suppressing two, four,
-or six dozen hands, where the lead had brought him to condign grief,
-would that in any way tend to show the lead was good?
-
-Still carefully selected hands, although we may disapprove of their
-_raison d’être_, are not necessarily revolting to the intelligence; but
-there is a limit, and attempting to show such a moral as this, that
-with king and another, it is dangerous to play the king second hand
-on the queen led, because your partner may hold the ace single, is
-perilously near it.
-
-I am not perhaps so conversant with the Whist-hands in _The Field_ as I
-ought to be, for the difficulty of its Catherine-wheel notation deters
-me; but about two years ago, I came across a few _disjecta membra_
-intended to bolster up some mechanical substitute for brains, and a
-similar fragment with a similar intention has lately been quoted in
-that paper. To make the matter more simple we will transpose it from
-the first to the third person. “A holds ace, knave, five, four, three
-and two of hearts; his partner B holds king, queen and a small heart;
-A leads the ace of hearts. He then leads three of hearts. His left
-hand adversary, Y, plays ten, B queen, and Z, fourth player, nine.
-Neither adversary has asked for trumps,” which is entirely a matter
-of opinion; for as no human being knows, or ever will know, where a
-single trump is, Z might have begun a call, and finding the whole heart
-suit dead against him, and knowing the exact position of every card in
-it, thought fit to conceal it. “Consequently two of hearts must be in
-A’s hand, and three other hearts besides.” Up to this point, except
-the little difference of opinion as to a signal, our unanimity is
-wonderful. “All the trumps now come out,” and B, in the confusion, gets
-rid of his king of hearts. That brief sentence about the trumps, like
-the pie in Pickwick, which was all fat, is rather too rich. If Y and Z
-had them and they “came out” against their will, it was rough on Y and
-Z. If Y and Z, with the fact staring them in the face that B holds the
-king of hearts and A the remaining four—for we are all agreed that this
-is clear—took any active steps to induce trumps to “come out,” they
-must have been rampant lunatics; even if Y and Z were not lunatics, but
-as ardent admirers of the antepenultimate lead, and anxious for its
-success, at any cost to themselves, merely did their best to ensure the
-“coming out” of the trumps, how B got the opportunity to discard the
-king of hearts would still be involved in Stygian darkness. The most
-reasonable supposition, if Y and Z really did lead trumps, is that he
-dropped it quietly under the table, in sure and certain hope that they
-were the very last people to take a mean advantage of him. If A and
-B, in addition to the entire suit of hearts, had also the strength in
-trumps, nothing could prevent those hearts from being brought in.
-
-Though futile for the purpose designed, the fragment has two other
-morals.
-
-(1) That if A and B hold the command of trumps, and an entire plain
-suit, they can bring it in, _in spite_ of proclaiming its exact
-position to the adversary.
-
-(2) That if Y and Z hold the trumps, when an antepenultimate is
-led, those trumps not only appear to “come out” of themselves like
-mushrooms—spontaneously and without obvious cause—which in itself
-would be sufficiently aggravating, but they “come out” at the most
-inopportune moments, to the dire discomfiture of their unfortunate
-owners. (If any decently responsible person will guarantee that my
-adversaries will always do their best to get trumps out for me whenever
-I lead an antepenultimate, nobody shall in future have to complain of
-my not going far enough in that direction).
-
-Special arrangements for taking a quantity above five are seldom of
-practical use; on the contrary, such suits have an innate propensity
-for making themselves unpleasantly conspicuous, without any _mécanique_.
-
-It must either be a very weak cause to require such advocacy, or an
-uncommonly strong one to survive it.
-
-
- Nec tali auxilio nec defensoribus istis.
-
-
-
-PILLAR NO. 3.—DEVELOPMENTS, EXTENSIONS OF PRINCIPLE, AND
-GENERALIZATIONS.
-
-
- The earth hath bubbles as the water hath,
- And these are of them.
-
-
-A DEVELOPMENT is such an ambiguous expression (for it may be either
-good, bad or indifferent) that, on that understanding, we may freely
-admit its existence; but an extension of principle has several
-varieties, is as slippery as an eel, and both the extension and the
-principle must be regarded with a wary eye.
-
-The principle that is extended by substituting ‘always’ for ‘generally’
-and then appealing boldly to history to sanction the alteration
-is one form. Another form is to invent both the principle and the
-extension when the occasion arises, as in the principle of leading the
-bottom of an intermediate sequence, and its extension to penultimates,
-antepenultimates, and so forth. Logicians term this _petitio_, not
-_extensio principii_.
-
-Even when you have got firm hold of a good principle, or a good
-india-rubber ring, you will get into trouble if you stretch it
-indefinitely.
-
-There is no sounder principle going than that it is generally desirable
-to acquaint your partner with the state of your hand, but it neither
-follows that you should place it face upwards on the table, nor avail
-yourself of those extensions known to Hoyle as “piping at whisk,”
-though the first is undoubtedly legitimate, and the second, if it were
-only first duly exploited by some faddist in _The Field_, would be
-quite as legitimate as any extension that has appeared there in our
-time.
-
-While these extensions of principle are in the air, some regard should
-be paid to the interests of that numerous class whose information is
-entirely derived from inspection of the last trick. Already they had
-to find out in that obscure medium what suit was led, who led it, and
-how each card fell. Now, they have in addition, to track to their lair
-several missing minor cards, and when they have succeeded in doing so,
-to decide whether they indicate a signal, a nine suit, the lowest of
-a long head sequence, or the lunacy of the leader. If their happiness
-is to be taken into consideration one important extension of principle
-must be added to the list.
-
-It is a principle—vide law 91—that we may all see the penultimate
-trick, and the extension that we may all see the antepenultimate and
-so on up to thirteen, proceeds _pari passu_ with the other famous
-demonstration; it also conveys the same kind of information, in exactly
-the same way, for it shows those who have eyes in their heads that
-which they already knew, and reduces to a more hopeless state of
-imbecility those dependent on its aid.
-
-I do not advocate it for two reasons; in the first place, because I
-abjure and detest the principle itself; secondly, because the only time
-I ever attempted to extend a principle, I was accused of _sorites_,
-which sounds like some unpleasant form of skin disease, and such
-insinuations, though untrue, are disagreeable. As I do not wish to
-expose myself to them, I make a present of the idea to any pupil of the
-new academy who may be intent on further spoiling the game.
-
-“One man’s meat is another man’s poison,” and what the late
-Government considered to be extensions of principle, developments and
-generalizations, their successors stigmatize as—
-
-
- “Red ruin and the breaking up of laws.”
-
-
-The present condition of Whist may be briefly and graphically
-expressed by the well-known epitaph:—
-
-
- “I was well, I wanted to be better, now I am here.”
-
-
-Among all the quasi-extensions of spurious principles, one fine old
-crusted principle is in danger of being lost sight of altogether, and
-now that attention is called to it, I sincerely hope that no modern
-pedant will be tempted to extend it. The principle is, TO LEAVE WELL
-ALONE.
-
-Such are the three remarkably unstable pillars, on which rest the
-proposals for upsetting the recognized play of the first, second, and
-third hand; and if they give way, down comes the entire superstructure.
-Happily, the purely academic discussion on the American leads is not
-likely to trouble the general public much; its fascinations for them
-are not great, but if those fascinations should induce the doctrinaire
-mind to lessen its mischievous activity in other directions, it may
-yet turn out to be a blessing in disguise. As we are threatened with
-a book devoted to these leads, I confine myself to mentioning that in
-answer to eighteen enquiries, “What do you think of the new leads?”
-sixteen replies were to the effect that a good player, if he took his
-coat off and went into the matter thoroughly, might master them in six
-months, and a duffer, under the same circumstances, in half a century,
-but that in neither case was the game worth the candle; the advice of
-the other two, to “go to Bath and get my head shaved,” was rude, and
-the latter half of it quite uncalled for.
-
-
-
-
-WHITTLING AT THE SMALL END OF NOTHING. CONVENTIONS AND ELABORATE RULES
-FOR EXCEPTIONAL PLAY.
-
-
-SO many articles have we had endeavouring to explain what a convention
-is, from the Cavendish point of view, that at last the common-sense
-view, driven from these inhospitable shores by the interminable flux of
-words, has taken refuge at the Antipodes; it was seen in the office of
-_The Australasian_ in May, 1884, and I presume it is there yet. If at
-any time you happen to be passing through Melbourne, and send in your
-card to the editor, I have no doubt he will show it to you. Item,—two
-long articles giving minute directions when not to lead trumps from
-five.
-
-If the basis of play is always to lead the longest suit these
-directions must be altogether unnecessary; the answer is self-evident.
-“You should invariably lead the penultimate from a five suit of trumps,
-save and except when you hold a plain suit of greater length, and then
-you should lead the highest but three.”
-
-Oh that mine enemy always would! for, I regret to say, some short time
-ago, a miscreant—one of the soundest Whist-players in this country—took
-up the four, five and six of diamonds (trumps); ace, knave, ten,
-eight, four and three of hearts; king, six and four of spades; and the
-eight of clubs, _which he led_. His score was one, ours four. I was
-second player, and held, _inter alia_, ace, queen, seven and six of
-clubs; and king, ten, eight, seven and five of trumps; my partner held
-king, knave, five and four of clubs, and though he turned up the queen
-of trumps, we lost four by cards and the game.
-
-Now this is a man who reads his newspaper, and should, in common
-decency, have led the ace and four of hearts. Somewhat nettled by the
-success of his nefarious play, I said to him, “even if you have not
-seen the Fruits of Philosophy, you must know better than to lead a
-singleton,” and this was his ribald reply:—
-
-
- How sad and mad and bad it was,
- But still how it was sweet.
-
-
-To return to my subject. If any one were to ask me when not to lead
-trumps with five, I should reply, “My very dear sir, it is not in my
-power to provide you with intelligence, the stock in my possession is
-barely sufficient for my own use; with five trumps, you should lead
-them nearly always, especially when you are very weak in the plain
-suits; but if, after acquiring a fair knowledge of general principles,
-you are unable to find out for yourself when it is inexpedient to
-lead them, I am quite sure nobody can teach you, and you may depend
-upon this, that a multitude of minute rules, purporting to explain
-to you when you should not do that which you would be right in doing
-ninety-fives times in a hundred, are a mockery, a delusion, and a snare.
-
-“Lay to heart the story of that little fish, which desired to know
-all the mysteries of fishing-tackle, and when its prayer was granted,
-was unable to assimilate its knowledge, and perished miserably from
-inanition. At the same time, if, after what I have said, you should
-feel disposed to commit those two articles to memory, and to repeat
-them to yourself whenever a difficulty arises, there is nothing in the
-laws of Whist to prevent you.”
-
-It is sad to reflect that such an incomparable talent for applying
-a straight-waistcoat to every thing should have blundered into a
-wrong groove; a tithe of the energy and perseverance devoted to
-throttling intelligence, and knocking the brains out of the game,
-would have placed our villainous code of laws, and our incongruous
-and contradictory decisions on a sound basis; but it was not to be;
-_dis aliter visum_, and the following pathetic appeal, reprinted from
-“_Knowledge_,” has been treated with silent contempt:—
-
-
-
- A WHIST-PLAYER’S WAIL.
-
- Whist-players have long been suffering acutely
- from three uncertainties—uncertainty of the laws,
- uncertainty of decisions, and uncertainty of authority.
-
- The laws are ninety-one in number, and, in “Cavendish
- on Whist,” are supplemented by forty-three explanatory
- notes and a couple of suppositions, which again have
- been further explained—if explain is the right word
- in this connection—by innumerable irresponsible
- decisions. Now, though it may be Utopian to expect such
- a badly-worded jumble of laws and definitions ever to
- be superseded by an intelligible code, is it impossible
- to have these decisions based on a principle of some
- kind, or, at any rate, for them to be consistent with
- themselves?
-
- At one time the decider has confined himself to the
- strictest letter of the law, at another time he has
- strained it to breaking; sometimes he has read the
- laws one with another; sometimes he has taken one and
- left the other out in the cold; sometimes he appears
- arbitrarily to give his decision out of his own head,
- quite irrespective of any law whatever; and finally,
- and worst of all, after consistently maintaining
- one position for years and years, until—rightly or
- wrongly—some doubtful point is settled, he suddenly
- turns round, with his tail where his head always used
- to be, flatly contradicts himself, and throws it once
- more into confusion.
-
- The usual excuse for a _volte face_ of this kind is,
- “that this is a free country, where every man has a
- right to change his opinions;” and I never hear that
- dreadful exordium without instinctively making for the
- door, knowing from bitter experience that mischief
- is brewing. “That judges themselves differ, and the
- judgment of one court is often over-ruled by another,”
- this also is, I am afraid, true, though it has no
- bearing on the matter in hand; for here we have a judge
- who, on his appointment to the bench—granting, what
- is strongly disputed, that a Whist arbitrator is a
- judge and has a bench—having found a well-established
- precedent and taken it for his guide in numerous
- judgments, one fine day reverses it without notice and
- without leave to appeal.
-
- To show that I am not making random accusations, I give
- three examples—there are others in stock, but these
- appear sufficient for my immediate purpose:—
-
- I. “The cards are cut. In taking up the packs, I join
- the two packs, but leave one card on the table; this
- card would have been the middle, not the bottom card.
- I claim a fresh cut; my adversaries claim that it is a
- misdeal. Am I entitled to a new cut or not?” Answer,
- No. 1. “We think you cannot make your adversary cut
- a second time. We do not think that when you left a
- card on the table it could be said that there was any
- confusion in the cutting, and unless you can make out
- that what you did amounted to confusion in the cutting,
- it is a misdeal.”
-
- Answer, No. 2. “The claim is void. There is nothing
- in the laws or the custom of the table to make this
- a misdeal.” Both these decisions are by the same
- authority. A more recent authority says, “According to
- the old rules, a misdeal might have been claimed; but
- not now, under Law 34.” The explanation is ingenious,
- if not ingenuous; but it is open to the objection that,
- as the first decision is dated December, 1873, nine
- years after the present laws came into force, it is
- scarcely water-tight.
-
- II. If A asked B whether he had any of a suit in which
- B had renounced, and B, instead of replying, turned
- and quitted the trick, and was subsequently brought to
- bed of one or more, his silence, combined with turning
- and quitting the trick, was ruled to be an answer in
- the negative within the meaning of the Law and he had
- revoked.
-
- This is a decision of Clay’s; and though disputed
- at the time, was the settled practice of Whist for
- fourteen or fifteen years.
-
- Three or four years ago this decision was reversed,
- and authority has now taken its stand upon the literal
- interpretation of Law 74.
-
- III. Some little time since my opinion was asked on
- this point. It was sent to me by a friend in Australia.
- “A and B _v._ Y and Z. Eleven tricks have been played.
- At the twelfth trick A leads a Heart, Y plays a Club,
- B plays a Spade. Before Z has played, Y throws down
- his last card, which turns out to be a Heart. Has he
- revoked?”
-
- Being mortally afraid of putting my foot in it, I much
- prefer to leave the mysterious borderland between
- sanity and insanity to experts in lunacy; however,
- in the sacred cause of friendship, I screwed up my
- courage, and, with considerable trepidation, gave
- an opinion to this effect. “It appears to me that Y
- certainly—this sounds unpleasantly like slang, but such
- is not my intention—revoked if the club was a trump,
- and, probably, if it was a card of a plain suit, for in
- playing his last card he either led or abandoned his
- hand, which has always been held to be an act of play
- establishing the revoke.”
-
- The question was next submitted to three of the
- best-known and most-respected authorities in this
- country—all champion deciders—whom we will call P. Q.
