MissScarlett: Washington Post, March 7th 1915:
<At the end of three hours he had broken down the opposition to one lone man, Sidney Ballou, of the Metropolitan Club. That game wasn't any child's play, even for Capablanca, and he reached for a chair! For nearly an hour the struggle continued, Ballou having a certain advantage of a rook as against a bishop, while Capablanca had the advantage in number and position of pawns, Breathlessly the gallery watched while the genius of the Cuban slowly but certainly ate into the powerful position of his opponent.The onlookers spoke in whispers, And, when at last that inevitable final stroke came, and Mr. Ballou turned over his king in token of defeat, there was a general sigh - Capablanca had beaten Washington's 34 best players, not allowing even a draw.
But the next moment, there was a general applause for the marvelous young Cuban, who had mowed down Washington's best like corn before the reaper, And he deserved it, too.
It was a marvelous exhibition. Probably, to quote Hamlet, who seems to have crept into this column, "We ne'er shall look upon his like again.">
Capablanca gave two simuls on his trip to the capital - March 1st, +34 -0 =0; March 2nd, +14 -1 =1. The dating of this game to March 2nd relies on the <ACB>, April 1915, p.72, where the score appeared aside three other games from the same occasion: Capablanca vs N Whitaker, 1915, Capablanca vs W Wimsatt, 1915, Capablanca vs Edward Beckley Adams, 1915
However, based on the cutting above, it seems practically certain this is the game being described, meaning the <ACB> was mistaken, and this game should be re-dated to the 1st. Although Ballou played in both exhibitions (<Evening Star> (Washington, DC) March 3rd 1915, p.13), the chances that they shared the same ending (Capa with bishop plus pawn majority vs rook) is vanishingly small. Correction enacted.