198 



♦ KNOXA^LKDGE * 



[April 1, 1886. 



at an angle of 175° from her vertex, and reappear at her 

 bright limb at 5h. 54m. at an angle from her vertex of 257°. On 

 the 9th the 6th mag. star 130 Tauri will disappear at the 

 dark limb at lUi. 49m.'"p.M. at a vertical angle of 175°. The moon 

 will have set before it reappears. On the 10th, 20 Geminorum, a star 

 of the 5ith mag. will disappear at the dark limb at lOh. 25m. P.M. 

 at an angle of 143° from the moon's vertex, and reappear at her 

 bright limb at Uh. 18m. P.M. at a vertical angle of 285°. On the 

 14th, 48 Leonis, a (Uh mag. star, will disappear at the dark limb at 

 lOh. 57m^ P.M. at a vertical angle of 40°, reappearing at the bright 

 limb at llh. 40ra. at an angle of 329" from the vertex of the moon. 

 On the 15th, t Leonis of the 5th mag. will disappear at 9h. 21m. P.M. 

 at her dark limb at an angle from her vertex of 359°, to reappear 

 at the bright limb at 9h. 55m. P.M. at a vertical angle of 310°. On 

 the 16th, 13 Virginis, a 6th mag. star, will disappear at the dark limb 

 at 6h. 14m. P.M^ at a vertical angle of 69°, and reappear at the 

 bright limb at 7h. 4m. p.m. at an angle of 180° from the vertex 

 of the moon. Later on, at 9h. 58m. the dark limb of the moon 

 will occult Uranus, who will disappear at an angle of 6° from 

 the lunar vertex. He will reappear at her bright limb at lOh. 44m. 

 P.M. at a vertical angle of 297°. Lastly, on the 18th, k Virginis, a 

 star of the 4lth mag., will disappear at the moon's bright limb at 

 9h. 5m. P.M. at a vertical angle of 349°, reappearing at her opposite 

 one (it will really be dark, but uncommonly close to the illuminated 

 part) at 9h. 48m. P.M., at an angle from her vertex of 273°. At 

 noon to-dav, when our notes begin, the moon is in the confines of 

 Cetus and Pisces. At midnight on the 2nd she crosses from Pisces 

 into the narrow strip of Cetus running between that constellation 

 and Aries, passing about 2h. P.M. on the 3rd definitely into the 

 latter constellation. Crossing Aries at 5h. P.M. on the 4th, she enters 

 Taurus, through which she is travelling until 7h. A.M. on the 7th, at 

 which hour she quits it for the narrow northern portion of Orion. 

 Her passage over this occupies her until 6h. o'clock in the afternoon of 

 the same day, when she emerges in Gemini. Her passage through 

 Gemini occupies her until 9h. A.M. on the 9th, when she enters Cancer. 

 She has crossed this by 9h. P.M. on the 10th, and entered Leo. She 

 travels through Leo until lOh. A.M. on the 13th, at which hour she 

 quits it for Virgo. In Virgo she remains until llh. A.M. on the 16th, 

 when she enters Libra. She is travelling through Libra until 7h. A.M. 

 on the 18th, entering at that hour the narrow northern strip of 

 Scorpio. She takes 10 hours, or untU 5h. P.M., to cross this, and 

 then emerges in Ophiuchus. At noon on the 20th she leaves 

 Ophiuchus for Sagittarius, which she quits in turn for Capricornus 

 at midnight on the 22nd. She travels through Capricornus until 

 3h. A.M. on the 25th, when" she enters Aquarius. Her journey 

 through Aquarius is completed by 4h. 30m. A.M. on the 27th, at 

 which hour she crosses into Pisces. Her passage through this great 

 constellation occupies until 8h. A.M. on the 30th, when she once 

 more travels into the narrow corner of Cetus, where we found her at 

 midnight on the 2nd. There we leave her. 



COMETS FABRY AND BARNARD. 

 Our notes above have reference, of course, to those familiar objects 

 which are the invariable occupants of our day and night sky. 

 Daring the present month, however, interest will largely centre in 

 the two interesting comets which are nightly becoming more con- 

 spicuous over the north-western part of the horizon. The first was 

 discovered in Paris by M. Fabry, on December 1, 1885, and the 

 second by Mr. Barnard, at Nashville, in the United States, two days 

 later. Our first map shows a portion of the path of M. Fabry's 

 comet, which commences at a point a little to the north of a line 

 joining the two small stars 12 and 14 Andromed*. Thence it 

 ascends slightly, passing below i and « in that constellation. On 

 the 17th it will be pretty close to B Andromedie, and on the next 

 night between 8 and p. On the 22nd it will be a little to the south 

 and west of j3 Andromeda;. Crossing, then, the extreme north-east 

 corner of Pisces, it will be found in the confines of Triangula and 

 Aries on the 25th, and on the 26th to the north-east of a Arietis. 