- R. P. replied, “Unless clubs are trumps I do not think
- Y. has revoked. He has not played again. He has exposed
- a card. If clubs were trumps I think he has played
- again (am not sure). The case is not sufficiently
- stated for a positive opinion.”
-
- Q. and R. did not regard it as insufficiently stated
- in any way, and they had no hesitation in saying that
- Y had not revoked.
-
- When by the next mail it turned out that hearts were
- trumps, when, consequently, the revoke was a shade
- more doubtful than before, while P made no further
- sign, Q and R came to the unanimous conclusion that Y
- had revoked. The authority at the Antipodes who ruled
- originally that there was no revoke, remains in the
- same mind up to the present time.
-
- Is this “vacillating and inconsistent,” or is it not?
-
- Here in a not very complicated difficulty—if only there
- was any agreement on first principles, we have
-
- (_a_) A benighted outsider thinking a revoke is
- established, because a well-known decision overrides
- the law;
-
- (_b_) An intelligent colonist thinking it is not
- established, because he considers the law to override
- the decision.
-
- (_c_) Authority No. 1 giving a somewhat uncertain
- sound, but on the whole inclining to the belief that
- it is either a revoke or it is not; evidently a man of
- judicial mind.
-
- (_d_) Authorities 2 and 3, while never in doubt for
- a moment, first affirming a thing to be white, and
- afterwards, when it has been bleached and is to some
- extent whiter than before, with unabated confidence
- affirming it to be black; and there an important
- question, involving the highest penalty known to the
- law, rests.
-
- If the force of absurdity can go beyond this, then “it
- can go anywhere and do anything.”
-
- The facts are in a nutshell. Either _Y_, when he threw
- his card up, abandoned his hand, or he did not. If he
- did, and _if that is an act of play which establishes a
- revoke_, then he revoked; if he did not, he had merely
- to say so, _cadit quæstio_; the card is an exposed
- one—“just that, and nothing more.” Only we have one,
- or rather two little difficulties to get over. Does
- abandoning the hand establish a revoke? and, if it
- does, is the decision authoritative—that is to say, of
- compulsory obligation?
-
- Who the original decider was, or who gave him authority
- to make a penal enactment in the teeth of Laws 58 and
- 73, I do not know. All I do know is that the decision
- must not be fathered on Clay, for his case 8, “_A_ has
- revoked; _his claim of the game_ and throwing down his
- cards must be held as against himself as an act of
- playing,” is not on all fours; it occupies much firmer
- ground.
-
- Here are two well-matched decisions, “Silence is
- an answer.” “Throwing down the cards establishes a
- revoke,”—of course, with the proviso that one has
- been made—both strain the law; both entail the revoke
- penalty; the only difference is that one is in the
- _ipsissima verba_ of Clay, the other is a mangled
- excerpt; if the strong one has been quietly and
- surreptitiously burked, why, in the name of ordinary
- patience, does the weaker survive?
-
- If decisions are retreating all along the line to a
- safer standpoint on the letter of the law, well and
- good; only tar them all with the same brush, and take
- some means to let the public know it.
-
- Before the lamented demise of the Westminster Papers,
- disputed points were argued at length; whether in the
- number of counsellors there was wisdom, or whether
- too many cooks spoiled the broth, in either event we
- heard both sides. Question and answer could be found
- together, and if the decision did not invariably
- commend itself to our intelligence, we at any rate knew
- what the decision was, and that was the main point; but
- now our position has changed greatly for the worse.
- The present practice of Whist—a direct incentive to
- gambling—is this; whenever any doubt arises, instead
- of being able to lay their hands upon the recorded
- decision and settle it at once, the parties concerned
- first make a bet of one or more sovereigns and then
- write to the _Field_. On the ensuing Saturday afternoon
- a certain amount of money changes hands; two people
- are wiser, but the increase of wisdom is confined to
- themselves, and at the very next table the same process
- is repeated; while numerous quiet, well-meaning people
- like myself, who never bet, never know anything at
- all; for such answers as these, “X. It is a revoke,”
- “A. S. S. You cannot call on Z to pass it,” partake
- very much of the nature of Valentines in that, however
- interesting they may be to the recipient, they arouse
- no corresponding emotion in the world at large.
-
- Lastly, with regard to the authority.
-
- Whist-players are law-abiding to a degree, and
- sufferance is the badge of all their tribe; but still
- they would like to know how the authority obtained what
- the imperfect Member for Northampton is so fond of
- calling his mandate; whether by divine or hereditary
- right, by competitive examination, by election, by
- appointment from the Crown, or whether he sits upon
- us by “the good old rule, the simple plan” _of force
- majeure_ as the Old Man of the Sea sat upon Sindbad.
-
- Bartholomew Binns, an official with the highest
- credentials, after being selected from numerous
- candidates, and receiving a mandate from the sheriffs
- of London and Middlesex, has his decisions reviewed by
- twelve good men and true, and reporters are present
- who publish them through the length and breadth of the
- land? How is our executioner appointed? Who reviews
- his decisions? How are they promulgated? Not that it
- matters to me, personally. When my fatal Monday comes
- round and _sus. per coll._ is written under my name in
- the family archives, I do not imagine it will trouble
- me much whether the operator was born great, has
- achieved greatness, or has had greatness thrust upon
- him. I do not object to the instrument, I object to the
- system; but many Whist-players are more fastidious,
- and protest strenuously against being treated worse
- than other criminals. They hold that the position of a
- functionary who takes upon himself to decide important
- questions of law, and to upset old-established
- precedents, and manufacture new ones on his mere _ipse
- dixit_, should be very clearly defined, and that if one
- man is to unite in his own proper person the attributes
- of prophet, priest and king—three single gentlemen
- rolled into one—he should be duly anointed, consecrated
- and crowned, _ad hoc_.
-
- For questions involving common courtesy, for insoluble
- verbal quibbles, for ethical questions of this type,
- “Ought A to sit quietly at the table while his partner
- B picks Z’s pocket? and if he ought, is it right for
- him to share the plunder?” and for the host of minor
- cases which constantly arise, and for which no law
- could possibly provide, no better arrangement than the
- present could be devised. As long as maniacs exist in
- the land, klepto-, dipso-, homicidal, or Whist—offences
- must come, and in disposing of them—where a cadi is
- the only effective treatment that can be openly
- suggested—the editor of the _Field_ is _facile
- princeps_,
-
-
- In faith he is a worthy gentleman,
- Exceedingly well read.
-
-
- Only if he is to be the _de facto_ authority in _all_
- cases, why not give him the three sanctions just
- mentioned, and make him the authority _de jure_?
- Then—as the _Field_ is not a Whist gazette, and
- can scarcely be expected to devote its columns to
- advertising gratuitously every legislative change,
- and any space it has to spare is used rather for
- elaborating the ceremonial than for settling the
- laws of the cult—in token of our esteem, let us club
- together and present him with a piece of chalk, a
- duster, and a black board, to be set up in some
- easily-accessible spot—say, the middle of Pall
- Mall, or St. James’s-street. Make it the official
- notice-board! When new decisions are created let
- them be legibly inscribed upon it, _coram populo_!
- When well-known decisions are abrogated let them be
- carefully rubbed out at once. Since the Bastille was
- destroyed and _lettres de cachet_ with it, there has
- been no authority without a notice-board; the Salvation
- Army has its “War Cry,” and the Pope himself, when he
- propounds a new dogma, propounds it _ex cathedrâ_.
-
- That is one remedy. Though it is not perfect it has
- two advantages—it is inexpensive, and if in future any
- of us should still remain in ignorance, we should be in
- ignorance by our own fault, and not by misfortune; and
- at any rate it is a more simple and less tortuous plan
- than upsetting well-known decisions in an unofficial
- newspaper, while new editions of our two standard
- Whist-books are subsequently brought out without one
- word of comment or warning.
-
- The alternative remedy—by no means novel, it has been
- suggested, _usque ad nauseam_, and I only bring it
- forward again because at present confusion is worse
- confounded than it has ever been in my recollection—is
- for the leading clubs to appoint a small committee of
- representative Whist-players, with power to revise any
- decisions they may see fit; and when they have revised
- them either to append them to the laws of Whist, or to
- place each decision as a rider under its own particular
- law, and every such decision should be final.
-
- Questions of strict law should never have been
- submitted to an arbitrator at all; they should have
- been cleared up long ago by the legislators themselves;
- though important, they are not very numerous, and
- as they have been well threshed out, and all their
- difficulties are known, the entire matter might be
- completed in a few hours. Why should London wait?
-
-
-The constitution of Whist and the constitution of our beloved country
-are both at the mercy of a grand old man of exuberant verbosity, each
-of whom is able, in some extraordinary way, to persuade himself that
-the side of any question on which he happens to be looking, is not only
-the right side, but that it positively has no other, in spite of the
-fact that in previous stages of his existence, he has himself, both
-recognised and vehemently supported that other side.
-
-For twelve years our despot—a despotism worse than Russian, which is
-tempered by assassination—has had no rival near the throne; for five
-he has absolutely had nobody even to contradict him, and what is the
-upshot? Why this:
-
-
-[2]
- THE EDIFICE WHEN LAST THE MODERN SUBSTITUTE.
- SEEN IN 1879.
-
- 1. That the strongest suit 1. That the longest suit
- should generally be led. should always be led.
-
- 2. That with a bad hand—which 2. That with any kind of
- unfortunately is a hand, you have merely to
- quite a normal condition—a pick out the four suit, which
- strengthening card, or the is the normal suit, and lead
- head of a short suit, should it.
- generally be led.
-
- 3. That the penultimate 3. That (as far as the innumerable
- is a useful lead when there exceptions permit)
- is a reasonable prospect of the penultimate of a
- bringing the suit in. five suit should always be
- led.
-
- 4. That no greater mistake 4. That you should always
- can be made, than to give the table information
- imagine it is desirable in of the exact length of your
- every case to give information suit.
- to your partner.
-
- 5. This being entirely a 5. That with suits from
- new extension, except as a five to thirteen, the top card
- joke, what view would have but three should be led.
- been taken of it five years
- ago it is impossible to say
- positively; but I have my
- own opinion.
-
- 6. That the discard, when 6. That the discard, when
- the adversary declares the adversary declares
- strength in trumps, is a protective strength in trumps, is from
- discard, to prevent the strongest suit, and is a
- him, if possible, from establishing direction to the discarder’s
- any suit. partner to lead that suit.
-
- That the aphorism, discard
- from the strong suit, is
- very imperfect and misleading.
-
- 7. That when an honour 7. That if an honour is
- is led, if the second player led, the second player
- holds a higher honour and should never head it except
- not more than three of the with the ace.
- suit, he should head the
- trick.
-
-
-Always doubtful of my own arithmetic, I am indebted for the following
-figures to a little boy who has recently passed the Fourth Standard at
-an adjacent Board-school. He informs me that during the last decade
-three and a quarter inches of small print have been devoted by the
-editor of the _Field_ to explaining that the modern rule of play at
-Whist is to discard from your best protected suit, when trumps are
-declared against you; twenty-one square inches to supporting the usual
-lead of a small card, from ace to four; and three square inches to
-reversing Clay’s and his own long-established decision, that silence is
-an answer; seventy-eight square inches to minute directions when not
-to lead trumps from five; three hundred and fifty-eight square inches
-to explaining what a convention is, and one acre, two roods, and eight
-perches—be the same more or less—to articles and hands purporting to
-illustrate the American leads, and placing the sheep on the right and
-the goats on the left, we have:—
-
-
- EVIL. GOOD.
-
- One acre, two roods, eight perches, Twenty-one sq.
- plus three square inches, inches,
- plus seventy-eight square inches, plus
- plus three hundred and fifty-eight three and a quarter
- square inches. sq. inches.
-
-
-My young informant adds that the evil, if represented in square inches,
-is 6,273,079, and is in proportion to the good as 258,683 to 1.
-
-The moral would seem to be, that sufficient ink may make an acre and a
-half of white paper black, but will never make those two sides balance.
-
-
- These be thy gods, O Israel.
-
-
-Our ancestors built up and handed down to us a noble game: be it our
-aim to keep it undefiled. The task is difficult.
-
-
- Facilis descensus Averni est,
- Sed revocare gradum, superasque evadere ad auras,
- Hic labor, hoc opus est.
-
-
-An ordinary mind might withstand the philosophy of losing its money
-on principle; it might resist the blandishments—not to say fallacies
-in this connection—of the first part of algebra; American leads will
-never trouble it; but a system which absolves Mrs. Juggins and her
-constituents (a most numerous and important body, where noses are
-counted and not weighed) from any necessity for drawing an inference,
-and at the same time assures them, that not only is it the concentrated
-wisdom of all the ages, but that they are its hierophants, is a great
-power.
-
-
- Yet, how can man die better than facing fearful odds,
- For the ashes of his fathers, and the temples of his gods?
-
-
-And if the modern iconoclast will scatter those ashes, and will destroy
-those temples, we can at any rate dree out our weird, in the proud
-consciousness that we have done our best to prevent him.
-
-
-
-
-CONCLUSION.
-
-
-IN twelve years one general principle has been faintly upheld, while
-three have been stretched on the rack and distorted till their own
-mothers would scarcely know them.
-
-If poor Mathews were to revisit the glimpses of the moon, and to come
-across that _improved_ edition of Clay, could he ever guess that the
-ricketty abortion in the preface had ever been his own healthy and
-intelligent bantling?
-
-Whist-players of every degree, from Deschapelles to Mrs. Juggins, are
-now all supposed to lead the same card—I know they try; for, after
-much anxious thought, I have often seen the penultimate led from king,
-queen and three small cards—and with such a hand as this: ace, king,
-queen, knave of diamonds; two, three, four, five, six and seven of
-hearts; two and three of clubs; and the deuce of spades (trumps),
-whatever the score, if Deschapelles were to lead the king of diamonds,
-and Mrs. Juggins the four of hearts, according to our latest teaching,
-the old woman would receive the gold medal for scientific play, while
-Deschapelles would not be in it.
-
-More than that, although while Mrs. Juggins was making futile attempts
-to establish her long suit, and to explain she held originally six,
-several diamonds would probably be discarded, and she would be in
-danger of never making a trick at all; the apparent end of conventions,
-philosophy and American leads being not to make tricks, but to enable
-the table to count your hand, the award would be right.
-
-Twelve years has the mountain been in labour, and, as Miss Squeers
-remarked, with ungrammatical emphasis, “this is
-
-
- THE HEND.”
-
-
-
-
-
- —————————————————————
- G. E. WATERS, 97, WESTBOURNE GROVE, LONDON.
-
-
-
-
- * * * * *
-
-
-
-
-Transcriber’s Note:
-
-Obvious punctuation errors were corrected.
-
-The printer was inconsistent in using terminal punctuation after a
-player’s initial. This was retained as printed.
-
-Page 60, repeated word “with” removed from text (with considerable
-trepidation)
-
-
-
-***END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE DECLINE AND FALL OF WHIST***
-
-
-******* This file should be named 54145-0.txt or 54145-0.zip *******
-
-
-This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:
-http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/5/4/1/4/54145
-
-
-Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will
-be renamed.
-
-Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright
-law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works,
-so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United
-States without permission and without paying copyright
-royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part
-of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project
-Gutenberg-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm
-concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark,
-and may not be used if you charge for the eBooks, unless you receive
-specific permission. If you do not charge anything for copies of this
-eBook, complying with the rules is very easy. You may use this eBook
-for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports,
-performances and research. They may be modified and printed and given
-away--you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks
-not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the
-trademark license, especially commercial redistribution.
