Cricket 1886

12 CRICKET?: A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. JAN. 28, 1886* GLOUCESTERSHIRE COUNTY CLUB. F ixtu res for 1886. April 26 —Kennington Oval, Gloucestershire v. Surrey June 7—Brighton, Gloucestershire v. Sussex June 10—Lord's, Gloucestershire v. Middlesex June 28 —Moreton-in-Marsh, Gloucestershire v. Nottinghamshire July 1—Gloucester, Gloucestershire v. Sussex July 22 —Manchester, Gloucestershire v. Lanca­ shire July 26 —Sheffield, Gloucestershire v. Yorkshire July 29 —Nottingham, Gloucestershire v. Notting­ hamshire Aug. 2—Derby, Gloucestershire v. Derbyshire Aug. 5—Clifton, Gloucestershire v. Australians Aug. 9—Gloucester, Gloucestershire v. Middlesex Aug 16—Cheltenham,Gloucestershirev.Australians Aug. 19—Cheltenham, Gloucestershire v. Yorkshire Aug. 23—Clifton, Gloucestershire v. Surrey Aug. 26—Clifton, Gloucestershire v. Lancashire O n Tuesday evening, at Red Hill, near Nottingham, a presentation was made to Thomas Oscroft, cricketer, by the members of the Bestwood Park Cricket Club. For twelve years past Oscroft has managed the cricket ground laid out on the Duke of St. Albans’ estate, and his Grace has himself shown his interest in cricket by cancelling the heavy debt which burdened the club for years. In presence of William Oscroft, Thomas was presented with a purse of gold, not only for his own worth, as it was stated, but because of the honour conferred upon the village by the splendid abilities of his sons in the cricket- field. M eeting of L ancashire S ecretaries . —On Jan. 9 a large gathering of the representatives of cricket clubs within a wide circle of Manchester took place at the Grand Hotel, Manchester, to confer for cricket fixtures during the ensuing season. Mr. S. H. Swire, of the County Club, on whose invitation the meeting—the first of its kind—was held, presided. More than one hundred clubs were represented. The chairman observed that some such meeting as that was calculated to save club secretaries a good deal of corres­ pondence and uncertainty. Referring to engagements already made by the Manchester Club, he said that, besides county matches, they played this season the Australians three times on their ground. He said that in Lancashire they were much in want of a fast bowler. In spite of the great cricketing talent in a county like that, they could not get a really good fast bowler. He wanted to assist the county in the endeavour to unearth such a man. If he were a professional man it would mean a fortune for him, and if an amateur there was no end to the reputation he might gain for his club. During the afternoon a large number of fixtures were made by the clubs represented. Among the engagements which it was ascertained had been made was that of Lancashire v. Surrey, to be played at Liverpool on the first three days of July. It was decided that a similar meeting be convened next year about the same date, and that clubs be recommended not to make their fixtures before that meeting took place. N orthampton A lma C lub . —At the annual dinner of this club, which has been established upwards of twenty years, and from which many county men have sprung, the prizes for batting and bowling were distributed. The captain, T. G. Beal, for the fifth time in six years, secured the president’s prize for batting (251 runs in eight innings, once not out— average 35.8)), and W. A . J. West was awarded the vice-president’s prize for bowling, having taken thirty-two wickets at an average of 6.3. The club during the past season played ten matches, scoring 1,587 runs for 110wickets, an average of 14.4, as against their opponents’ 707 runs for sixty-six wickets, or an average of 10.7. J. P. Kingston’s three innings averaged 52.3, whilst W. A . J. West played ten innings for an average of 20.7. M r . H. W. D illo n , Woodchurch, Penge, S.E., is Hon. Sec. of the Penge Club. SURREY COUNTY CLUB. F ix tu r e s f o r 1886. April 26—(Easter Monday) Oval, Surrey v. Gloucestershire May 17—Oval, Surrey v. Hampshire May 20—Oval, Surrey v. Australians May 24—Oval, Surrey v. Leicestershire May 27—Oval, Surrey v. Middlesex May 31—Leyton, Surrey v. Essex June 7—Oval, Surrey v. Lancashire June 10—Oval, Surrey v. Essex June 14—Notts, Surrey v. Notts June 17—Oval, Gentlemen of England v.Australians June 21—Lord’s, Surrey v. Middlesex June 24—Oval, Surrey v. Cambridge University June 28—Sheffield, Surrey v. Yorkshire July 1—Manchester, Surrey v. Lancashire July 5—Derby, Surrey v. Derbyshire July 8—Leicester, Surrey v. Leicestershire July 15—Oval, Gentlemen v. Players July 19—Southampton, Surrey v. Hants July 22—Beckenham, Surrey v. Kent July 26—Oval, Surrey v. Sussex July 29—Oval, Surrey v. Australians Aug. 2—Oval, Surrey v. Notts Aug. 5—Oval, Surrey v. Derbyshire Aug. 12—Oval, England v. Australia Aug. 16—Brighton, Surrey v. Sussex Aug. 19—Oval, Surrey v. Kent Aug. 23—Clifton, Surrey v. Gloucestershire Aug. 26—Oval, Surrey v. Yorkshire LEICESTERSHIRE COUNTY CLUB. F ixtu res for 1886. MAY. 24—Kennington Oval, Leicestershire v. Surrey. 31, June 1—Leicester, Leicestershire v. Cheshire. JUNE. 25, 26—Leicester, Leicestershire v. Warwickshire. JULY. 8, 9,10—Leicester, Leicestershire v. Surrey. 12.13—Leicester, Leicestershire v. Warwickshire. 19,20—Leicester, Leicestershire Gentlemen and Two Professionals v. Harrow Wanderers. AUGUST. 13.14—Stockport, Leicestershire v. Cheshire. 