 Map II. shows its course during the remainder of April. From it 

 will be gathered that the comet on the 27th will be south-east of 

 V Arietis ; on the 28th south by west of 8 Arietis ; on the 29th to 

 the east of | Tauri, and on the last day of April to the south and 

 slightly to the west of \. It will rapidly increase in brilliancy as 

 the month advances, and the student will note how its arc in the 

 sky increases nightly in length. 



The path of Barnard's comet is depicted in the left-hand portion 

 of Map I. Commencing to the north-east of a Trianguli, it runs up 

 into Andromeda, terminating almost on aline joining y andr Andro- 

 medae, but much nearer the smaller star. As in the case of Fabry's 

 comet, this is brightening very perceptibly. Unlike that object, 

 however, which is at its brightest on April 29, Barnard's will not 

 attain its greatest brilliancy until two or three months later. On 

 the night of the 24th the comets will be a little more than 9° apart, 



d^m- WBWt Column. 



ON THE ORIGINAL LEAD. 



By Mogul. 

 PART I. 



exhaust this subject so much would have to be 

 said that I certainly would not touch on it were 

 I not convinced that the rule, more or less abso- 

 lutely laid down by some of the more modern 

 writers, that when trumps are not opened the 

 original lead ought invariably to be from the 

 longest suit, is radically wrong ; and, further, 

 that the rule is neither the outcome of experience 

 nor adopted by the finest players of the day. 

 In considering the point I shall refer only to the first lead of the 

 first player in cases where he does not lead trumps, thus practically 

 excluding all cases where the leader holds five or more trumps, or 

 where the lead is affected by the state of the score (a point which 

 a certain quasi-philosophical writer totally ignores). The reader had 

 better, therefore, in all cases suppose the score to be love all. 



A player in opening the hand has to be guided partly by proba- 

 bilities or chances, but principally by the strength of his own hand. 

 Common-sense will tell him that, with a strong hand, he has a right 

 to play a strong game and risk a little for the chance of winning 

 the game in the one hand ; but it will also tell him that, with a 

 weak hand, it would be folly to play a strong game, and that, there- 

 fore, he ought to risk as httle as possible. With a medium hand he 

 must, so far as he can, play in such a way as will fall in with a 

 strong game if his partner be strong, and hardly risk anything if 

 his partner be weak. In this way he will much more assuredly 

 combine his hand with his partner's than by adopting any fixed 

 rule. It is right, therefore, if he has a long, weak suit, say of five 

 headed by the Ten, with average strength in trumps and strong 

 cards in the other suits, to open the long suit ; for, should his part- 

 ner have two or three cards in that suit with an average strength in 

 trumps, he will probably be able to bring it in, and this probability 

 justifies the risk he incurs of sacrificing any good cards his partner 

 may hold in the suit. And here let me digress. What do you 

 mean, the reader will say, by a long n-eaJc suit ? Is not such a suit 

 numerically strong ? My reply is that the expression " numerically 

 strong " is misleading. 'There is no strength in numbers UTespective 

 of quality. A suit of Ace, King, and Queen is strong of itself, but a 

 suit of six headed by no higher card than a Ten is intrinsically 

 weak ; and although, if the holder or his partner holds overwhelm- 

 ing strength in trumps, two or three tricks may be made in it, the 

 suit itself lacks every element of strength. There is no hope with 

 such a suit of capturing a good card of the adversaries', nor even, 

 except by extrinsic aid, of making a trick in it ; and, further, it is a 

 weakness in a hand as seriously diminishing the chances of holding 

 a really strong suit. To say, as Proctor says, that a suit of Two, 

 Three, Four, aud Five contains an element o£ strength because of 

 the possibility of the Five being the thirteenth card is, so it seems 

 to me, very loose language. If the remote possibility of making a 

 trick is to be regarded as an element of strength, there almost must 

 be in the hand some other suit containing a more reliable element 

 of strength, and the argument based on this supposed element of 

 strength would fail.'* But, picking up the thread of my remarks, 

 he would not be justified in opening such a suit if he held but two 

 small trumps and a suit which he could lead without risking loss to 

 himself or partner, say Knave, Ten, and Two, or even Knave and 

 Two. The Knave in the latter case, and the Knave or Ten in the 

 first case, must fall in the first two rounds ; and, by leading it at 

 once, a player effects two desirable objects — he strengthens his 

 partner's hand by forcing out the adversaries' good cards in that 

 suit, and prevents his own good card being wasted by falling to a 

 better one led by his partner. 



It seems to me to be downright foUy to adopt the long suit 

 system in obedience to mere theory when there is no reasonable 

 chance of establishing it. It is playing an offensive game with a 

 weak hand, and is opposed to the most important of all canons of 

 play, viz., that play must vary with the circumstances. No wonder, 

 therefore, that Pole, who lays down an absolute rule of leading 

 from the long suit, admits that the object aimed at more frequently 

 fails than succeeds, but in extenuation he alleges that no dis- 

 advantage arises from the attempt if unsuccessful. This is really 



* If those who contend that mere numbers constitute strength 

 are right, then a hand consisting of two plain suits, one of seven 

 headed by the Eight, and another of six headed by the Seven, is a 

 very strong hand. But does the reader think so i 