-
-START: FULL LICENSE
-
-THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
-PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
-
-To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free
-distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
-(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project
-Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full
-Project Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at
-www.gutenberg.org/license.
-
-Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project
-Gutenberg-tm electronic works
-
-1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm
-electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
-and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
-(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
-the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or
-destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your
-possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a
-Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound
-by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the
-person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph
-1.E.8.
-
-1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be
-used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
-agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few
-things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
-even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See
-paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project
-Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this
-agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm
-electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.
-
-1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the
-Foundation" or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection
-of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual
-works in the collection are in the public domain in the United
-States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the
-United States and you are located in the United States, we do not
-claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing,
-displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as
-all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope
-that you will support the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting
-free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm
-works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the
-Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with the work. You can easily
-comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the
-same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg-tm License when
-you share it without charge with others.
-
-1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
-what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are
-in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States,
-check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this
-agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing,
-distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any
-other Project Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no
-representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any
-country outside the United States.
-
-1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
-
-1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other
-immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear
-prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work
-on which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the
-phrase "Project Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed,
-performed, viewed, copied or distributed:
-
- This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
- most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no
- restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it
- under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this
- eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the
- United States, you'll have to check the laws of the country where you
- are located before using this ebook.
-
-1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is
-derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not
-contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the
-copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in
-the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are
-redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase "Project
-Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply
-either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or
-obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg-tm
-trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
-
-1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted
-with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
-must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any
-additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms
-will be linked to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works
-posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the
-beginning of this work.
-
-1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm
-License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
-work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.
-
-1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
-electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
-prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
-active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
-Gutenberg-tm License.
-
-1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
-compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including
-any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access
-to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format
-other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official
-version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site
-(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense
-to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means
-of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original "Plain
-Vanilla ASCII" or other form. Any alternate format must include the
-full Project Gutenberg-tm License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
-
-1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
-performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works
-unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
-
-1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
-access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
-provided that
-
-* You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
- the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method
- you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed
- to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he has
- agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project
- Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid
- within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are
- legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty
- payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project
- Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in
- Section 4, "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg
- Literary Archive Foundation."
-
-* You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
- you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
- does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm
- License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all
- copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue
- all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg-tm
- works.
-
-* You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of
- any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
- electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of
- receipt of the work.
-
-* You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
- distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.
-
-1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project
-Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than
-are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing
-from both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and The
-Project Gutenberg Trademark LLC, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm
-trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.
-
-1.F.
-
-1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
-effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
-works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project
-Gutenberg-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm
-electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may
-contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate
-or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other
-intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or
-other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or
-cannot be read by your equipment.
-
-1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right
-of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
-Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
-Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
-Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
-liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
-fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
-LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
-PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
-TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
-LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
-INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
-DAMAGE.
-
-1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
-defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
-receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
-written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you
-received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium
-with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you
-with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in
-lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person
-or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second
-opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If
-the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing
-without further opportunities to fix the problem.
-
-1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
-in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO
-OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT
-LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
-
-1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
-warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of
-damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement
-violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the
-agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or
-limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or
-unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the
-remaining provisions.
-
-1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
-trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
-providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in
-accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the
-production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm
-electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses,
-including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of
-the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this
-or any Project Gutenberg-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or
-additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any
-Defect you cause.
-
-Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm
-
-Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of
-electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
-computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It
-exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations
-from people in all walks of life.
-
-Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
-assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's
-goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will
-remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
-Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
-and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future
-generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary
-Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see
-Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at
-www.gutenberg.org
-
-Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary
-Archive Foundation
-
-The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
-501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
-state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
-Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
-number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary
-Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by
-U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.
-
-The Foundation's principal office is in Fairbanks, Alaska, with the
-mailing address: PO Box 750175, Fairbanks, AK 99775, but its
-volunteers and employees are scattered throughout numerous
-locations. Its business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt
-Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to
-date contact information can be found at the Foundation's web site and
-official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact
-
-For additional contact information:
-
- Dr. Gregory B. Newby
- Chief Executive and Director
- gbnewby@pglaf.org
-
-Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
-Literary Archive Foundation
-
-Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide
-spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
-increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
-freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest
-array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations
-($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
-status with the IRS.
-
-The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
-charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
-States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
-considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
-with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations
-where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND
-DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular
-state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate
-
-While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
-have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
-against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
-approach us with offers to donate.
-
-International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
-any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
-outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
-
-Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation
-methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other
-ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To
-donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate
-
-Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works.
-
-Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
-Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be
-freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
-distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of
-volunteer support.
-
-Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed
-editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in
-the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not
-necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper
-edition.
-
-Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search
-facility: www.gutenberg.org
-
-This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,
-including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
-Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
-subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
-
diff --git a/old/54145-0.zip b/old/54145-0.zip
deleted file mode 100644
index 8258762..0000000
--- a/old/54145-0.zip
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/54145-h.zip b/old/54145-h.zip
deleted file mode 100644
index f397427..0000000
--- a/old/54145-h.zip
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/54145-h/54145-h.htm b/old/54145-h/54145-h.htm
deleted file mode 100644
index 7866467..0000000
--- a/old/54145-h/54145-h.htm
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,2583 +0,0 @@
-<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
- "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
-<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
-<head>
-<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" />
-<title>The Project Gutenberg eBook of The Decline and Fall of Whist, by John Petch Hewby</title>
- <style type="text/css">
-
-body {
- margin-left: 10%;
- margin-right: 10%;
-}
-
- h1,h2,h3,h4 {
- text-align: center; /* all headings centered */
- clear: both;
-}
- .faux {
- font-size: 0.5em; /*this font size could be anything */
- visibility: hidden;}
-
-p {
- margin-top: .75em;
- text-align: justify;
- text-indent: 1.25em;
- margin-bottom: .75em;
-}
-
- .maintitle {font-size: 200%; font-weight: bold; text-align: center; text-indent: 0;}
- .copyright {text-align: center; font-size: 70%; text-indent: 0;}
- .author {font-size: 120%; text-align: center; text-indent: 0;}
- .authorof {font-size: 70%; text-align: center; text-indent: 0; margin-bottom: 0; margin-top: 0;}
- .small {font-size: 70%;}
- div.chapter {page-break-before: always;}
-
-
- .center {text-align: center; text-indent: 0;}
-
- .smcap {font-variant: small-caps; font-style: normal;}
- .blockquot { margin-left: 10%; margin-right: 10%; font-size: 90%;}
-
- .tnote {border: dashed 1px; margin-left: 10%; margin-right: 10%; padding-bottom: .5em; padding-top: .5em;
- padding-left: .5em; padding-right: .5em; text-indent: 0;}
-
- .unindent {margin-top: .75em;
- text-align: justify;
- margin-bottom: .75em;
- text-indent: 0;}
-hr {
- width: 33%;
- margin-top: 1em;
- margin-bottom: 1em;
- margin-left: auto;
- margin-right: auto;
- clear: both;
-}
-hr.chap {width: 65%}
-hr.full {width: 95%;}
-
-
-/* Poetry */
-.poetry-container
-{
- text-align: center;
-}
-
-.poetry
-{
- display: inline-block;
- text-align: left;
-}
-
-.poetry .stanza
-{
- margin: 1em auto;
-}
-
-.poetry .verse
-{
- text-indent: -3em;
- padding-left: 3em;
-}
-
-
-
-table {
- margin-left: auto;
- margin-right: auto;
-}
-
-
-.pagenum { /* uncomment the next line for invisible page numbers */
- /* visibility: hidden; */
- position: absolute;
- left: 92%;
- font-size: smaller;
- text-align: right;
- font-style: normal;
- text-indent: 0;} /* page numbers */
-
-
-/* Images */
- img {border: 0;}
-
-
-.figcenter {
- margin: auto;
- text-align: center;
-}
-
-
-/*Drop caps*/
-.drop-cap {
- text-indent: 0em;
- text-align: justify;
-}
-.drop-cap:first-letter
-{
- float: left;
- margin: 0.15em 0.1em 0em 0em;
- font-size: 250%;
- line-height:0.5em;
-}
-
-
-
-@media handheld
-{
- .chapter
- {
- page-break-before: always;
- }
-
- h2.no-break
- {
- page-break-before: avoid;
- padding-top: 0;
- }
-
- .poetry
- {
- display: block;
- margin-left: 1.5em;
- }
- .drop-cap:first-letter
- {
- float: none;
- margin: 0;
- font-size: 100%;
- }
-}
-
- hr.pg { width: 100%;
- margin-top: 3em;
- margin-bottom: 0em;
- margin-left: auto;
- margin-right: auto;
- height: 4px;
- border-width: 4px 0 0 0; /* remove all borders except the top one */
- border-style: solid;
- border-color: #000000;
- clear: both; }
- </style>
-</head>
-<body>
-<h1>The Project Gutenberg eBook, The Decline and Fall of Whist, by John Petch
-Hewby</h1>
-<p>This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States
-and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no
-restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it
-under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this
-eBook or online at <a
-href="http://www.gutenberg.org">www.gutenberg.org</a>. If you are not
-located in the United States, you'll have to check the laws of the
-country where you are located before using this ebook.</p>
-<p>Title: The Decline and Fall of Whist</p>
-<p> An Old Fashioned View of New Fangled Play</p>
-<p>Author: John Petch Hewby</p>
-<p>Release Date: February 10, 2017 [eBook #54145]</p>
-<p>Language: English</p>
-<p>Character set encoding: UTF-8</p>
-<p>***START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE DECLINE AND FALL OF WHIST***</p>
-<p>&nbsp;</p>
-<h4>E-text prepared by Emmy, MFR,<br />
- and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team<br />
- (<a href="http://www.pgdp.net">http://www.pgdp.net</a>)<br />
- from page images digitized by<br />
- the Google Books Library Project<br />
- (<a href="http://books.google.com">http://books.google.com</a>)<br />
- and generously made available by<br />
- Internet Archive<br />
- (<a href="https://archive.org">https://archive.org</a>)</h4>
-<p>&nbsp;</p>
-<table border="0" style="background-color: #ccccff;margin: 0 auto;" cellpadding="10">
- <tr>
- <td valign="top">
- Note:
- </td>
- <td>
- Images of the original pages are available through
