Cricket 1885

162 CRICKET- A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. JUNE 4, 1885. of the Kent eleven who took part in every one of the fifteen matches played by the county in 1878, and, indeed, he was the mainstay of the team that summer. Two very line innings of 83 against England and 60 not out against M.C.C. and Ground made the Canterbury week of 1878 very memor­ able for him, and his all-round cricket during that week was so highly appreciated that a collection of £20 2s, was made on the ground on his behalf. During the seasons of 1879 and 1880, though fairly successful with the ball, he was not in quite the same form with the bat, and his highest scores were made for M.C.C., the best being one of 162 against Essex, at Brentwood, in the former year. The summer of 1881, though, found him in better luck, and he had not only the best figures of the Kent bowlers, but was also on several occasions of great service with the bat. He had with Wootton to bear the brunt of the howling for Kent in 1882, and though his twenty-six wickets were got at an average cost of eighteen runs he was at times of great use to the County. His best scores in Kent matches during this summer were 90 and 64, both against Sussex, although he was credited with higher figures in some of the minor fixtures of M.C.C., notably against Wellington College and Mote Park, where he respectively made 133 and 100, in each case not out. In 1883, though more expensive, he did the most work of any of the Kentish bowlers, delivering nearly five hundred overs during the summer. His best performances, though,were with the bat and several of his innings were of a very high class, in particular his 125 for M.C.C. and G. v. Leicestershire at Lord’s ; 71 not out for M.C.C. and G. v. Derbyshire at Derby; and his 80 against M.C.C. and G. and 76 against Surrey for Kent. Last year, though his bowling was nothing like so effective, he bat'.ed with consistent success, aud the Committee of the Marylebone Club showed their appreciation by giving him for the first time the honour of a place in the match between Gentlemen and Players. The highest of several good Innings for his county were his 116 and 61 against Hants at Gravesend, and he helped with Lord Harris in a great measure to secure a victory for Kent in that match. Hearne is a left-handed bat with very strong defence. He is particularly good on the off-side, his driving and cutting being at times brilliant. He is also left handed in his bowling, which is over medium pace. Though, as a rule, there is not much break, he has rather a high delivery, which, on a sticky wicket, makes him occasionally very effective. No professional player at the present time is more deservedly respected,and no better proof can be given of this than in the remarks made by Lord Harris on the occasion of the presentation of £80,collected last Canterbury Week, to the three brothers Hearne and Wootton. Lord Harris, to quote from C r ic k e t , “ spoke in laudatory terms of the excellent conduct of George Hearne, with whom he had played fourteen years, his invariable good temper, whether losing or winning, and his invariable keenness to uphold the credit of the County.” Next Thursday’s C rick et w ill contain a portrait and^ biography of W. A. Woof, of Gloucestershire. R u le s of C ricket suitable for hanging in Pavilions and Club Rooms. Thoroughly well mounted and framed, price 3s. To be had of the publisher, 41, St. Andrew’s Hill, Doctors’ Commons, E.C. U N F A I R B OW L I N G . The following letter has been sent by Lord Harris to the Committee of the Lancashire Club:— G entlem en , —I have the honour to beg your attention on a subject which has engaged the attention of the cricketing public of late years, and which has now in my humble opinion arrived, owing to the action of your club, at a point requiring incisive treatment. The subject is that of unfair bowling. It is unnecessary to remind you that a very strong opinion has gained ground of late years that an unfair style of bo wling has become too common, and that measures should be taken to check its increase. In consequenoe at a meeting of County Secretaries, held at Lord’s on Dec. 11, 1883, it was proposed by Mr. I. D. Walker and seconded by Mr. 0. W. Alcock, “ That the under-mentioned counties agree among themselves not to employ auy bowler whose action is at all doubtful,” and this was signed by representatives of Yorkshire, Kent, Middlesex, Derbyshire, Notts and Surrey. Your representatives declined to agree to the resolution, contending, I presume, that the public feeling on the subject was groundless, that there were no unfair bowling actions, and that there was no necessity for any steps being taken in the matter, and with you,in not signing the agreement,were the re­ presentatives of Gloucestershire and Sussex. Early in the following season, however— and here, and for the first time publicly, permit me to observe, I find it necessary to mention individuals by name, and only now, because otherwise I could not state my case —I found that, of those bowlers whose delivery had been particularly objectionable, Nash had disappeared from his county eleven; another, Crossland, was