Cricket 1883

190 CRICKET; A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. JUNE 21, 1883 ground of the latter, on Saturday last, in the first innings of the local team, took nine ■wickets at a cost of thirty-two runs and caught the tenth, thus having a hand in all ten wickets. Of the nine batsmen who fell to his delivery, five were clean bowled, one caught and bowled, one leg before wicket, and two caught. An incident of very rare occurrence in any match took place al the Oval in the first innings of Cambridge University against Surrey. Mr. C. W. Wright, turning round to hit a ball of Barratt’s, trod on his wicket, and removed one of the bails. . The batsmen ran two runs, and as on the appeal of the Surrey Captain both umpires declared they had not witnessed the removal of the bail, Mr. Wright continued his innings. T h e presentation of the testimonial, subscribed for by members of the Surrey County Cricket Club, to Mr. W . W . Bead in recognition of the Brilliant cricket he displayed during the recent Australian tour, will be made in the Pavilion at the Oval to-morrow at 2.80 by Lord Monson. It will, I understand, consist of a hand­ somely illuminated address on vellum, and a purse of two hundred and fifty guineas. T h e highest score of the season in a lirst-class match—Mr. A. G. G. Asher’s 182 for Oxford against the Orleans eleven at Twickenham. Mr. Asher, as I have already stated more than once, learned his cricket at Loretto School, and is, I believe, Scotch by birth. A f e w big scores since last week:—• Gravesend v. West Kent Wanderers, 442 for 9 wickets (Bev. F. F. J. Greenfield, 189); Lancashire v. Oxford University, 427 (Bobinson 154); Burton v. Trentliam Park, June 11, 476; Civil Service v. Household Brigade, June 13, 437 for 8 wickets; Sunderland v. South Nor­ thumberland, June 13, 339 for 5 wickets; Elsenham v. Orleans Club, June 16,247 for one wicket, (Ulyett not out 136); Dronfield Town v. Norton Oaks, June 16, 265 for two wickets. In this last match, W . Beeves (not out, 105), and H. James (112) made 252 before they were parted. For Lancashire v. Oxford, Bobinson and Mr. F. Taylor scored 237 while they were together. S o m e of the performances of the Ton­ bridge School Eleven this season have been very far above the ordinary run of Public School Cricket. Against Brighton College on June 9, after having disposed of Brighton for 88 , they scored 444 for nine wickets, of which A. 0 . Hubbard contributed 162, with only one chance when he had got over 130. Four days later, against the Marlborough Blues, they totalled 447, Bashleigh 125. and Le Fleming 112. I do not suppose any one can instance a similar case of a school playing two such innings in con­ secutive matches. I g a t h e r from the Australians that G. Giffen, the best all round player of the last Australian team, has resigned his position in the Adelaide Post Office, and is likely to turn Boniface. I t is said, on the best authority, that, barring accidents, the teamwhich repre­ sented ,Cambridge iu its three London matches, will do battle against Oxford at Lord’s on Monday. The eleven will b e :— C. T. Studd (Eton) captain, J. E. K. Studd (Eton), C. W . Wright (Char­ terhouse), Hon. M. B. Hawke (Eton), Hon. J: W. Mansfield (Winchester), P. J. de Paravicini (Eton), P. J. T. Henery (Harrow), W . N. Boe (Clergy Orphan School, Canterbury), J. A. Turner (Up­ pingham), C. A: Smith (Charterhouse), and H. G. Topham (Bepton). I am told that ten of the Oxford team have been definitely chosen:—M. C. Kemp(Harrow), captain, T. B. Hine-Haycock (Welling­ ton), J\ G. Walker (Loretto), C. F. Leslie (Bugby), A. G. G. Asher (Loretto), H. G. Buggles-Brise (Winchester), H. V. Page (Cheltenham), E . Peake (Marl­ borough), G. E . Bobinson (private), and W. E . Bolitho (Harrow). The eleventh place will most likely be filled by either E . D. Shaw, of last year’s team, E . W. Bastard, or J. Foord-Kelcey. ♦ * C 0 I ^ E g P 0 p E jM E - 3 * Wa are not responsible for the opinions expressed by our correspondents. No communications can be inserted un­ less they bear the name and address of the writer, as a proof of good faith, not necessarily for publication. REMOVING AN OLD LANDMARK. To t h e E d ito r of “ C r ic k e t .” S ir , —If Mr. Gale does not object to my mild criticism, I think nobody else will. It is almost worth while to raise points of difference, for the sake of