- Internet Archive. See
- <a href="https://archive.org/details/declineandfallw00hewbgoog">
- https://archive.org/details/declineandfallw00hewbgoog</a>
- </td>
- </tr>
-</table>
-<p>&nbsp;</p>
-<hr class="pg" />
-<p>&nbsp;</p>
-<p>&nbsp;</p>
-<p>&nbsp;</p>
-
-<h1 class="faux">THE
-DECLINE AND FALL
-OF WHIST</h1>
-<div class="figcenter" style="width: 600px;">
-<img src="images/cover.jpg" width="600" height="800" alt="This cover has been created by the transcriber and is placed in the public domain." />
-</div>
-<hr class="chap" />
-<div class="chapter"></div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_1" id="Page_1">[1]</a></span></p>
-
-
-
-
-<div class="maintitle"><span class="small">THE</span><br />
-DECLINE AND FALL<br />
-OF WHIST<br /><br /></div>
-
-<div class="center">
-<i>An Old Fashioned View of New<br />
-Fangled Play</i><br />
-<br />
-BY<br />
-<span class="author">THE AUTHOR</span><br />
-<span class="authorof">OF “WHIST OR BUMBLEPUPPY”</span><br />
-<br /><br /><br />
-<b>London</b><br />
-G. E. WATERS 97 <span class="smcap">Westbourne Grove</span><br />
-<span class="smcap">SIMPKIN MARSHALL &amp; Co. Stationers’ Hall Court</span><br />
-1884<br />
-</div>
-
-<hr class="chap" />
-<div class="chapter"></div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_2" id="Page_2">[2]</a><br /><a name="Page_3" id="Page_3">[3]</a></span></p>
-
-
-
-
-<h2>CONTENTS.</h2>
-
-
-
-
-
-
-<div class="center">
-<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" summary="Contents">
-<tr>
-<td align="left">&nbsp;</td>
-<td align="right">Page</td>
-</tr>
-
-<tr>
-<td align="left">Introductory</td>
-<td align="right"><a href="#Page_7">7</a></td>
-</tr>
-
-<tr>
-<td align="left">&nbsp;</td>
-</tr>
-
-<tr>
-<td align="left">Wooden Arrangement, No. 1—</td>
-</tr>
-
-<tr>
-<td align="left"><span style="margin-left: 2em;">The Signal and the Echo</span></td>
-<td align="right"><a href="#Page_9">9</a></td>
-</tr>
-
-<tr>
-<td align="left">&nbsp;</td>
-</tr>
-
-<tr>
-<td align="left">Wooden Arrangement, No. 2—</td>
-</tr>
-
-<tr>
-<td align="left"><span style="margin-left: 2em;">Tampering with the Discard</span></td>
-<td align="right"><a href="#Page_12">12</a></td>
-</tr>
-
-<tr>
-<td align="left">&nbsp;</td>
-</tr>
-
-<tr>
-<td align="left">The Modern Game</td>
-<td align="right"><a href="#Page_19">19</a></td>
-</tr>
-
-<tr>
-<td align="left">&nbsp;</td>
-</tr>
-
-<tr>
-<td align="left">Wooden Arrangement, No. 3—</td>
-</tr>
-
-<tr>
-<td align="left"><span style="margin-left: 2em;">Original Lead of the Longest Suit</span></td>
-<td align="right"><a href="#Page_20">20</a></td>
-</tr>
-
-<tr>
-<td align="left">&nbsp;</td>
-</tr>
-
-<tr>
-<td align="left">Wooden Arrangement, No. 4—</td>
-</tr>
-
-<tr>
-<td align="left"><span style="margin-left: 2em;">The Lead of the Penultimate and its Congeners</span></td>
-<td align="right"><a href="#Page_25">25</a></td>
-</tr>
-
-<tr>
-<td align="left">&nbsp;</td>
-</tr>
-
-<tr>
-<td align="left">Some Pillars of the Modern Edifice—</td>
-</tr>
-
-<tr>
-<td align="left"><span style="margin-left: 2em;">Pillar No. 1—The Philosophy of Whist</span></td>
-<td align="right"><a href="#Page_33">33</a></td>
-</tr>
-
-<tr>
-<td align="left"><span style="margin-left: 2em;">Pillar No. 2—Illustrative Whist Hands</span></td>
-<td align="right"><a href="#Page_41">41</a></td>
-</tr>
-
-<tr>
-<td align="left"><span style="margin-left: 2em;">Pillar No. 3—Developments, Generalizations, and Extensions of Principle</span></td>
-<td align="right"><a href="#Page_47">47</a></td>
-</tr>
-
-<tr>
-<td align="left">&nbsp;</td>
-</tr>
-
-<tr>
-<td align="left">Whittling at the Small End of Nothing</td>
-<td align="right"><a href="#Page_52">52</a></td>
-</tr>
-
-<tr>
-<td align="left">&nbsp;</td>
-</tr>
-
-<tr>
-<td align="left">A Whist Player’s Wail</td>
-<td align="right"><a href="#Page_56">56</a></td>
-</tr>
-
-<tr>
-<td align="left">&nbsp;</td>
-</tr>
-
-<tr>
-<td align="left">Arithmetic Applied to Whist by a Small Boy</td>
-<td align="right"><a href="#Page_70">70</a></td>
-</tr>
-
-<tr>
-<td align="left">&nbsp;</td>
-</tr>
-
-<tr>
-<td align="left">Conclusion</td>
-<td align="right"><a href="#Page_73">73</a></td>
-</tr>
-
-</table></div>
-
-
-<hr class="chap" />
-<div class="chapter"></div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_4" id="Page_4">[4]</a><br /><a name="Page_5" id="Page_5">[5]</a></span></p>
-
-
-
-
-<h2>PREFACE.</h2>
-
-
-<p class="unindent"><span class="smcap">As</span> it has been taken for granted, because
-no abhorrence of the recent proceedings of
-the New Academy has been openly expressed,
-such feeling is non-existent, this opuscule
-has been written in the confident belief that
-it expresses the opinions of a majority of
-civilized Whist-players.</p>
-
-<p><span class="smcap">London</span>, <i>Christmas, 1884</i>.</p>
-
-<hr class="chap" />
-<div class="chapter"></div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_6" id="Page_6">[6]</a><br /><a name="Page_7" id="Page_7">[7]</a></span></p>
-
-
-
-
-<h2>THE DECLINE AND FALL OF<br />
-WHIST.</h2>
-
-
-<p class="drop-cap">IF we only live long enough we all pass
-through at least three stages—one authority
-says seven;—we grow, we attain our prime,
-we decay; and Whist, apparently, is not exempt
-from the common lot.</p>
-
-<p>Somewhat obscure in its origin, it gradually
-developed, it arrived at its zenith, then began to
-go down hill, and became the piteous spectacle
-we now see, until, flying from the whist-room as
-from a pest-house, the players are betaking
-themselves in shoals to other and unholy games.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_8" id="Page_8">[8]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>There is an opinion that Whist is at the
-present moment so exceedingly popular that it
-is fast becoming a serious rival to afternoon tea,
-and this, so far from being inconsistent with my
-original statement, rather strengthens it; for it is
-quite possible that a certain percentage of the
-more reputable refugees from the clubs, averse
-to gambling, may have sought—and I hope I
-may add, found—consolation in the family
-bosom and the domestic rubber.</p>
-
-<p>The golden age of Whist lasted from the time
-when Cavendish arranged in a systematic form
-his selections from the wisdom of our ancestors,
-until the death of Mr. Clay, twelve years ago;
-then the age of wood began, and if the whole
-subsequent literature of Whist had been publicly
-burnt by the common hangman, including <i>nostri
-farrago libelli</i>, it would have been an unmixed
-boon; so greatly has the evil preponderated
-over the good.</p>
-
-<hr class="chap" />
-<div class="chapter"></div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_9" id="Page_9">[9]</a></span></p>
-
-
-
-
-<h2>WOODEN ARRANGEMENT, NO. 1.—THE PETER.</h2>
-
-
-<p class="unindent"><span class="smcap">The</span> peter, simple in its inception, and ineffably
-stupid in execution, was already on the scene,
-and though among decent players it soon found
-its level, and became comparatively inoffensive,
-was the pioneer of the mass of wood-paving
-which has since been laid down; echoes, tampering
-with the discard, penultimates, antepenultimates,
-developments, extensions of principle,
-rules for exceptional play, with a few other
-matters <i>quod nunc perscribere longum est</i>, all
-equally inelastic, but differing from the signal in
-this, that while its mission is to supply your partner
-with brains and to dictate to him, regardless
-of the state of his hand, to play trumps
-when you think fit, theirs is to do away with all
-necessity for any brains whatever.</p>
-
-<p>The call for trumps appeared in this form,
-and in this form Bumblepuppydom believes in<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_10" id="Page_10">[10]</a></span>
-it to this day. “Whenever a player is strong in
-trumps, whether he has any reason for wanting
-them out or not, he informs the table of the
-fact, and it is imperative upon his partner to take
-the most violent and extraordinary steps to
-get in and lead him one.” However, the proceeding—when
-not useless—turned out so injurious
-to the perpetrator, that it had to be
-mitigated (for in that benighted day it had not
-been discovered that it was philosophical to
-lose on principle), and now reads something like
-this,—“whenever a player is strong in trumps,
-and considers from the fall of the cards that it
-is expedient they should be drawn, he makes
-those facts public,” and as his partner is usually
-in possession of the lead at the moment, he is
-able to play a trump without unduly straining
-himself.</p>
-
-<p>Compulsory peters, anticipated peters, and
-peters late in the hand, are matters of common
-sense and intelligence, and attempts to lay down<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_11" id="Page_11">[11]</a></span>
-arbitrary conventions as substitutes for those
-qualities are the main causes of the present
-decadence of Whist.</p>
-
-
-<h3>THE ECHO.</h3>
-
-<p class="unindent"><span class="smcap">The</span> echo is reported to be an extension of the
-signal, and is the most innocuous of the series;
-it does very little harm, and always amuses
-somebody.</p>
-
-<p>When the signal-man holds half the trumps
-and the echoer the remainder, it amuses them
-and does not hurt the adversary; for weight
-will tell, wholly irrespective of conventions.</p>
-
-<p>When there is a possibility of saving the
-game, and it comes into play before the hand
-is over, which it seldom does, its usual effect
-is to induce the signal-man (seeing his partner
-drop a high card) to endeavour unsuccessfully
-to force him; then they suffer grief and pain,
-and the adversary in his turn is amused.</p>
-
-<hr class="chap" />
-<div class="chapter"></div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_12" id="Page_12">[12]</a></span></p>
-
-
-
-
-<h2>WOODEN ARRANGEMENT, NO. 2.</h2>
-
-
-<p class="unindent"><span class="smcap">This</span> resulted from tampering with the discard.
-Though Mathews (<i>circa</i> <small>A.D.</small> 1800) in two short
-sentences laid down the true and only principle
-of discarding: “If weak in trumps, keep guard
-on your adversaries’ suits; if strong, throw away
-from them,” fifty years afterwards it was discovered
-by the “little school” that “the old
-system of discarding was just this—when not
-able to follow suit, let your first discard be from
-your weakest suit.” Rough on poor Mathews!
-but the absent are always wrong.</p>
-
-<p>However, by a process of evolution, to the
-first step of which no exception can be taken,
-we are next told—(<i>a</i>) “When you see from the
-fall of the cards that there is no probability of
-bringing in your own or your partner’s long suit
-discard originally from your best protected suit.”
-“You must play a defensive game.”—<i>Cavendish.</i></p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_13" id="Page_13">[13]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>Then, as the evolution proceeds, and we come
-to (<i>b</i>), we catch the first glimpse of the woody
-fibre, “for the sake of a short and easily remembered
-rule,” it is the fashion to say, “discard
-originally from your strong suit when the adversaries
-lead trumps, but this aphorism does not
-truly express the conditions.” (It does not
-indeed; far from it! for the adversaries may
-lead trumps and the strength may turn out on
-the other side; and why, under any circumstances,
-currency should be given to an erroneous
-fashion is a question I have repeatedly
-asked in vain), and here the pupils rush in,
-with that zeal which outruns discretion, overpower
-the master and cut the Gordian Knot
-with (<i>c</i>) <i>strongest</i>. Fourthly, I am informed
-whenever I take my walks abroad in Whist
-circles, (<i>d</i>) that with trumps declared against
-me I must not only discard from my strongest
-suit, but by that discard point out to my
-partner—and I presume my adversaries—the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_14" id="Page_14">[14]</a></span>
-suit I wish led, and we are all on our backs
-on the wood pavement.</p>
-
-<p>Is this a defensive game? Surely it is pedantry
-run mad! Why am I, in these frightful circumstances,
-fighting for dear life, and breathing with
-the greatest difficulty, to disclose my vital parts
-to a powerful and remorseless enemy? Where
-am I to get a suit from that I wish led? Why
-am I to be debarred from using my common
-sense—if I have any—and holding on to everything
-in obedience to my old friend Mathews
-and Cavendish on Whist, for both of whom I
-have the highest respect? If by good luck I do
-hold a very strong suit, I used to be able to point
-out that fact by discarding the head of it; now
-I am told “you must not do that; it is not <i>the
-game</i>”—whatever the game may be; “it shows
-the adversary too much;” so that I am in
-this absurd dilemma—if I have a really strong
-suit, I am to keep it dark; if I have a suit in
-which I hope to make a trick by remaining very<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_15" id="Page_15">[15]</a></span>
-quiet, I am to invite my partner to put me
-under the harrow by making me third player. <i>O
-tempora! O mores!</i></p>
-
-<p>Bad in itself, and ensnaring to others, this
-outrageous latter-day discard is cowardly to a
-degree; for while it does no particular injury to
-the player with a strong hand, it knocks down
-and jumps upon the weak vessel.</p>
-
-<p>What am I to do with a suit in which I hold absolutely
-nothing, say the two, three, four and five?
-Did the doctrinaires never hear of such a suit?
-One would imagine not. Am I to discard from
-king, queen and another, or from knave to
-four, in order to keep four cards like that?
-How about retaining every card of a powerful
-suit, regardless where the trumps may be, knowing
-that unless it can be brought in somehow or
-other, the game is gone? When I am compelled
-to discard from a weak five suit, is that an order
-to my partner to lead in a singly or doubly
-guarded king?</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_16" id="Page_16">[16]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>If these difficulties—and there are numbers
-of others—only occurred to me, with my natural
-modesty, I should consider myself the victim of
-some congenital defect; but this is not the case;
-far from it. The confusion on this head alone is
-awful, and what do the authorities teach us? I
-have already quoted Mathews and Cavendish
-on Whist; the second edition of Clay does not
-mention the forced discard, but it is mentioned
-in the last new and <i>improved</i> edition with a
-vengeance: here I learn to my horror and
-amazement that “the discard from the <i>strongest</i>
-suit * * * <i>is admirably explained and developed
-in the ‘Laws and Principles of Whist,’ by
-Cavendish</i>.”</p>
-
-<p>Now this statement, which was made in 1881,
-is puzzling. I have already pointed out that the
-“laws and principles of Whist” by Cavendish
-neither explain nor develope anything of the
-kind, admirably or otherwise, before and after
-that date, Cavendish in <i>The Field</i> has contradicted<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_17" id="Page_17">[17]</a></span>
-it in toto. His latest utterance, on which
-I can lay my hand, is this. “The aphorism—discard
-from your strong suit to an adverse
-trump lead is very imperfect”—as any aphorism,
-attempting to lay down a fixed law for such an
-intricate subject, is bound to be—“and misleading,
-and often gives rise to misunderstandings
-between partners as to the true character of the
-discard. A player should carefully consider the
-aspect of the game at the time the discard is
-made. With no indication to guide him, he
-may assume his partner’s first discard to be a
-protective one, if the adversaries have led, or
-called for trumps; but if, notwithstanding an
-adverse lead, he can place the command of
-trumps with his partner, or must so place it in
-order to save the game, he should assume the
-reverse.” Here, though somewhat verbose and
-obscure, he recognizes that the subject bristles
-all over with difficulty.</p>
-
-<p>Now let us return for a moment to the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_18" id="Page_18">[18]</a></span>
-<i>improved</i> Clay. “The discard from the strongest
-rests upon, * * * and upon the very reasonable
-argument, that the partner is directed to lead
-the suit indicated by the discard.” That a protective
-discard is a direction to my partner to
-make me third player in the suit may seem
-reasonable to the modern doctrinaire, but it is
-not the view ordinarily taken of it; then having
-produced his highly objectionable animal in
-<i>puris naturalibus</i>, the Editor winds up by <i>thanking
-Cavendish for his imprimatur</i>.</p>
-
-<p>This way madness lies! What Cavendish?
-how many Cavendishes are there? there is certainly
-a Cavendish on Whist, and there is a
-Cavendish in <i>The Field</i>; that makes two, on
-this point pretty much of one mind. Is there a
-third, who appears for one brief moment, without
-father, mother, or descent, mysterious as
-Melchizedek, just to contradict both his namesakes,
-and then disappears for ever in the ewigkeit?
-This conundrum is too much for me; I<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_19" id="Page_19">[19]</a></span>
-give it up, merely enquiring with an ancient
-philosopher:—</p>
-
-<p class="center">
-Quousque tandem abutere patientiâ nostrâ?<br />
-</p>
-<hr class="chap" />
-<div class="chapter"></div>
-
-
-
-<h2>THE MODERN GAME.</h2>
-
-
-<p class="unindent"><span class="smcap">Because</span> a game has been overlaid by petty
-detail, and injured by having its square pegs
-driven into round holes, it does not on that
-account become a modern game, any more than
-the Trojan priest, when the serpents set upon
-him and strangled him, became a modern Laocoon.
-First, this figment of a modern game is
-devised, and then used as a convenient peg to
-hang other figments upon.</p>
-
-<p>Whist, as far as I have been able to ascertain
-from a tolerably careful study of the leading
-authorities, “has slowly broadened down from
-precedent to precedent;” there has been no
-solution of continuity; and other investigators
-hold the same belief. “We suspect that Cavendish<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_20" id="Page_20">[20]</a></span>
-very often objected to that ancient plagiarist
-Mathews for stealing his ideas.” “In the
-bulk the two systems agree.”—<i>Westminster
-Papers.</i></p>
-
-<p>“There is no essential difference between
-modern and old-fashioned Whist, <i>i.e.</i>, between
-Hoyle and Cavendish, Mathews and J. C.”—<i>Mogul.</i></p>
-
-<p>So “the modern game” would appear to be
-an imaginary line, on one side of which stand
-all the authorities from Hoyle to Clay, including
-Cavendish on Whist;—recently designated fossils—on
-the other, “the great twin brethren,”
-Cavendish in <i>The Field</i> and the ‘Theory of
-Whist.’</p>
-
-
-
-<hr class="chap" />
-<div class="chapter"></div>
-<h2>WOODEN ARRANGEMENT, NO. 3.</h2>
-
-
-<p class="unindent"><span class="smcap">The original lead of the longest suit</span>:—This,
-according to all accounts, is the essence of
-modern Whist, and if not too much modern it is
-certainly modern enough; for take any fossil you<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_21" id="Page_21">[21]</a></span>
-please, again including Cavendish on Whist,—you
-must keep in mind the doubtful personality
-of the three Cavendishes—and you will find no
-such lead; that it is generally advisable to lead
-from your strongest suit, a dogma old as the
-everlasting hills, is quite another matter.</p>
-
-<p>All authority is dead against the strongest,
-and <i>a fortiori</i> against the longest suit, <i>always</i>
-being led.</p>
-
-<p>In the Westminster Papers for February and
-March, 1878, the point was thoroughly ventilated;
-it is not my intention to quote the articles
-in extenso, I have given you chapter and verse,
-and if you are anxious to master the subject,
-you can either read it for yourself, or consult
-the originals.</p>
-
-<p>The editor shows that Hoyle, Paine, Major A.,
-Mathews, Clay, and Cavendish on Whist, all teach
-that, though the strong suit should <i>generally</i> be
-led, the lead depends upon the hand and the
-score. He points out that “Mathews recognizes<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_22" id="Page_22">[22]</a></span>
-the fact, which we all deplore, that we must
-in the nature of things, have bad hands or
-peculiar hands, such that the ordinary lead must
-be departed from;” that Hoyle, giving directions
-how to play for an odd trick, says, “Suppose
-you are elder hand, and that you have ace, king
-and three small trumps, with four small cards of
-another suit, three small cards of a third suit,
-and one small card of a fourth suit, how are
-you to play? You are to lead the single card.”
-That Major A.—whom Clay describes as likely to
-be very formidable among the best players of the
-present day—goes so far as to say, “with a bad
-hand, do <i>not</i> lead from three or four small cards.”</p>
-
-<p>So much for the books! His conclusion from
-observation is “In watching good players, we
-find them averse to leading from their long suit
-unless they have sufficient trumps or other cards
-of re-entry to enable them to establish that suit.
