THE EVOLUTION OF WHIST.

New Zealand Times, Volume LVII, Issue 2691, 14 December 1895, Page 2 (Supplement)

THE EVOLUTION OF WHIST.

Dr Pole, whose book with the above title has been published by Longmans and Ooij is well known as an authority upon wliisit, find any book Which he may Write upon the subject is assured of attention. His present purpose is mainly scientific; to account for the present condition of wbist, as played by experts, by tracing the successive changes through which it has passed. Dr Pole is at great pains to lay stress upon the evolutionary process; but there is no game in which that process is not visible, provided only that it be a game capable of development. Cricket has passed through an evolutionary process 5 Bugby football is a still better illustration j and chess as played in a Burmese village and as played at the Hastings totirnaruerit exhibits the same general history; In, whist the development is most remarkable becadse or the strict limits which the fundamental principled of the game impose. It is a little disconcerting to those who would have all card games as being the peculiar implements of the Adversary to discover that one of the earliest references to the game is found in a sermon preached in 1529 by the martyr Latimer. He says: And where you are wont to celebrate Christmas in playing at cards, I intend, by God’s grace, to deal unto you Christs Cards, wherein you shall perceive Christ’s Buie. The game that we play at shall be called tbo Triumph, which, if it be well played out, bo that dealetb shall win; the Players shall likewise win j and the standees and lookers upon shall do tbo same. . , , st * * *

You must mark also that tbo Triumph must apply to fetch home unto him all the other cards, whatever suit they bo of. • * * *

Then, further, we must say to ourselves, “What requireth Christ of a Christian man f” Now turn up your Trump, your Heart (Hearts is Trump, as I said before), and cast your Trump, your Heart, on this card.

Bishop Still, in “ Gammer Grurton’s Needle," also provides an obvious reference to the game. This episcopal countenance is reassuring, tfhe primitive game of Trump had, about the beginning of the seventeenth century, acquired the name of Buff, whilst a few years later Taylor, the AVater Poet, has an allusion to whisk, which in the oUrious second part of “ Hudibras" (1663) has become whist. This transition from whisk to whist oasts some doubt upon both derivations of the latter name. “ Whist" is offered by one party as borrowed from tho interjection demanding the silence proper to the game. And the French authority who seeks to derive it from “ Oui" “ St 1" moves iu the same direction. AVe should be disposed ourselves to urge that “ whisk " became “whist" by the natural disposition of language to take the easier and more euphonious form. The name “ swobbors" seems soon to have died out, but a literary associate preserves its memory for ua

Swift, in bis “Essay on the Fates of Clergymen," ridicules Archbishop Tenison, who was said to be a dull man, for misunderstanding the term. He relates a known story of a clergyman who was recommended to the Archbishop for preferment, when his Grace said :—“ He had heard that clergymen used to play at whist and swobbera ; that as to playing now and then a sober game at whist for pastime, it might be pardoned, but he could not digest those wicked swobbors.” “ It was with some pains,” added the Dean, “ that my Lord Somers oonld undeceive him." Johnson quotes the pretended speech of the Archbishop, and defines swobbera as "four privileged cards, which are only incidentally used for hotting at whist.” The additional term was of limited application, and soon went out of use.

Dr Polo recalls the early expedients the dishonest iat whist, together with evidence that it fell rather into disrepute on this account. From that low estate it was raised by Edmond Hovlo, who, as a professional teacher of whist, furnished ample precedent for a development now more common in America than in England. Whist, as Hoyle taught it, was the long whist played ever since. Short whist came in during tho early part of the present century. But the next serious development of the game did not occur until between 1860 and IE7O, or a century and a quarter after the introduction of the Hoyle game. The influence of the group of Cambridge-men who constituted in the fifties the “Little, Whist . School" was most valuable ; but even more important was the appearance as a whist authority of the over-to-be-reverod “ Cavendish." Dr Pole himself joined him in developing - tho combination of hands and the investigation of probabilities in their relation to the game. The philosophical game, once started, yvas taken up with enthusiasm. The practical result has been to divide whist into two games, the scientific and the domestic. The developments of the scientific game are here explained and discussed in a lucid narrative, which can bo read with profit by those who have hitherto disdained ‘any effort to master a philosophic, game. There is an interesting survey of whist in America, in which the attempt by “ duplicating " to eliminate the influence of chance is fully described. The American frenzy for further developments in signalling is not received with equal sympathy:—

It is curious to contrast the present strong opinion in favour of the multiplication of signals with that quoted in page 128 as given at the time of tho first introduction of the signal for' trumps. We are there told that the inventor often said that “ ho bitterly regretted bis ingenuity,'which'had deprived him of one-half of tho, advantage which he derived from bis superior play.’’ Here are two opinions, diametrically opposed, .Do these signals, encourage or discourage fine play? The question is worth study. Suppose some of the best players in America (and “Cavendish” says they are the best in the world) wore to try for a month tho experiment of playing whist as it was played before the trump- signal was introduced, taking care not to allow any communication from one' partner to the other, except by tbe strictest ami' most natural interpretation of the normal fall of the cards. Would they find any diminished opportunity for the exercise of their skill ? It such a cacoSthes for signalling as now prevails should continue to spread, its logical outcome would be for each player to hand over his cards for his partner,'to look at before the play begins. This would be quite admissible if agreed to by ail parties, but it would bo a new game, and ceftainly no improvement on the one »o are accustomed to.