In relation to the Solitaire King effect in this issue is a card oddity which was shown to me a few years ago by a professional gambler who used it as a form of solitaire. Shuffle any deck and deal off twenty-five cards, discarding the rest of the deck. Turn these face up, lay them out in five rows of five cards each, and then move them around at will, until you have five complete poker hands consisting of straights, full houses or flushes, according to the way they may be arranged. There can be no pairs only or three of a kind only hands as all cards must be used. This can always be done regardless of what cards you have to work over. Sometimes it is easy and other times you’ll spend an hour before you realize it. It is a fascinating puzzle and if you try it and get stuck, send me the names of the cards and a stamped envelope. If I can’t figure it out, I know a fellow who can.

Lurking in my notebook is another cute bit of knowledge. Someone shuffles a deck and names any two different values. You fan the face up deck and invariably can show the two values side by side somewhere among the cards. The chances in favor of this are quite high and it has been used extensively as a betting proposition.

You can also spread a deck face down and have anyone turn over three cards, wagering that among the three will be an Ace, Deuce or Jack. It looks to the spectator as if only twelve cards out of the fifty-two can lose for them, but the percentage is computed differently and is high in your favor. Never let it be said I have advocated betting, but in case someone’s mind turns that way, these two items are safe even money wagers.

In The Book Without a Name was an effect called Seven Keys to Baldpate. It made use of a Yale or Corbin padlock and seven keys, only one of which would fit. The keys were to be mixed and each of seven people would pick one out and hold it in their close fist. The performer would now pass from one to another and finally stop in front of one whose key would be tried and found to open the lock. I used a small size changing bag and extra keys in the method given. Robert Thrasher, of Elmira, New York, and I were together not long ago, and in talking about the effect evolved, not alone a better method, but a much improved effect from the standpoint of the audience. One needs only the padlock and eight keys, one of which fits the lock. These keys all look alike, but only seven are used openly. One of the dummy keys is used secretly. Have the real key with a ribbon tied to it. Hand the dummy keys to a spectator with the lock and have him try them. Then hand him the real key which opens the lock. Now hook the lock into his coat lapel and snap it shut. Remove the ribbon from the real key and toss it into a hat or bowl with the others. Really, though, you switch it with a simple coin move for your dummy key. And at this time, no one expects anything, most attention being on the lock in the lapel. Now have the keys mixed and picked out by seven people. Pass along and finally stop in front of one. Have the real key in your left hand finger palmed, take the key from the spectator, make a change over the palm and toss the real key to the spectator with the lock. He removes the padlock and all is well and can be checked.

I wonder how many passed up the shrinking dollar stunt that Max Holden described in the Linking Ring for May ? It’s an excellent table trick and new. By rolling a bill real hard between the hands it is broken down and appears to have become much smaller than an ordinary bill with which it is compared. The more it is broken up and the finer the wrinkles get, the smaller the bill looks, and the picture, figures and design appears smaller and is not distorted. It takes three or four times to do well, and the bill is getting smaller all the while. I patter along about showing them a practical explanation of deflation. The dollar on the table is a pre-deflation dollar and the one you use is what happened. When Mr Roosevelt decreed that the dollar drop to 59 cents, all members of the house and senate went out on the capitol steps with a pile of bills beside them, and worked night and day to make the dollar worth 59 cents. While gabbing about this, you keep rolling the bill hard and unrolling to show how it gradually drops to about 90 cents, then 75 and finally to approximately 59 cents in size. It’s silly but funny and an awfully interesting stunt. (English readers note : My apologies for the used up space here. I tried it with a ten shilling note and it doesn’t work worth a hoot.)

For those who use the canary in the electric light bulb, I’ve thought of a variation which would be very effective. Instead of a bird, use water. Have the bulb burning as usual and vanish a glassful of water, not the glass, just the water. You can use a Foo can or any preferable method. Instantly, and coinciding with the vanish, the light goes out, the bulb is unscrewed and found full of water when broken. The contrast of water into a burning bulb is very strong and impressive. To fill a bulb, hold it in a pail of water and with a pair of shears cut the tip off. The vacuum in the bulb causes it to fill itself and the small hole is then waxed over.

Speaking of a Foo can reminds me of a very funny comedy stunt in which it was secretly used. One was made to fit into a derby hat. As usual, the opportunity rises for the practical joker to pour water into the hat and stand by, waiting for the deluge. However, the hat is put on and taken off with nothing happening and the joke rebounds. It’s very funny to watch because just the opposite to what you expect happens. Perhaps Frank Lane can use this at the next convention.

Why don’t more magicians be up to date and timely ? I’ve seen two different performers do a burglar card trick lately with the worn out ‘cop and robber’ talk. Use ‘G-man’ instead of ‘cop’ and make a modern manhunt of it. You’ll get their interest quicker and they’ll remember how you ‘caught Dillinger’ longer than just a card trick about burglars.

Magicians could learn a lot by digging into old magazine files. There are two tricks being used a great deal to-day, but no one is doing them as they were originally performed and the effects in those days were much better. The Vanishing Bird Cage is the first. The cage and bird were shown and vanished. Then the performer would explain that any fear for the bird was groundless because the bird disappeared first, followed by the cage. They both vanished so close together, however, that it appeared as one disappearance. After saying this, the performer would reach under his coat and his hand would come out holding a canary which would fly away. I’ve always thought this a pretty finish and remember trying to get Keating to use it at the time he was making Broadway extremely birdcage conscious. The S.P.C.A. was interested and the usual ‘to hurt or not to hurt’ controversy raged. This finish would have been timely and a cute come-back, but Fred couldn’t see it my way, or else was too tired to bother. I heard a short time ago that, while working on a picture, he did the cage vanish with a pigeon. It may have been ballyhoo (Fred had lobby photos once holding a parrot cage about the size of an Austin) but I know him well enough to guess that he might try such a thing. If he did, he must have looked like Lionel Strongfort in his prime, after the cage and pigeon were out of sight (?).

The other trick is The Cards From the Pockets. Performers invariably have the deck shuffled and then pull out the card called for. When Herbert Brooks introduced this stunt he tossed a deck out for a three card selection. Each spectator who took a card wrote his name on it and shuffled his card back himself. Brooks put the halves into his trouser pockets and had the three cards named. He reached in his pockets and drew out the cards, returning them to their owners for verification.

Then he said that it was easy because he could find any card called for, and as cards were named, he produced them. The indexes were in the double pockets to start. The deck from which cards were selected was of normal size but taken back while the cards were being marked and changed for a narrow deck. In his pockets he could pull out the three marked cards and return them. The other cards called for came from the indexes. This was subtle because the locating of the three marked cards impressed that the same deck that was shuffled was being used. If you do the effect, try this version by the originator of the trick.

Others may have thought of this but I’ve never seen it in print and I thought of it through necessity. I don’t suppose there is a reader who hasn’t been handed something as a joke and asked to take it out of somebody’s pocket. If the article is reasonably small like a pen, pencil, or a watch, I can tell you a cute wrinkle. Just do a simple card location and pick on the goat-to-be to help. Have him shuffle the deck after returning his card and when you take the deck you use your own method for getting the card to the top or the bottom. Now ask him to come over and stand beside you and your right hand drops to the pocket and gets the article. He is on your left and you merely put the deck into his pocket with both hands, and leave the article there. Now have him name his card and you reach in with one hand and produce it. Take the deck out immediately and sit him down for another trick. He never knows what hit him when later, the article is found missing and you, with obviously empty hands, take it from his pocket. It’s a good angle to know, anyway.