-So also with the score advanced; no one dreams
-of trying to bring in the long suit.” According<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_23" id="Page_23">[23]</a></span>
-to the play that we see, with great weakness the
-rule is rather to lead strengthening cards. For
-our own part we should be inclined to say,
-“Lead from your strong suit only when you are
-sufficiently strong to bring in that suit with the
-aid of reasonable strength on the part of your
-partner.” “The supposed orthodox lead is
-absurd.” My own opportunities for observation
-have been considerable, and I say “ditto to
-Mr. Burke.” In the teeth of this, we have
-Cavendish in <i>The Field</i>, and Dr. Pole, the great
-twin brethren again, affirming not only that the
-strongest suit should always be led, and that the
-strongest suit is the longest, but that “this system
-has stood the test of the experience of a century
-and a half.”</p>
-
-<div class="poetry-container">
- <div class="poetry">
-<div class="verse">The open, erect and manly foe,</div>
-<div class="verse">Firm we may meet, perchance return the blow.</div>
-</div>
-</div>
-
-<p class="unindent">The three tailors of Tooley Street might have
-chanted in unison,</p>
-
-<div class="center">
-Sic volo, sic jubeo, stet pro ratione voluntas,<br />
-</div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_24" id="Page_24">[24]</a></span></p>
-
-<p class="unindent">with impunity, if they had only given their
-correct names and address. It was because they
-attempted to pose as the people of England,
-with a large P, that the laugh came in.</p>
-
-<p>In the same way Brown, Jones and Robinson,
-collectively or individually, have an undoubted
-right to depose Clay from his pedestal, and
-substitute wood as a better material for our idol;
-but they have no right to palm it off on the
-worshippers as the real Simon Pure.</p>
-
-<p>I should like an answer to this simple
-question; if the longest suit is always to be
-led, how is it that every Whist book, without
-exception, gives minute directions for leading
-short suits?</p>
-
-<p>Another red herring trailed across the scent is
-that a four suit is a normal suit, and that being
-normal it must always be led. In the first place
-it is the strong suit, not the long suit, which is
-the normal lead; in the second place, what is
-‘normal’ by no means invariably takes place,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_25" id="Page_25">[25]</a></span>
-otherwise why does ‘abnormal’ still remain in
-our dictionaries?</p>
-
-<p>When you hold a bad hand, it is just as
-philosophical to acquaint your partner with that
-unpleasant circumstance by leading a strengthening
-card, as it is to lead a long weak suit and
-leave him floundering about in ignorance of
-everything but its length, and it has a much
-greater weight of authority at the back of it.</p>
-
-<p>Pondering where the Dioscuri got hold of
-such extraordinary notions, it flashed across my
-memory that in childhood’s happy hour, I had
-read in Lemprière, that though they spent half
-their time with the immortals, they passed the
-remainder “in another place;” hence these tears!</p>
-
-
-
-<hr class="chap" />
-<div class="chapter"></div>
-<h2>WOODEN ARRANGEMENT, NO. 4.</h2>
-
-
-<p class="unindent"><span class="smcap">The Lead of the Penultimate and its
-Congeners.</span>—Playing Whist some five and
-twenty years ago with Cam for my partner,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_26" id="Page_26">[26]</a></span>
-he led the trey of a suit in which I held king,
-queen and another, I won with the queen,
-and on the return of the king, which was
-taken by the fourth hand, Cam played the
-deuce. From subsequent enquiry I found it
-was a lead of his own, to inform the table he
-had three remaining, and no honour in his
-own suit; I had never seen the device before;
-I did not think highly of it when I did
-see it, and am of the same opinion still; however,
-in 1865 it appeared in “What to Lead,”
-and was strenuously objected to, by Mogul
-among others; but it is only due to the memory
-of my old friend,—in his day an authority
-second to none—to state, that though tenacious
-of his proposition, I never knew him suggest for
-one moment, that it was an extension of any
-known, or unknown, principle.</p>
-
-<p>The credit of discovering a brand-new principle,
-and that the penultimate lead is a legitimate
-extension of that discovery is, as far as I<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_27" id="Page_27">[27]</a></span>
-am aware, entirely due to Cavendish’s unassisted
-ingenuity; and here we learn incidentally what,
-in his view, a principle is; for, after he had concluded
-to his own satisfaction, that from suits
-containing a sequence that does not head the
-suit, the lowest card of the sequence should be
-led—although Clay denied this flatly, and
-objected to the lead in toto—he straightway
-elevated it into a principle.</p>
-
-<p>How the penultimate lead is an extension of
-it, I have no idea; he appears to have evolved
-both the principle and the extension from his
-own internal consciousness. Anti-Cavendish
-puts this with such force and perspicuity in the
-Westminster Papers, February, 1873, that the
-whole article is well worth reading, and in these
-convention ridden days is quite refreshing. I
-make an extract or two from his conclusion.
-“The reasoning on which Cavendish grounds
-this invention is so faulty, that one feels that in
-the pursuit of his hobby of ‘extension of principle’<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_28" id="Page_28">[28]</a></span>
-he loses his head altogether.” “It is a
-purely arbitrary signal and might much more
-plausibly have been proposed as a means of
-giving information without all the rigmarole
-about ‘extension of principle,’ &amp;c., &amp;c., but then
-if so proposed, players would have refused to
-adopt it; now, as disguised by Cavendish under
-a cloud of words, too many will be ready to
-jump at it to save themselves the trouble of
-thinking.” “No greater mistake can be made
-than to imagine that it is desirable in every case
-to give information to your partner, and players
-who are always endeavouring to do this, without
-reference to the state of their hands, will surely
-in the long run suffer. Whether to give or withhold
-information frequently tries the discretion of
-the best players, and with weak hands the great
-necessity is to keep your adversaries in ignorance,
-without deceiving your partner. Now if this
-new signal were generally adopted, players
-would, as regards the lead in question, be<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_29" id="Page_29">[29]</a></span>
-deprived of all discretion, and be compelled
-either to give information to their adversaries,
-which might be used against them with fatal
-effect, or else deceive their partners, whereas
-the present lead, if it gives no information does
-not deceive your partner. Another disadvantage
-is that in nearly all cases where either adversary
-wins the second round, he will know whether or
-not he can force his partner in that suit without
-risk of being overtrumped, but if the original
-leader wins the second round his partner will
-rarely get any positive information as to his
-strength until the third round.” “These refinements
-of artifice are utterly opposed to the
-essence of scientific Whist, viz., the necessity of
-rational deduction. To substitute signals which
-convey information, without troubling the brains,
-must tend to spoil the game.”</p>
-
-<p>Objections have repeatedly been taken to
-these conventions on moral grounds, but as long
-as the Church and Stage Guild and kindred<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_30" id="Page_30">[30]</a></span>
-associations exist, there seems no reason why
-we should be troubled to look after our own
-morality.</p>
-
-<p>For my own part, although believing the principle
-to be extremely doubtful and the extension
-far from clear, I am quite prepared to admit that
-when you have a reasonable expectation of
-bringing in a five suit, it is desirable that you
-should make your partner acquainted with the
-exact length of it, but I am equally prepared to
-deny its expediency when there is no chance of
-bringing it in; if such a suit must be played,
-and you may be so unfortunately placed that
-it is unavoidable, it would be much better
-to keep the length of it buried in your own
-bosom.</p>
-
-<p>Oddly enough when another writer, emulous
-of extending the master, and seduced by the
-analogy that what was sauce for the goose must
-be sauce for the gander, suggested that if it was
-imperative to lead the lowest but one of five, it<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_31" id="Page_31">[31]</a></span>
-must be equally obligatory to lead the lowest
-but two of six; (indeed so clear is this next link
-in the chain, that it was the very first thought of
-myself and some half-dozen other light-minded
-persons, the moment we heard of the principle;
-but, by ill luck, the seed fell on barren ground,
-for so far were we from realizing the importance
-of our discovery, and taking immediate steps to
-protect the patent, that, sad to relate, <i>solvuntur
-tabulæ risu</i>), we find Cavendish in <i>The Field</i> for
-a time deprecating such an eminently logical
-extension, till I wake up one Saturday morning
-and read that the antepenultimate does not go
-far enough, and that under pain of becoming
-fossils, we must all lead the lowest but three of
-seven, but four of eight, and so on until we
-arrive at the lowest but nine of thirteen, when
-further extension in that direction becomes impracticable.</p>
-
-<p>Fortunately this arrangement has been simplified,
-for the game would have become even<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_32" id="Page_32">[32]</a></span>
-slower than it is, if whenever a player had a
-ten suit, he had to repeat to himself, lowest but
-one of five, two of six, three of seven, till he
-eventually arrived at lowest but six of ten, and
-after much laborious whittling at the small end
-of nothing, the ultimate outcome is, with any
-number of a suit from five to thirteen, to lead
-the top but three.</p>
-
-<p>Apropos of this same ultimate outcome, in
-the Westminster Papers for January, 1875, there
-is a remarkable statement: “We have the
-opinion, never published, of a personal friend,
-that while you ought to lead the lowest card in
-four suits, you should lead <i>the third from the top</i>
-in five suits;” and this anonymous genius is still
-“unwept, unhonoured and unsung.” Such is
-fame!</p>
-
-<hr class="chap" />
-<div class="chapter"></div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_33" id="Page_33">[33]</a></span></p>
-
-
-
-
-<h2>SOME PILLARS OF THE EDIFICE.</h2>
-
-
-<h3>PILLAR NO. 1.—THE PHILOSOPHY OF WHIST.</h3>
-
-<p class="unindent"><span class="smcap">In</span> case the <i>ipse dixit</i> of Cavendish in <i>The Field</i>,
-or “the preface,” should fail to convince, we have
-also had the sacred name of Philosophy dragged
-in to countenance these proceedings.</p>
-
-<p>Ever since there has been any record of
-philosophers, their schools appear to have been
-about as numerous as themselves. Plato for his
-own share had five different sets of followers.
-All the systems contradicted each other, and the
-disciples of each master usually held different
-views as to his tenets; as this has continued
-down to our own day, for the dogmatic philosopher
-who recently died in Chelsea spent more
-than half a century in contradicting himself,
-while two of the most prominent disciples of
-Comte are fighting tooth and nail at this very
-moment, when we hear of <i>the</i> philosophy of Whist,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_34" id="Page_34">[34]</a></span>
-the enquiry naturally arises, which philosophy?
-The Whist philosophy of Cam, propounded day
-by day, was, that there is no absolute never or
-always. The same idea runs through the entire
-treatise of Clay; and if there is one point more
-especially distinctive than another in the teaching
-of that great master, repeated again and again,
-and constantly insisted upon, it is that all the
-maxims of Whist are open to innumerable exceptions,
-that the coat must be cut according to
-the cloth, and that he is the finest Whist-player
-who can most readily grasp that fact. (Here I
-may remark, in a parenthesis, that though the
-late Mr. Clay eventually gave a qualified assent
-to the penultimate lead and the forced discard,
-it has yet to be shown that he assented to either
-the one or the other, in its present uncompromising
-and preposterous form, a form which is
-utterly repugnant to his every public utterance).</p>
-
-<p>This is considerably opposed to the fearful
-and wonderful philosophy of Dr. Pole, the basis<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_35" id="Page_35">[35]</a></span>
-of which appears to be that it is always imperative
-to lead your longest suit, which he naively
-admits to be a losing game. It is unfortunate
-that his lines are drawn in a commercial age, for
-if he had only lived in the time of Don Quixote
-he might have taken high rank.</p>
-
-<p>To ignore the teaching of a long line of
-illustrious dead, to set precedent at defiance, and
-deliberately to go out of your way in order to
-lose, is an extension of the old stoical principle,
-“under all circumstances to keep your temper,”
-in the very best latter-day manner; but reasonably
-doubtful as to the success of such an appeal
-if left to stand upon its own bottom, he invokes
-elementary algebra to his aid. Now elementary
-algebra is not devoid of good points; by its
-means we learn that a man may—either in time
-or in eternity—hold 635,013,559,600 different
-whist-hands. Moreover, every hand, he will have
-an entirely different purpose; sometimes to win
-the game; sometimes to save it, and with that<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_36" id="Page_36">[36]</a></span>
-end in view, will lay himself out to make tricks
-varying from three to eleven—below and above
-that number, since the invention of short
-Whist, he has no need to trouble himself—and
-the moral most people would draw, would be
-that in that portentous number of hands, some
-of them would require very different treatment
-from others; the philosopher of Whist, however,
-thinks not, but would fit all those six hundred
-and thirty-five thousand odd millions of hands
-into the same Procrustes’ bed, and would always
-lead the longest suit. Again, Whist is an art; if
-in any sense a science, it is certainly not an
-exact science, and the application of algebra to
-art is somewhat limited. There are far too many
-unknown quantities in the equation.</p>
-
-<p>Take our old friend king and another in the
-second hand; Permutations and Combinations
-will inform us sooner or later—I should imagine
-later, for to my certain knowledge, a series of four
-thousand two hundred and nineteen is not<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_37" id="Page_37">[37]</a></span>
-enough—as to the number of times we shall
-make it or lose it, whether we play it, or do
-not play it; but they will give us no clue as to
-the extent of damage we may receive when it is
-played and taken by the third hand, or as to the
-loss we incur when the ace is in the fourth hand,
-by importing uncertainty into the game. When
-we do not put it on and lose it, we may—or may
-not—lose one trick; when we put it on and lose
-it, we may lose any number. The whole system
-of the newly suggested play of the first and
-second hand is undermined by the fundamentally
-false assumption that the lead is always
-from a long suit; that everybody, irrespective
-of the score, has merely to ascertain which is
-his longest suit, and then to take immediate
-steps to put the table in possession of its exact
-length is so transparently simple, that such
-extreme simplicity in a game of skill is enough
-of itself to arouse the gravest suspicion.</p>
-
-<div class="poetry-container">
- <div class="poetry">
-<div class="verse">Qui studet optatam cursu contingere metam,</div>
-<div class="verse">Multa tulit fecitque puer, sudavit et alsit.</div>
-</div>
-</div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_38" id="Page_38">[38]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>Just to see how the plan worked, six consecutive
-times have I with king and two others—using
-my best judgment as to the lead—passed
-the queen led, and six times have I lost a trick;
-this may show that my judgment was bad; but
-it shows, with much more absolute certainty,
-that the lead, in those six cases, was not from
-numerical strength.</p>
-
-<p>If the lead always were, it needs no demonstration
-to prove that the holder of the king
-has seldom anything to gain by heading the
-trick; that might be granted without the slightest
-demur; only how about the combination game?
