At most four sets were allowed per competitor. While there were no limits to the number of moves, problems within 12 moves would be preferred.
|sect. a:||1 pr.||T. M. Brown (Motto: Par Nobile Fratrum)|
Problems would be published as sent, under motto.
Problems were published between 1867-10-05 and 1868-04-04 (problems 593-618). The closing date does not appear to have been strictly enforced. In the 1867-10-26 column it was said that "we will allow two weeks,and then close the lists." and on 1867-11-05 Hazeltine sums up the results as 12 entries for section A, and one for section B. However, when the final problem is published on April 4, an additional problem for section B has been added.
The committee of judges was expected to be announced at the same time, but it seems there were difficulties. The Correspondents section of the 1867-04-18 column suggests that E. B. C., Hoboken (E. B. Cook), and C. C. B., Canajoharie (C. C. Barnes) had been addressed on an important question, suspected to be judgeship; from later events, they appear to have taken the job on. In the same column, amended version of problems discovered to be faulty by readers are invited.
On 1868-08-29, there's a question from Hazeltine to E. B. Cook about progress, but it is not until 1868-11-21 that the 1st prize of section A is published. (No second prize is mentioned.) E. B. Cook says that deciding the prize in the B section is more difficult and would require three judges, and Hazeltine prints a request for two additional judges to join Mr. Barnes in this task; those mentioned are S. Loyd, N. Marache, J. Patterson and "Hesperian" of Pittsburg.
No positive traces of the remaining awards have been found in The Clipper for 1869, and no full report appears to have been published.
In 1878, Sam Loyd, editor of the Scientific American Supplement chess column republishes problem 1, and adds that as only one correct competing set was found in this tourney, it was awarded first prize [of section A] automatically. It is not known if he obtained this information from Cook or Hazeltine; the conclusion cannot safely be made from published problems without knowing if judges allowed partially faulty sets to compete or not.
This particular column entry is also interesting because in it Loyd expresses his opinion that self-mates are absurdities and monstrosities.
On preparing this page, problem 1 of the prize-winner was found to misprinted: the stipulation was originally 'Black compels suimate in five moves', yet the second problem of the set is also printed as a black-to-move problem. As problem 1 was printed with White moving from the bottom rank, it was assumed that it really is a normal self-mate. As confirmation, the problem can also be found in American Chess-Nuts, section "Self-Mates", p. 368, prb. 79.
1 Prize: T. M. BrownProblem 2 was originally printed as black to move from the lower rank of the diagram (i.e. with A1 in upper right corner.) The diagram has been rotated to place A1 in lower left corner.
No solutions appear to have been printed in The Clipper. For problem 1, the key move given was taken from American Chess-Nuts, and for problem 2 the key move found by the Chest solving program has been given in brackets.