still in it, and in my opinion bowling as unfairly as in the provious season; but personally I was content to rest for the time being with the point I believed I had gained. I hoped you meant of your own free will, and without agreement with other counties, to place your eleven in an irreproachable position, and my hopes were justified by finding later on in the season that Crossland was also left out. It was, therefore, with the greatest regret, that, on arriving at Old Trafford on Thurs­ day last, I found that both Crossland and Nash were to play. I acted as I thought best, under the circumstances : I asked for an interviewwith your Committee orits repre­ sentatives, and I told Mr. McLaren and Mr. Hornby then, before the match commenced, that I held myself free to take what action I thought necessary. It was impossible for me to do anything more there. For all that, I knew, both bowlers might have changed their deliveries, or again, if they had not, the umpires might no-bill them. In my opinion, and in that of others after watching them carefully this year, the delivery of neither bowlers is consistently fair. The umpires did not ‘ ‘ no-ball ” them, and it remains, therefore, for me—pledged, a3 I consider myself to be, to do everything in my power to discourage unfair bowling—to take the steps I told your representatives, I thought it might be necessaryfor me to take. First, let me say that I consider your contention unanswerable, i. e., that the umpires, the sole judges, by the laws of cricket, of fair and unfair play, never have objected to the action of either of the bowlers above mentioned. I admit that it is un­ answerable, and that being so, and still maintaining my opinion, in which I believe myself to be supported by a very large number of cricketers, that the action of neither bowler is consistently fair, and bearing in mind that your club has declined to pledge itself “ not to employ any bowler whose action is at all doubtful; ” I conceive, after careful consideration, that there is only one course open for me to adopt, and that is, to advise the Committee of Kent County Cricket Club to decline any further engage­ ment with your club, certainly for this year, and until a more satisfactory state of things maintains. Our clubs are engaged to play the return match at Tunbridge in August. What I shall suggest to my Committee is to allow you, without appearance on the ground, to take the match by our- default, or. if you prefer to go by the strict letter of the law and to send your team there, to take care that there be wickets pitched, someone to tos3 for choice of innings, and on our declining to go to the wickets, umpires to give you the match. Of course, it is quite possible that my Committee may decline to support me ; in that case I promise you that no one shall ever hear another word from me on the subject of unfair bowling. I shall consider that I have taken the last step possible, and that I may fairly leave it to some other enthusiast, with more energy and his cricket career to look forward to rather than back upon, to take up the cudgels. Before I conclude let me add a few words of personal interest, certainly to myself, I think to the Kent Eleven, and, perhaps, your club. I told your representatives before the match began, and I was but repeating what I have frequently said, That if there was one county in England against which I should have a disinclination to move, that county would be Lancashire. It is fourteen years since I first played on Old Trafford for Kent v. Lancashire; and I think this makes the eleventh consecutive year that I have come up as Captain of the Kent Eleven. During all that time the relations between the two clubs, so far as I know, have been of the most cordial character. We always rejoiced when Lancashire was Champion County; Kentish and Lancashire pro­ fessionals have always been on the most friendly terms,the Bame among the amateurs, and, if Mr. Hornby will forgive me for mentioning him last, or, indeed, at all, entirely divergent as are his opinions and mine, strong as they are upon the question of the deliveries of their two bowlers, we have never allowed mere opinions to interfere with our personal friendship, and, indeed, I believe that each has no better friend in the erioket-field, perhaps in a wider sphere, than the other; and lastly, I had the gratification on Thursday last of meeting with such a reception from the enormous company present on Old Trafford a3 I have never received on any cricket ground in or out, of England in my life, only surpassed by the still more complimentary manifesta­ tion at my summary dismissal. Apprecia­ ting then at their highest worth that cordial reception and these friendly relations, I ask you, gentlemen, and the Lancashire cricket ■ loving public to believe that in acting as I propose to do I am actuated solely by my anxiety to see the noble game pursued in what I conceive to be the fairest way, by no petty or jealous feelings, and with infinite regret that my action should be directed against two professional cricketers, and against the Lancashire County Cricket Club. —I remain, Gentlemen, faithfully yours, H a r r is .