-If the fourth player has to play the ace on the
-queen led, where is the king? certainly, not
-according to our present knowledge, in the
-second hand with one or two of the suit.</p>
-
-<p>As to not heading the queen with king and
-another, one of the latest Cavendish coups, it is
-really so puerile, he must be practising upon our
-credulity; the veriest bumble-puppist that ever<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_39" id="Page_39">[39]</a></span>
-crawled upon this earth is too well aware that,
-every now and again, a trick may be made by
-the most absurd and outrageous play—or rather
-want of play—otherwise the breed would have
-been as extinct as the dodo.</p>
-
-<p>There are positions enough, where the king is
-the only card of re-entry and where, unless the
-fourth hand can get in with the ace and draw
-the trumps, the game is over, but it is not so
-here; the coup succeeds, simply and solely,
-because, by a most improbable chance, the
-fourth hand holds one, while the second player
-holds two of the suit. Genuine, unadulterated
-bumble-puppy! Whenever I am induced to
-propound a system of Whist philosophy, enlivened
-with texts from the Gospel according to
-Cocker (<i>absit omen</i>), its fundamental principle
-will be that four in thirteen goes twice.</p>
-
-<p>If I with king and another head the queen
-and make it, and have nothing else to do, I can
-return the suit, ruff the third round and make<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_40" id="Page_40">[40]</a></span>
-three consecutive tricks; not a bad thing in
-these hard times when the rental of our estates
-is constantly diminishing, and the income tax
-has gone up another penny.</p>
-
-<p>Now suppose I pass it and my partner makes
-the ace, he must open a new suit. We have had
-a surfeit of statistics lately, still, if the gentleman
-at present in possession of the calculating
-machine of the late Mr. Babbage would kindly
-turn the handle, and let me know how many
-tricks on the average are lost by merely opening
-a suit, I should be much obliged to him. When
-the leader and his partner either hold the whole
-of it, or nothing at all, it may be done with impunity,
-but under ordinary circumstances it
-usually entails a loss of one trick and often two.</p>
-
-<p>I have considered at some length the original
-lead of the longest suit, and the lead of the
-penultimate, because on these two commandments
-hang all the latter-day law, but not the
-profits: for on the strength—for want of a more<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_41" id="Page_41">[41]</a></span>
-appropriate word—of these figments, at this very
-moment our guide is attacking the recognised
-play of the third hand, our philosopher is suggesting
-an entirely new set of proceedings for
-the second hand, while both guide and philosopher
-are doing their level best to assist our friend
-in New York to bouleverse the leads.</p>
-
-
-<h3>PILLAR NO. 2.—ILLUSTRATIVE WHIST-HANDS.</h3>
-
-<p class="unindent"><span class="smcap">If</span> you watch a thousand ordinary whist-hands,
-the great bulk will be illustrative of (1) human
-stupidity; a few (2) of super-human cunning,
-and out of the remainder the faddist may pick out
-(3) one or two to countenance any form of
-mania from which he may be suffering at the
-moment.</p>
-
-<p>The first class—always provided that you
-meet it in the spirit and not in the flesh—is
-often amusing.</p>
-
-<p>The second is, if skilful, generally open to the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_42" id="Page_42">[42]</a></span>
-objection that, as the same result might be
-attained by a more simple and equally legitimate
-method of play, there is an enormous
-amount of good skill gone wrong.</p>
-
-<p>The third class—and this is the class we have
-now to deal with—is never amusing, seldom
-skilful, and not uncommonly misses its tip
-altogether; for instance, two hands given in the
-‘Theory of Whist,’ to illustrate certain leading
-principles of the game, were promptly gibbeted
-by another eminent authority, and are still hanging
-in chains in the Westminster Papers, for
-September and October, 1873, as “most striking
-examples of brute force and stupidity.”</p>
-
-<p>In any case they prove nothing. Suppose
-some malefactor, with a turn for leading singletons,
-were to bring before the public a dozen or
-two of hands illustrative of results which would
-make any leader of the top card but three livid
-with envy, at the same time suppressing two,
-four, or six dozen hands, where the lead had<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_43" id="Page_43">[43]</a></span>
-brought him to condign grief, would that in any
-way tend to show the lead was good?</p>
-
-<p>Still carefully selected hands, although we may
-disapprove of their <i>raison d’être</i>, are not necessarily
-revolting to the intelligence; but there is
-a limit, and attempting to show such a moral as
-this, that with king and another, it is dangerous
-to play the king second hand on the queen led,
-because your partner may hold the ace single, is
-perilously near it.</p>
-
-<p>I am not perhaps so conversant with the
-Whist-hands in <i>The Field</i> as I ought to be, for
-the difficulty of its Catherine-wheel notation
-deters me; but about two years ago, I came
-across a few <i>disjecta membra</i> intended to bolster
-up some mechanical substitute for brains, and a
-similar fragment with a similar intention has
-lately been quoted in that paper. To make the
-matter more simple we will transpose it from the
-first to the third person. “A holds ace, knave,
-five, four, three and two of hearts; his partner B<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_44" id="Page_44">[44]</a></span>
-holds king, queen and a small heart; A leads the
-ace of hearts. He then leads three of hearts.
-His left hand adversary, Y, plays ten, B queen,
-and Z, fourth player, nine. Neither adversary
-has asked for trumps,” which is entirely a matter
-of opinion; for as no human being knows, or
-ever will know, where a single trump is, Z
-might have begun a call, and finding the whole
-heart suit dead against him, and knowing the
-exact position of every card in it, thought fit to
-conceal it. “Consequently two of hearts must
-be in A’s hand, and three other hearts besides.”
-Up to this point, except the little difference of
-opinion as to a signal, our unanimity is wonderful.
-“All the trumps now come out,” and B, in
-the confusion, gets rid of his king of hearts.
-That brief sentence about the trumps, like the
-pie in Pickwick, which was all fat, is rather too
-rich. If Y and Z had them and they “came
-out” against their will, it was rough on Y and Z.
-If Y and Z, with the fact staring them in the face<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_45" id="Page_45">[45]</a></span>
-that B holds the king of hearts and A the remaining
-four—for we are all agreed that this is
-clear—took any active steps to induce trumps to
-“come out,” they must have been rampant
-lunatics; even if Y and Z were not lunatics, but
-as ardent admirers of the antepenultimate lead,
-and anxious for its success, at any cost to themselves,
-merely did their best to ensure the
-“coming out” of the trumps, how B got the
-opportunity to discard the king of hearts would
-still be involved in Stygian darkness. The most
-reasonable supposition, if Y and Z really did
-lead trumps, is that he dropped it quietly under
-the table, in sure and certain hope that they
-were the very last people to take a mean advantage
-of him. If A and B, in addition to the
-entire suit of hearts, had also the strength in
-trumps, nothing could prevent those hearts from
-being brought in.</p>
-
-<p>Though futile for the purpose designed, the
-fragment has two other morals.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_46" id="Page_46">[46]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>(1) That if A and B hold the command of
-trumps, and an entire plain suit, they can bring
-it in, <i>in spite</i> of proclaiming its exact position
-to the adversary.</p>
-
-<p>(2) That if Y and Z hold the trumps, when
-an antepenultimate is led, those trumps not
-only appear to “come out” of themselves like
-mushrooms—spontaneously and without obvious
-cause—which in itself would be sufficiently
-aggravating, but they “come out” at the most
-inopportune moments, to the dire discomfiture
-of their unfortunate owners. (If any decently
-responsible person will guarantee that my
-adversaries will always do their best to get
-trumps out for me whenever I lead an antepenultimate,
-nobody shall in future have to
-complain of my not going far enough in that
-direction).</p>
-
-<p>Special arrangements for taking a quantity
-above five are seldom of practical use; on
-the contrary, such suits have an innate propensity<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_47" id="Page_47">[47]</a></span>
-for making themselves unpleasantly conspicuous,
-without any <i>mécanique</i>.</p>
-
-<p>It must either be a very weak cause to require
-such advocacy, or an uncommonly strong one
-to survive it.</p>
-
-<p class="center">
-Nec tali auxilio nec defensoribus istis.<br />
-</p>
-
-
-<h3>PILLAR NO. 3.—DEVELOPMENTS, EXTENSIONS OF
-PRINCIPLE, AND GENERALIZATIONS.</h3>
-
-<div class="poetry-container">
- <div class="poetry">
-<div class="verse">The earth hath bubbles as the water hath,</div>
-<div class="verse">And these are of them.</div>
-</div>
-</div>
-
-<p class="unindent"><span class="smcap">A development</span> is such an ambiguous expression
-(for it may be either good, bad or indifferent)
-that, on that understanding, we may freely admit
-its existence; but an extension of principle has
-several varieties, is as slippery as an eel, and
-both the extension and the principle must be
-regarded with a wary eye.</p>
-
-<p>The principle that is extended by substituting
-‘always’ for ‘generally’ and then appealing<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_48" id="Page_48">[48]</a></span>
-boldly to history to sanction the alteration is one
-form. Another form is to invent both the
-principle and the extension when the occasion
-arises, as in the principle of leading the bottom
-of an intermediate sequence, and its extension
-to penultimates, antepenultimates, and so forth.
-Logicians term this <i>petitio</i>, not <i>extensio principii</i>.</p>
-
-<p>Even when you have got firm hold of a good
-principle, or a good india-rubber ring, you will
-get into trouble if you stretch it indefinitely.</p>
-
-<p>There is no sounder principle going than that
-it is generally desirable to acquaint your partner
-with the state of your hand, but it neither follows
-that you should place it face upwards on the
-table, nor avail yourself of those extensions
-known to Hoyle as “piping at whisk,” though
-the first is undoubtedly legitimate, and the
-second, if it were only first duly exploited by
-some faddist in <i>The Field</i>, would be quite as
-legitimate as any extension that has appeared
-there in our time.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_49" id="Page_49">[49]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>While these extensions of principle are in the
-air, some regard should be paid to the interests
-of that numerous class whose information is
-entirely derived from inspection of the last trick.
-Already they had to find out in that obscure
-medium what suit was led, who led it, and how
-each card fell. Now, they have in addition, to
-track to their lair several missing minor cards,
-and when they have succeeded in doing so, to
-decide whether they indicate a signal, a nine
-suit, the lowest of a long head sequence, or the
-lunacy of the leader. If their happiness is to
-be taken into consideration one important extension
-of principle must be added to the list.</p>
-
-<p>It is a principle—vide law 91—that we may
-all see the penultimate trick, and the extension
-that we may all see the antepenultimate and so
-on up to thirteen, proceeds <i>pari passu</i> with the
-other famous demonstration; it also conveys the
-same kind of information, in exactly the same
-way, for it shows those who have eyes in their<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_50" id="Page_50">[50]</a></span>
-heads that which they already knew, and
-reduces to a more hopeless state of imbecility
-those dependent on its aid.</p>
-
-<p>I do not advocate it for two reasons; in the
-first place, because I abjure and detest the
-principle itself; secondly, because the only
-time I ever attempted to extend a principle, I
-was accused of <i>sorites</i>, which sounds like some
-unpleasant form of skin disease, and such
-insinuations, though untrue, are disagreeable.
-As I do not wish to expose myself to them, I
-make a present of the idea to any pupil of the
-new academy who may be intent on further
-spoiling the game.</p>
-
-<p>“One man’s meat is another man’s poison,”
-and what the late Government considered to be
-extensions of principle, developments and generalizations,
-their successors stigmatize as—</p>
-
-<p class="center">
-“Red ruin and the breaking up of laws.”<br />
-</p>
-
-<p>The present condition of Whist may be briefly<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_51" id="Page_51">[51]</a></span>
-and graphically expressed by the well-known
-epitaph:—</p>
-
-<p class="center">
-“I was well, I wanted to be better, now I am here.”<br />
-</p>
-
-<p>Among all the quasi-extensions of spurious
-principles, one fine old crusted principle is in
-danger of being lost sight of altogether, and now
-that attention is called to it, I sincerely hope
-that no modern pedant will be tempted to
-extend it. The principle is, <small>TO LEAVE WELL
-ALONE</small>.</p>
-
-<p>Such are the three remarkably unstable pillars,
-on which rest the proposals for upsetting the
-recognized play of the first, second, and third
-hand; and if they give way, down comes the
-entire superstructure. Happily, the purely
-academic discussion on the American leads is
-not likely to trouble the general public much;
-its fascinations for them are not great, but if
-those fascinations should induce the doctrinaire
-mind to lessen its mischievous activity in other<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_52" id="Page_52">[52]</a></span>
-directions, it may yet turn out to be a blessing
-in disguise. As we are threatened with a book
-devoted to these leads, I confine myself to
-mentioning that in answer to eighteen enquiries,
-“What do you think of the new leads?” sixteen
-replies were to the effect that a good player, if
-he took his coat off and went into the matter
-thoroughly, might master them in six months,
-and a duffer, under the same circumstances, in
-half a century, but that in neither case was the
-game worth the candle; the advice of the other
-two, to “go to Bath and get my head shaved,” was
-rude, and the latter half of it quite uncalled for.</p>
-
-
-
-<hr class="chap" />
-<div class="chapter"></div>
-<h2>WHITTLING AT THE SMALL END OF NOTHING.
-CONVENTIONS AND ELABORATE RULES FOR
-EXCEPTIONAL PLAY.</h2>
-
-
-<p class="unindent"><span class="smcap">So</span> many articles have we had endeavouring
-to explain what a convention is, from the
-Cavendish point of view, that at last the common-sense<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_53" id="Page_53">[53]</a></span>
-view, driven from these inhospitable
-shores by the interminable flux of words, has
-taken refuge at the Antipodes; it was seen in
-the office of <i>The Australasian</i> in May, 1884,
-and I presume it is there yet. If at any time
-you happen to be passing through Melbourne,
-and send in your card to the editor, I have no
-doubt he will show it to you. Item,—two long
-articles giving minute directions when not to lead
-trumps from five.</p>
-
-<p>If the basis of play is always to lead the longest
-suit these directions must be altogether unnecessary;
-the answer is self-evident. “You
-should invariably lead the penultimate from a
-five suit of trumps, save and except when you
-hold a plain suit of greater length, and then you
-should lead the highest but three.”</p>
-
-<p>Oh that mine enemy always would! for, I
-regret to say, some short time ago, a miscreant—one
-of the soundest Whist-players in this
-country—took up the four, five and six of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_54" id="Page_54">[54]</a></span>
-diamonds (trumps); ace, knave, ten, eight, four
-and three of hearts; king, six and four of spades;
-and the eight of clubs, <i>which he led</i>. His score
-was one, ours four. I was second player, and
-held, <i>inter alia</i>, ace, queen, seven and six of
-clubs; and king, ten, eight, seven and five of
-trumps; my partner held king, knave, five and
-four of clubs, and though he turned up the
-queen of trumps, we lost four by cards and the
-game.</p>
-
-<p>Now this is a man who reads his newspaper,
-and should, in common decency, have led the ace
-and four of hearts. Somewhat nettled by the
-success of his nefarious play, I said to him,
-“even if you have not seen the Fruits of Philosophy,
-you must know better than to lead a
-singleton,” and this was his ribald reply:—</p>
-
-<div class="poetry-container">
- <div class="poetry">
-<div class="verse">How sad and mad and bad it was,</div>
-<div class="verse">But still how it was sweet.</div>
-</div>
-</div>
-
-<p>To return to my subject. If any one were to
-ask me when not to lead trumps with five, I<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_55" id="Page_55">[55]</a></span>
-should reply, “My very dear sir, it is not in my
-power to provide you with intelligence, the stock
-in my possession is barely sufficient for my own
-use; with five trumps, you should lead them
-nearly always, especially when you are very weak
-in the plain suits; but if, after acquiring a fair
-knowledge of general principles, you are unable
-to find out for yourself when it is inexpedient to
-lead them, I am quite sure nobody can teach
-you, and you may depend upon this, that a
-multitude of minute rules, purporting to explain
-to you when you should not do that which you
-would be right in doing ninety-fives times in a
-hundred, are a mockery, a delusion, and a snare.</p>
-
-<p>“Lay to heart the story of that little fish, which
-desired to know all the mysteries of fishing-tackle,
-and when its prayer was granted, was
-unable to assimilate its knowledge, and perished
-miserably from inanition. At the same time, if,
-after what I have said, you should feel disposed
-to commit those two articles to memory, and to<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_56" id="Page_56">[56]</a></span>
-repeat them to yourself whenever a difficulty
-arises, there is nothing in the laws of Whist to
-prevent you.”</p>
-
-<p>It is sad to reflect that such an incomparable
-talent for applying a straight-waistcoat to every
-thing should have blundered into a wrong
-groove; a tithe of the energy and perseverance
-devoted to throttling intelligence, and knocking
-the brains out of the game, would have placed
-our villainous code of laws, and our incongruous
-and contradictory decisions on a sound basis;
-but it was not to be; <i>dis aliter visum</i>, and the
-following pathetic appeal, reprinted from
-“<i>Knowledge</i>,” has been treated with silent contempt:—</p>
-
-
-<div class="blockquot">
-
-<h3>A WHIST-PLAYER’S WAIL.</h3>
-
-<p>Whist-players have long been suffering acutely from
-three uncertainties—uncertainty of the laws, uncertainty
-of decisions, and uncertainty of authority.</p>
-
-<p>The laws are ninety-one in number, and, in “Cavendish
-on Whist,” are supplemented by forty-three explanatory<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_57" id="Page_57">[57]</a></span>
-notes and a couple of suppositions, which again
-have been further explained—if explain is the right word
-in this connection—by innumerable irresponsible decisions.
