On the alternative <39... Rxa4>: White loses a pawn after 39... Rxa4 40. Rc5 Ra2 with the threat of Kh5-g4 still intact. 39... Rxa4 40. Rc6 Rxb4 41. Rxe6+ Kh5 leads to 42. Kg2, so does 40... Kh5 41. Kg2, saving White's Knight; but after 39... Rxa4 40. Rc6 Kf6 White will inevitably lose the b-pawn--39... Rxa4 40. Kg2 Rxb4 just loses the pawn quicker. Still, it seems to offer White slightly better chances than the text move, even though White is badly losing in either case.

The time limit was exceeded by Mr. Kolisch; but the manuscript does not provide sufficient indication in this respect. >

https://books.google.de/books?id=Tz...

<Ueber einen internationalen Skandal im internationalen Schachkongreß erzählen Pariser Blätter Folgendes: Am 11. d. ist es im cercle international zu einer recht artigen Prügelei zwischen Arnous de Rivière, einem der Preisrichter im Schach-Turnier, und Kollisch [sic], dem Erringer des ersten Preises, gekommen. Kollisch sollte nämlich das für Ueberschreitung der Bedenkzeit (eine halbe Stunde für 10 Züge), die er sich beim Spielen seiner letzten Partie zu Schulden kommen ließ, festgesetzte Pönale von einem Napoleonsd'or erlegen. Da er sich weigerte, kam es zwischen ihm und de Revière [sic] zum Wortwechsel, der bald in Thätlichkeit überging. Die Aufregung in Schach-Kreisen wegen dieses Vorfalls ist keine geringe, und werden im Café de la Régence und im Grand Café lebhafte Debatten geführt, wie die Turnier=Kommission diese Angelegenheit schlichten wird. Ueberhaupt hat die Thätigkeit dieser Kommission allgemeine Mißbilligung erfahren, hauptsächlich wegen des irrationellen Reglements, nach welchem mehr der Zufall als die wirkliche Tüchtigkeit der Spieler die Entscheidung herbeiführt. [...]

Parisian papers tell the following about an international scandal in the international chess congress: On the 11th of this month, in the cercle international, there was quite a brawl between Arnous de Rivière, one of the judges in the chess tournament, and Kollisch [sic], the winner of the first prize. Kollisch was to pay the penalty of one Napoleon's d'or for exceeding the time limit (half an hour for 10 moves), which he was guilty of when playing his last game. Since he refused, there was an exchange of words between him and de Revière [sic], which soon turned into violence. The excitement in chess circles because of this incident is not small, and in the Café de la Régence and in the Grand Café there are lively debates how the tournament commission will settle this matter. In general, the activity of this commission has met with general disapproval, mainly because of the irrational rules, according to which the decision is made more by chance than by the real skill of the players. >

Translated withwww.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)

If you can find any more exposition on the matter I would be anxious to hear.

I'm still unsure the circumstances of the game - was it adjourned and not resumed due to this disagreement?

Was Kolisch in the wrong? Or was this somewhat of an arbitrary decision on the part of the committee?

When did Kolisch exceed the time limit (i.e. what series of moves)?

How violent was the disagreement?

Was this incident discussed at all in Z's book on Kolisch?

Please don't feel an obligation to investigate any of these multifarious questions unless it's at your convenience and inclination.

I'm just thinking out loud (as often happens with me!).