eliciting such letters as the one in last week’s C r ick e t . But when I said that cricket was played in England at an earlier date than that which is ascribed to Ken’s playing at Win­ chester, I was thinking of several facts which, as far as I knew, have never been gainsaid, and which, if accepted, conclusively prove the posi­ tion which I assumed. In Russell’s History o f Guildford , page 203, there is an account of a trial which took place in 1598, about a piece of land which had been enclosed. John Derrick, gentleman, and one of the coroners for Surrey, said that he had known tke piece of land for fifty years and more, and “ when he was a scholler in the free school of Guildford, he and several of his fellows did runne and play there at cricket and other plaies.” In the Cricket Field , Mr. Pycroft gives several instances of cricket being mentioned in the 17 th century. I will quote from the new edition of the work. Page 5—In the Life and Death of Thomas Wilson , 1672, the biographer says, referring to Maidstone : He had seen “ cricketts and many other sports on the Lord’s Day.” On page 3, Mr. Pycroft refers to Edward Philips’ “ Mysteries cf Love and Eloquence,” 1658. I place this a ter Wilson's Life because the Encyclopcedia Britannica gives the date as 1685, I have not a copy of the work, and cannot verify the date, but Philips makes a bumpkin say, “ Would my eyes had been beat out of my head with a cricket ball.” Then on page 2, D’ Drfey, Pope, Duncome, and Jengus are quoted as a’l speaking of cricket about the year 1710. Dun- come, laying the scene of a match near Canter­ bury, wrote:— An ill-timed cricket match there did At Bishops-boume befall. The earliest of these references shows that cricket was known at a period antecedent to that at which Ken entered Winchester. Of course, it does not prove that Ken played, but it removes any a priori objection which may be raised on the ground of cricket not being then iu existence. Ever since I read Mr. Gale’s Echoes from Old Cricket Fields, I have thought that his opinion about the origin of the word “ cricket” is the one heresy in his cricket creed. I have read Bolland’s book and think he fails to make out his case. He derives cricket from cross-wicket, and ascribes the change to the contraction which is common in all language 3 . Tip-cat is suggeste I as the origin of cricket, and when the game wa< played from both ends, like the Scotch game of cat-and-dog, it was called cross-wic’iet, and this was reduced to cricket. I have two objections to this opinion. One is that the word “ cross­ wicket” would have left traces in literature if it haa ever been the popular name of a game. Even long words are not shortened universally and immediately. I cannot remember that Mr. Bcllaud adduces any evidence for his theory. The other objection is that cricket, as the nams of a game, appears to be older than wicket. Small gates were called wickets, but we have no evidence that the word was used in connection with cricket as early as the word “ cricket” itself. If the earliest form of cricket was played with one stump in the block-hole (and evidence for this is given in vol. 1 of Lillywhite's Scorei and Biographies , p. 114) then the game is older than the wickets, and could not take its name from them. In my leisure moments I have been at work for some time on the nomenclature of cricket, as I think this is almost untrodden ground. Three books on the game give glossaries, but they mike no attempt to trace the terms to their origin. The word cricket itself has been the subject of many investigations, and the weight of evidence is on the side of those who derive it frem cric or cryc, a crooked stick. I In the neighbourhood of Sheffield, where I spent my boyhood, the word cricket was scarcely ever used by the common people. Wickets was the name they gave to the game , but I never heard cross-wickets, either there, or in my native county Notts, or in Lancashire, my present home. Stormouth derives cricket from the French criquet, the stick or peg serving for a mark in the game of bowls. Earle, the philologist, says that cricket has a French termination. I believe the word is hybrid, the root of it old English, written creag in the well-knownwardrobe account of Prince Edward, son of Edward I,, and dated 1,300, and finally the word became cricket, be­ cause of the similar word in use among bowlers.