-Now, though it may be Utopian to expect such a
-badly-worded jumble of laws and definitions ever to be
-superseded by an intelligible code, is it impossible to
-have these decisions based on a principle of some kind,
-or, at any rate, for them to be consistent with themselves?</p>
-
-<p>At one time the decider has confined himself to the
-strictest letter of the law, at another time he has strained
-it to breaking; sometimes he has read the laws one with
-another; sometimes he has taken one and left the other
-out in the cold; sometimes he appears arbitrarily to give
-his decision out of his own head, quite irrespective of any
-law whatever; and finally, and worst of all, after consistently
-maintaining one position for years and years, until—rightly
-or wrongly—some doubtful point is settled, he
-suddenly turns round, with his tail where his head always
-used to be, flatly contradicts himself, and throws it once
-more into confusion.</p>
-
-<p>The usual excuse for a <i>volte face</i> of this kind is, “that
-this is a free country, where every man has a right to
-change his opinions;” and I never hear that dreadful
-exordium without instinctively making for the door,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_58" id="Page_58">[58]</a></span>
-knowing from bitter experience that mischief is brewing.
-“That judges themselves differ, and the judgment of
-one court is often over-ruled by another,” this also is, I
-am afraid, true, though it has no bearing on the matter
-in hand; for here we have a judge who, on his appointment
-to the bench—granting, what is strongly disputed,
-that a Whist arbitrator is a judge and has a bench—having
-found a well-established precedent and taken it
-for his guide in numerous judgments, one fine day reverses
-it without notice and without leave to appeal.</p>
-
-<p>To show that I am not making random accusations, I
-give three examples—there are others in stock, but these
-appear sufficient for my immediate purpose:—</p>
-
-<p>I. “The cards are cut. In taking up the packs, I join
-the two packs, but leave one card on the table; this card
-would have been the middle, not the bottom card. I
-claim a fresh cut; my adversaries claim that it is a misdeal.
-Am I entitled to a new cut or not?” Answer,
-No. 1. “We think you cannot make your adversary cut
-a second time. We do not think that when you left a
-card on the table it could be said that there was any confusion
-in the cutting, and unless you can make out that
-what you did amounted to confusion in the cutting, it is a
-misdeal.”</p>
-
-<p>Answer, No. 2. “The claim is void. There is<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_59" id="Page_59">[59]</a></span>
-nothing in the laws or the custom of the table to make
-this a misdeal.” Both these decisions are by the same
-authority. A more recent authority says, “According to
-the old rules, a misdeal might have been claimed; but
-not now, under Law 34.” The explanation is ingenious,
-if not ingenuous; but it is open to the objection that, as
-the first decision is dated December, 1873, nine years
-after the present laws came into force, it is scarcely
-water-tight.</p>
-
-<p>II. If A asked B whether he had any of a suit in
-which B had renounced, and B, instead of replying,
-turned and quitted the trick, and was subsequently
-brought to bed of one or more, his silence, combined
-with turning and quitting the trick, was ruled to be an
-answer in the negative within the meaning of the Law
-and he had revoked.</p>
-
-<p>This is a decision of Clay’s; and though disputed at
-the time, was the settled practice of Whist for fourteen
-or fifteen years.</p>
-
-<p>Three or four years ago this decision was reversed, and
-authority has now taken its stand upon the literal interpretation
-of Law 74.</p>
-
-<p>III. Some little time since my opinion was asked on
-this point. It was sent to me by a friend in Australia.
-“A and B <i>v.</i> Y and Z. Eleven tricks have been played.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_60" id="Page_60">[60]</a></span>
-At the twelfth trick A leads a Heart, Y plays a Club, B
-plays a Spade. Before Z has played, Y throws down his
-last card, which turns out to be a Heart. Has he
-revoked?”</p>
-
-<p>Being mortally afraid of putting my foot in it, I much
-prefer to leave the mysterious borderland between sanity
-and insanity to experts in lunacy; however, in the sacred
-cause of friendship, I screwed up my courage, and, with
-considerable trepidation, gave an opinion to this
-effect. “It appears to me that Y certainly—this sounds
-unpleasantly like slang, but such is not my intention—revoked
-if the club was a trump, and, probably, if
-it was a card of a plain suit, for in playing his last
-card he either led or abandoned his hand, which has
-always been held to be an act of play establishing the
-revoke.”</p>
-
-<p>The question was next submitted to three of the best-known
-and most-respected authorities in this country—all
-champion deciders—whom we will call P. Q. R. P.
-replied, “Unless clubs are trumps I do not think Y. has
-revoked. He has not played again. He has exposed a
-card. If clubs were trumps I think he has played again
-(am not sure). The case is not sufficiently stated for a
-positive opinion.”</p>
-
-<p>Q. and R. did not regard it as insufficiently stated in<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_61" id="Page_61">[61]</a></span>
-any way, and they had no hesitation in saying that Y had
-not revoked.</p>
-
-<p>When by the next mail it turned out that hearts were
-trumps, when, consequently, the revoke was a shade
-more doubtful than before, while P made no further sign,
-Q and R came to the unanimous conclusion that Y had
-revoked. The authority at the Antipodes who ruled
-originally that there was no revoke, remains in the same
-mind up to the present time.</p>
-
-<p>Is this “vacillating and inconsistent,” or is it not?</p>
-
-<p>Here in a not very complicated difficulty—if only there
-was any agreement on first principles, we have</p>
-
-<p>(<i>a</i>) A benighted outsider thinking a revoke is established,
-because a well-known decision overrides the law;</p>
-
-<p>(<i>b</i>) An intelligent colonist thinking it is not established,
-because he considers the law to override the decision.</p>
-
-<p>(<i>c</i>) Authority No. 1 giving a somewhat uncertain sound,
-but on the whole inclining to the belief that it is either a
-revoke or it is not; evidently a man of judicial mind.</p>
-
-<p>(<i>d</i>) Authorities 2 and 3, while never in doubt for a
-moment, first affirming a thing to be white, and afterwards,
-when it has been bleached and is to some extent
-whiter than before, with unabated confidence affirming it
-to be black; and there an important question, involving
-the highest penalty known to the law, rests.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_62" id="Page_62">[62]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>If the force of absurdity can go beyond this, then “it
-can go anywhere and do anything.”</p>
-
-<p>The facts are in a nutshell. Either <i>Y</i>, when he threw
-his card up, abandoned his hand, or he did not. If he
-did, and <i>if that is an act of play which establishes a revoke</i>,
-then he revoked; if he did not, he had merely to say so,
-<i>cadit quæstio</i>; the card is an exposed one—“just that,
-and nothing more.” Only we have one, or rather two
-little difficulties to get over. Does abandoning the hand
-establish a revoke? and, if it does, is the decision
-authoritative—that is to say, of compulsory obligation?</p>
-
-<p>Who the original decider was, or who gave him
-authority to make a penal enactment in the teeth of Laws
-58 and 73, I do not know. All I do know is that the
-decision must not be fathered on Clay, for his case 8,
-“<i>A</i> has revoked; <i>his claim of the game</i> and throwing
-down his cards must be held as against himself as an act
-of playing,” is not on all fours; it occupies much firmer
-ground.</p>
-
-<p>Here are two well-matched decisions, “Silence is an
-answer.” “Throwing down the cards establishes a
-revoke,”—of course, with the proviso that one has been
-made—both strain the law; both entail the revoke
-penalty; the only difference is that one is in the <i>ipsissima
-verba</i> of Clay, the other is a mangled excerpt; if the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_63" id="Page_63">[63]</a></span>
-strong one has been quietly and surreptitiously burked,
-why, in the name of ordinary patience, does the weaker
-survive?</p>
-
-<p>If decisions are retreating all along the line to a safer
-standpoint on the letter of the law, well and good; only
-tar them all with the same brush, and take some means
-to let the public know it.</p>
-
-<p>Before the lamented demise of the Westminster Papers,
-disputed points were argued at length; whether in the
-number of counsellors there was wisdom, or whether too
-many cooks spoiled the broth, in either event we heard
-both sides. Question and answer could be found together,
-and if the decision did not invariably commend itself to
-our intelligence, we at any rate knew what the decision
-was, and that was the main point; but now our position
-has changed greatly for the worse. The present practice
-of Whist—a direct incentive to gambling—is this; whenever
-any doubt arises, instead of being able to lay their
-hands upon the recorded decision and settle it at once, the
-parties concerned first make a bet of one or more
-sovereigns and then write to the <i>Field</i>. On the ensuing
-Saturday afternoon a certain amount of money changes
-hands; two people are wiser, but the increase of wisdom
-is confined to themselves, and at the very next table the
-same process is repeated; while numerous quiet, well-meaning<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_64" id="Page_64">[64]</a></span>
-people like myself, who never bet, never know
-anything at all; for such answers as these, “X. It is a
-revoke,” “A. S. S. You cannot call on Z to pass it,”
-partake very much of the nature of Valentines in that,
-however interesting they may be to the recipient, they
-arouse no corresponding emotion in the world at large.</p>
-
-<p>Lastly, with regard to the authority.</p>
-
-<p>Whist-players are law-abiding to a degree, and sufferance
-is the badge of all their tribe; but still they would
-like to know how the authority obtained what the imperfect
-Member for Northampton is so fond of calling his
-mandate; whether by divine or hereditary right, by competitive
-examination, by election, by appointment from
-the Crown, or whether he sits upon us by “the good old
-rule, the simple plan” <i>of force majeure</i> as the Old Man
-of the Sea sat upon Sindbad.</p>
-
-<p>Bartholomew Binns, an official with the highest credentials,
-after being selected from numerous candidates, and
-receiving a mandate from the sheriffs of London and
-Middlesex, has his decisions reviewed by twelve good men
-and true, and reporters are present who publish them
-through the length and breadth of the land? How is
-our executioner appointed? Who reviews his decisions?
-How are they promulgated? Not that it matters to me,
-personally. When my fatal Monday comes round and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_65" id="Page_65">[65]</a></span>
-<i>sus. per coll.</i> is written under my name in the family
-archives, I do not imagine it will trouble me much
-whether the operator was born great, has achieved greatness,
-or has had greatness thrust upon him. I do not
-object to the instrument, I object to the system; but
-many Whist-players are more fastidious, and protest
-strenuously against being treated worse than other
-criminals. They hold that the position of a functionary
-who takes upon himself to decide important questions of
-law, and to upset old-established precedents, and manufacture
-new ones on his mere <i>ipse dixit</i>, should be very
-clearly defined, and that if one man is to unite in his own
-proper person the attributes of prophet, priest and king—three
-single gentlemen rolled into one—he should be duly
-anointed, consecrated and crowned, <i>ad hoc</i>.</p>
-
-<p>For questions involving common courtesy, for insoluble
-verbal quibbles, for ethical questions of this type, “Ought
-A to sit quietly at the table while his partner B picks Z’s
-pocket? and if he ought, is it right for him to share the
-plunder?” and for the host of minor cases which constantly
-arise, and for which no law could possibly provide,
-no better arrangement than the present could be devised.
-As long as maniacs exist in the land, klepto-, dipso-, homicidal,
-or Whist—offences must come, and in disposing of
-them—where a cadi is the only effective treatment that<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_66" id="Page_66">[66]</a></span>
-can be openly suggested—the editor of the <i>Field</i> is <i>facile
-princeps</i>,</p>
-
-<div class="poetry-container">
- <div class="poetry">
-<div class="verse">In faith he is a worthy gentleman,</div>
-<div class="verse">Exceedingly well read.</div>
-</div>
-</div>
-
-<p class="unindent">Only if he is to be the <i>de facto</i> authority in <i>all</i> cases, why
-not give him the three sanctions just mentioned, and make
-him the authority <i>de jure</i>? Then—as the <i>Field</i> is not a
-Whist gazette, and can scarcely be expected to devote its
-columns to advertising gratuitously every legislative
-change, and any space it has to spare is used rather for
-elaborating the ceremonial than for settling the laws of
-the cult—in token of our esteem, let us club together and
-present him with a piece of chalk, a duster, and a black
-board, to be set up in some easily-accessible spot—say,
-the middle of Pall Mall, or St. James’s-street. Make it
-the official notice-board! When new decisions are
-created let them be legibly inscribed upon it, <i>coram
-populo</i>! When well-known decisions are abrogated let
-them be carefully rubbed out at once. Since the Bastille
-was destroyed and <i>lettres de cachet</i> with it, there has been
-no authority without a notice-board; the Salvation Army
-has its “War Cry,” and the Pope himself, when he propounds
-a new dogma, propounds it <i>ex cathedrâ</i>.</p>
-
-<p>That is one remedy. Though it is not perfect it has<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_67" id="Page_67">[67]</a></span>
-two advantages—it is inexpensive, and if in future any of
-us should still remain in ignorance, we should be in
-ignorance by our own fault, and not by misfortune; and
-at any rate it is a more simple and less tortuous plan than
-upsetting well-known decisions in an unofficial newspaper,
-while new editions of our two standard Whist-books
-are subsequently brought out without one word of
-comment or warning.</p>
-
-<p>The alternative remedy—by no means novel, it has been
-suggested, <i>usque ad nauseam</i>, and I only bring it forward
-again because at present confusion is worse confounded
-than it has ever been in my recollection—is for the leading
-clubs to appoint a small committee of representative
-Whist-players, with power to revise any decisions they
-may see fit; and when they have revised them either to
-append them to the laws of Whist, or to place each decision
-as a rider under its own particular law, and every
-such decision should be final.</p>
-
-<p>Questions of strict law should never have been submitted
-to an arbitrator at all; they should have been
-cleared up long ago by the legislators themselves; though
-important, they are not very numerous, and as they have
-been well threshed out, and all their difficulties are known,
-the entire matter might be completed in a few hours. Why
-should London wait?</p></div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_68" id="Page_68">[68]</a></span></p>
-
-<p>The constitution of Whist and the constitution
-of our beloved country are both at the mercy of
-a grand old man of exuberant verbosity, each of
-whom is able, in some extraordinary way, to
-persuade himself that the side of any question
-on which he happens to be looking, is not only the
-right side, but that it positively has no other, in
-spite of the fact that in previous stages of his
-existence, he has himself, both recognised and
-vehemently supported that other side.</p>
-
-<p>For twelve years our despot—a despotism
-worse than Russian, which is tempered by
-assassination—has had no rival near the throne;
-for five he has absolutely had nobody even to
-contradict him, and what is the upshot? Why
-this:</p>
-
-<div class="center">
-<table border="0" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="0" summary="comparisons between 1879 and current text">
-<tr>
-<td align="center">THE EDIFICE WHEN LAST SEEN IN 1879.</td>
-<td align="center">THE MODERN SUBSTITUTE.</td>
-</tr>
-
-<tr>
-<td align="left" valign="top">1. That the strongest suit should generally be led.</td>
-<td align="left" valign="top">1. That the longest suit should always be led.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_69" id="Page_69">[69]</a></span></td>
-</tr>
-
-<tr>
-<td align="left" valign="top">&nbsp;</td>
-</tr>
-
-<tr>
-<td align="left" valign="top">2. That with a bad hand—which unfortunately is quite a normal condition—a strengthening card, or the head of a short suit, should generally be led.</td>
-<td align="left" valign="top">2. That with any kind of a hand, you have merely to pick out the four suit, which is the normal suit, and lead it.</td>
-</tr>
-
-<tr>
-<td align="left" valign="top">&nbsp;</td>
-</tr>
-
-<tr>
-<td align="left" valign="top">3. That the penultimate is a useful lead when there is a reasonable prospect of bringing the suit in.</td>
-<td align="left" valign="top">3. That (as far as the innumerable exceptions permit) the penultimate of a five suit should always be led.</td>
-</tr>
-
-<tr>
-<td align="left" valign="top">&nbsp;</td>
-</tr>
-
-<tr>
-<td align="left" valign="top">4. That no greater mistake can be made, than to imagine it is desirable in every case to give information to your partner.</td>
-<td align="left" valign="top">4. That you should always give the table information of the exact length of your suit.</td>
-</tr>
-
-<tr>
-<td align="left" valign="top">&nbsp;</td>
-</tr>
-
-<tr>
-<td align="left" valign="top">5. This being entirely a new extension, except as a joke, what view would have been taken of it five years ago it is impossible to say positively; but I have my own opinion.</td>
-<td align="left" valign="top">5. That with suits from five to thirteen, the top card but three should be led.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_70" id="Page_70">[70]</a></span></td>
-</tr>
-
-<tr>
-<td align="left" valign="top">&nbsp;</td>
-</tr>
-<tr>
-
-<td align="left" valign="top">6. That the discard, when the adversary declares strength in trumps, is a protective discard, to prevent him, if possible, from establishing any suit.</td>
-<td align="left" valign="top">6. That the discard, when the adversary declares strength in trumps, is from the strongest suit, and is a direction to the discarder’s partner to lead that suit.</td>
-</tr>
-
-<tr>
-<td align="left" valign="top">That the aphorism, discard from the strong suit, is very imperfect and misleading.</td>
-</tr>
-
-<tr>
-<td align="left" valign="top">&nbsp;</td>
-</tr>
-
-<tr>
-<td align="left" valign="top">7. That when an honour is led, if the second player holds a higher honour and not more than three of the suit, he should head the trick.</td>
-<td align="left" valign="top">7. That if an honour is led, the second player should never head it except with the ace.</td>
-</tr>
-</table>
-</div>
-
-<p>Always doubtful of my own arithmetic, I am
-indebted for the following figures to a little boy
-who has recently passed the Fourth Standard at
-an adjacent Board-school. He informs me that
-during the last decade three and a quarter
-inches of small print have been devoted by the
-editor of the <i>Field</i> to explaining that the modern<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_71" id="Page_71">[71]</a></span>
-rule of play at Whist is to discard from your best
-protected suit, when trumps are declared against
-you; twenty-one square inches to supporting the
-usual lead of a small card, from ace to four; and
-three square inches to reversing Clay’s and his
-own long-established decision, that silence is an
-answer; seventy-eight square inches to minute
-directions when not to lead trumps from five;
-three hundred and fifty-eight square inches to
-explaining what a convention is, and one acre,
-two roods, and eight perches—be the same
-more or less—to articles and hands purporting
-to illustrate the American leads, and placing
-the sheep on the right and the goats on the left,
-we have:—</p>
-
-
-<div class="center">
-<table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" summary="Evil and good">
-<tr>
-<td align="center"><span class="smcap">Evil.</span></td>
-<td align="center"><span class="smcap">Good.</span></td>
-</tr>
-
-<tr>
-<td align="left">One acre, two roods, eight perches, plus three square inches, plus seventy-eight square inches, plus three hundred and fifty-eight square inches.</td>
-<td align="left">Twenty-one sq. inches, plus three and a quarter sq. inches.</td>
-</tr>
-</table>
-</div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_72" id="Page_72">[72]</a></span></p>
-
-<p class="unindent">My young informant adds that the evil, if
-represented in square inches, is 6,273,079, and
-is in proportion to the good as 258,683 to 1.</p>
-
-<p>The moral would seem to be, that sufficient
-ink may make an acre and a half of white paper
-black, but will never make those two sides
-balance.</p>
-
-<p class="center">
-These be thy gods, O Israel.<br />
-</p>
-
-<p>Our ancestors built up and handed down to
-us a noble game: be it our aim to keep it undefiled.
-The task is difficult.</p>
-
-
-<div class="poetry-container">
- <div class="poetry">
-<div class="verse"><span style="margin-left: 5em;">Facilis descensus Averni est,</span></div>
-<div class="verse">Sed revocare gradum, superasque evadere ad auras,</div>
-<div class="verse">Hic labor, hoc opus est.</div>
-</div>
-</div>
-
-<p>An ordinary mind might withstand the philosophy
-of losing its money on principle; it might
-resist the blandishments—not to say fallacies in
-this connection—of the first part of algebra;
-American leads will never trouble it; but a
-system which absolves Mrs. Juggins and her<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_73" id="Page_73">[73]</a></span>
-constituents (a most numerous and important
-body, where noses are counted and not weighed)
-from any necessity for drawing an inference, and
-at the same time assures them, that not only is
-it the concentrated wisdom of all the ages, but
-that they are its hierophants, is a great power.</p>
-
-<div class="poetry-container">
- <div class="poetry">
-<div class="verse">Yet, how can man die better than facing fearful odds,</div>
-<div class="verse">For the ashes of his fathers, and the temples of his gods?</div>
-</div>
-</div>
-
-<p>And if the modern iconoclast will scatter
-those ashes, and will destroy those temples, we
-can at any rate dree out our weird, in the proud
-consciousness that we have done our best to
-prevent him.</p>
-
-
-
-<hr class="chap" />
-<div class="chapter"></div>
-<h2>CONCLUSION.</h2>
-
-
-<p class="unindent"><span class="smcap">In</span> twelve years one general principle has been
-faintly upheld, while three have been stretched
-on the rack and distorted till their own mothers
-would scarcely know them.</p>
-
-<p>If poor Mathews were to revisit the glimpses<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_74" id="Page_74">[74]</a></span>
-of the moon, and to come across that <i>improved</i>
-edition of Clay, could he ever guess that the
-ricketty abortion in the preface had ever been
-his own healthy and intelligent bantling?</p>
-
-<p>Whist-players of every degree, from Deschapelles
-to Mrs. Juggins, are now all supposed
-to lead the same card—I know they try; for,
-after much anxious thought, I have often seen
-the penultimate led from king, queen and three
-small cards—and with such a hand as this: ace,
-king, queen, knave of diamonds; two, three,
-four, five, six and seven of hearts; two and three
-of clubs; and the deuce of spades (trumps),
-whatever the score, if Deschapelles were to
-lead the king of diamonds, and Mrs. Juggins
-the four of hearts, according to our latest teaching,
-the old woman would receive the gold
-medal for scientific play, while Deschapelles
-would not be in it.</p>
-
-<p>More than that, although while Mrs. Juggins
-was making futile attempts to establish her long<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_75" id="Page_75">[75]</a></span>
-suit, and to explain she held originally six,
-several diamonds would probably be discarded,
-and she would be in danger of never making a
-trick at all; the apparent end of conventions,
-philosophy and American leads being not to
-make tricks, but to enable the table to count
-your hand, the award would be right.</p>
-
-<p>Twelve years has the mountain been in labour,
-and, as Miss Squeers remarked, with ungrammatical
-emphasis, “this is</p>
-
-<div class="center"><br /><br />
-<small>THE HEND.”</small><br /><br /><br />
-</div>
-
-
-
-<p class="copyright">
-—————————————————————<br />
-G. E. WATERS, 97, WESTBOURNE GROVE, LONDON.<br />
-</p>
-
-
-<hr class="full" />
-<p>&nbsp;</p>
-<p>&nbsp;</p>
-
-<div class="tnote"><div class="center"><b>Transcriber’s Note:</b></div>
-
-<p>Obvious punctuation errors were corrected.</p>
-
-<p>The printer was inconsistent in using terminal punctuation after a
-player’s initial. This was retained as printed.</p>
-
-<p>Page 60, repeated word “with” removed from text (with
-considerable trepidation)</p>
-
-<p>The book cover image was created by the transcriber and is placed in the public domain.</p>
-</div>
-
-<p>&nbsp;</p>
-<p>&nbsp;</p>
-<hr class="pg" />
-<p>***END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE DECLINE AND FALL OF WHIST***</p>
-<p>******* This file should be named 54145-h.htm or 54145-h.zip *******</p>
-<p>This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:<br />
-<a href="http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/5/4/1/4/54145">http://www.gutenberg.org/5/4/1/4/54145</a></p>
-<p>
-Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will
-be renamed.</p>
-
-<p>Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright
-law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works,
-so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United
-States without permission and without paying copyright
-royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part
-of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project
-Gutenberg-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm
-concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark,
-and may not be used if you charge for the eBooks, unless you receive
-specific permission. If you do not charge anything for copies of this
-eBook, complying with the rules is very easy. You may use this eBook
-for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports,
-performances and research. They may be modified and printed and given
-away--you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks
-not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the
-trademark license, especially commercial redistribution.
-</p>
-
-<h2>START: FULL LICENSE<br />
-<br />
-THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE<br />
-PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK</h2>
-
-<p>To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free
-distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
-(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project
-Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full
-Project Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at
-www.gutenberg.org/license.</p>
-
-<h3>Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project
-Gutenberg-tm electronic works</h3>
-
-<p>1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm
-electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
-and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
-(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
-the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or
-destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your
-possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a
-Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound
-by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the
-person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph
-1.E.8.</p>
-
-<p>1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be
-used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
-agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few
-things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
-even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See
-paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project
-Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this
-agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm
-electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.</p>
-
-<p>1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the
-Foundation" or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection
-of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual
-works in the collection are in the public domain in the United
-States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the
-United States and you are located in the United States, we do not
-claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing,
-displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as
-all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope
-that you will support the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting
-free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm
-works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the
-Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with the work. You can easily
-comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the
-same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg-tm License when
-you share it without charge with others.</p>
-
-<p>1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
-what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are
-in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States,
-check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this
-agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing,
-distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any
-other Project Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no
-representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any
-country outside the United States.</p>
-
-<p>1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:</p>
-
-<p>1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other
-immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear
-prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work
-on which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the
-phrase "Project Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed,
-performed, viewed, copied or distributed:</p>
-
-<blockquote><p>This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United
- States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost
- no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use
- it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with
- this eBook or online
- at <a href="http://www.gutenberg.org">www.gutenberg.org</a>. If you
- are not located in the United States, you'll have to check the laws
- of the country where you are located before using this
- ebook.</p></blockquote>
-
-<p>1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is
-derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not
-contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the
-copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in
-the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are
-redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase "Project
-Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply
-either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or
-obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg-tm
-trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.</p>
-
-<p>1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted
-with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
-must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any
-additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms
-will be linked to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works
-posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the
-beginning of this work.</p>
-
-<p>1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm
-License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
-work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.</p>
-
-<p>1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
-electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
-prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
-active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
-Gutenberg-tm License.</p>
-
-<p>1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
-compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including
-any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access
-to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format
-other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official
-version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site
-(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense
-to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means
-of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original "Plain
-Vanilla ASCII" or other form. Any alternate format must include the
-full Project Gutenberg-tm License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.</p>
-
-<p>1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
-performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works
-unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.</p>
-
-<p>1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
-access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
-provided that</p>
-
-<ul>
-<li>You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
- the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method
- you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed
- to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he has
- agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project
- Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid
- within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are
- legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty
- payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project
- Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in
- Section 4, "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg
- Literary Archive Foundation."</li>
-
-<li>You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
- you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
- does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm
- License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all
- copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue
- all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg-tm
- works.</li>
-
-<li>You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of
- any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
- electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of
- receipt of the work.</li>
-
-<li>You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
- distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.</li>
-</ul>
-
-<p>1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project
-Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than
-are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing
-from both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and The
-Project Gutenberg Trademark LLC, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm
-trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.</p>
-
-<p>1.F.</p>
-
-<p>1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
-effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
-works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project
-Gutenberg-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm
-electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may
-contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate
-or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other
-intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or
-other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or
-cannot be read by your equipment.</p>
-
-<p>1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right
-of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
-Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
-Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
-Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
-liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
-fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
-LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
-PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
-TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
-LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
-INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
-DAMAGE.</p>
-
-<p>1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
-defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
-receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
-written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you
-received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium
-with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you
-with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in
-lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person
-or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second
-opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If
-the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing
-without further opportunities to fix the problem.</p>
-
-<p>1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
-in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO
-OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT
-LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.</p>
-
-<p>1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
-warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of
-damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement
-violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the
-agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or
-limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or
-unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the
-remaining provisions.</p>
-
-<p>1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
-trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
-providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in
-accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the
-production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm
-electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses,
-including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of
-the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this
-or any Project Gutenberg-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or
-additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any
-Defect you cause. </p>
-
-<h3>Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm</h3>
-
-<p>Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of
-electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
-computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It
-exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations
-from people in all walks of life.</p>
-
-<p>Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
-assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's
-goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will
-remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
-Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
-and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future
-generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary
-Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see
-Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at
-www.gutenberg.org.</p>
-
-<h3>Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg
-Literary Archive Foundation</h3>
-
-<p>The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
-501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
-state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
-Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
-number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary
-Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by
-U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.</p>
-
-<p>The Foundation's principal office is in Fairbanks, Alaska, with the
-mailing address: PO Box 750175, Fairbanks, AK 99775, but its
-volunteers and employees are scattered throughout numerous
-locations. Its business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt
-Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to
-date contact information can be found at the Foundation's web site and
-official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact</p>
-
-<p>For additional contact information:</p>
-
-<p> Dr. Gregory B. Newby<br />
- Chief Executive and Director<br />
- gbnewby@pglaf.org</p>
-
-<h3>Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
-Literary Archive Foundation</h3>
-
-<p>Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide
-spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
-increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
-freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest
-array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations
-($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
-status with the IRS.</p>
-
-<p>The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
-charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
-States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
-considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
-with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations
-where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND
-DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular
-state visit <a href="http://www.gutenberg.org/donate">www.gutenberg.org/donate</a>.</p>
-
-<p>While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
-have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
-against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
-approach us with offers to donate.</p>
-
-<p>International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
-any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
-outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.</p>
-
-<p>Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation
-methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other
-ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To
-donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate</p>
-
-<h3>Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works.</h3>
-
-<p>Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
-Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be
-freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
-distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of
-volunteer support.</p>
-
-<p>Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed
-editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in
-the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not
-necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper
-edition.</p>
-
-<p>Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search
-facility: www.gutenberg.org</p>
-
-<p>This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,
-including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
-Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
-subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.</p>
-
-</body>
-</html>
-
diff --git a/old/54145-h/images/cover.jpg b/old/54145-h/images/cover.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 3a5cd53..0000000
--- a/old/54145-h/images/cover.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