23,24—Lord’s, Leicestershire v. M.C.C. Dates for Uppingham Rovers and several other amateur matches have not yet been fixed. HERTFORDSHIRE COUNTY CLUB. M a tch es f o r 1886. June 14,15—Leyton, Herts v. Essex July 2, 3—Southampton, Herts v. Hampshire Aug. 9,10—Hitchin, Herts v. M.C.C. and G. Aug. 13,14—Bishop Stortford, Herts v. Essex Aug. 20, 21—Lord’s, Herts v. M.C.C. and G. Aug. 25, 26—Hertford, Herts v. Hampshire S cottish C ricketers ’ A nnual and G uide . —The growth of cricket on the other side of the Border is shown by the steady increase in size of the Annual, founded fifteen years ago by Percival King, the old Surrey professional, who, it is not too much to say, has contributed in no small degree to the development of our national game in Scotland. The fifteenth edition of the Annual will compare favourably in every way with the best of its predecessors. The place of honour is appropriately given to Mr. J. S. Carrick, the Scotch Amateur, whose extraordinary score of 419 not out at Priory Park, the highest innings on record, was the event of last season. An interesting biography of Mr. Carrick is given with accompanying portrait, and in addition there is a photograph of the West of Scotland Eleven, who toured in England with such success last summer. A portrait and biography of Percival King also lend interest to the contents, which in­ clude in addition every possible information concerning the doings of Scottish players and Clubs in 1885. The Scottish Annual will be useful as well as interesting to cricketers of all nationalities. W e regret to announce the death of Mr. Charles Thornton, of Ruddington, near Nottingham, which occurred on the 23rd inst., after a short illness from the effects of a stroke of paralysis and the bursting of a blood vessel. Deceased, who was 63 years of age, was an enthusiastic patron of cricket. He was one of the founders of the Notts Commercial C.C. and for several years served on the Notts County Committee. He was a keen judge of the game and was rarely absent from any match of importance at Trent-bridge. F IF TH A U S T R A L IA N T E AM FOR E N G L A N D . At the time the last number of C ricket was published (on Dec. 24) the adjourned meeting of the Secretaries of English Counties had just been held at Lord’s. The programme arranged at the previous conference had been partially revised so as to allow of the inclusion of the fixtures proposed by the Secretary of the Surrey County Cricket Club to be made for the Australian visit of 1886. A certain amount of difficulty was naturally experienced in preventing collision with some of the principal English matches, but on the whole the rearrangement was successful, and with the exception of a few clashings, most of which have been avoided by subsequent altera­ tions, a thoroughly satisfactory card was pro­ vided for the team to visit England under the auspices of the Melbourne Club. At the time a general feeling of annoyance was felt at what was regarded as a lack of courtesy on the part of the Melbourne Club in failing, despite an official notice of the date on which the meeting of English secretaries was to be held, to intimate definitely whether the Counties were to expect a visit from an Australian team or not. This feeling found expression in a resolution passed at the meeting at Lord’s on Dec. 21, proposed by Lord Harris and seconded by Mr. W. G. Grace, to the following effect:—“ The Secretaries of the County Cricket Clubs trust that 011 the occasion of any future visit of Australian cricketers to this country they will consider the convenience of those who have to arrange the list of matches in England to announce their intention at a sufficiently early date.” Since that time the delay of the Melbourne Club in coming to a decision has been quite explained. At the general meeting of the Club, held on Nov. 21, it was announced that a telegram had been received from the Secretary of the Marylebone Club stating, in reply to an enquiry from Melbourne, that the presence of certain members of the last team would seriously prejudice' the reception of an Austra­ lian combination visiting England. As was only to be expected, such an announcement had not been foreseen by the executive of the Melbourne Club, and the preparations for the projected trip were forthwith stopped. The receipt of this telegram from “ home ” naturally prevented a decision being come to at that meeting, and an adjournment was made to December 12 in order to communicate further with the authorities in England. With that view a telegram was sent by the Secretary of the Melbourne Club to the Secretary of the Surrey County Club to the effect that the coming team must include Spofforth, Blackham, and Palmer, and asking him, in the event of there being no objection to the inclusion of the members of the last team, to act for the Melbourne Club subject to the final decision to be given by the general meeting of that society on Dec. 12. Finding after consultation with several of the most representative English cricketers that there was no possible feeling against the presence of any of Murdoch’s com­ bination on English grounds, an attempt was made, with the approval of eight of the nine principal counties, to have the conference of English secretaries postponed from December 8 until the Melbourne Club had communicated its resolve. Unfortunately a postponement was not considered advisable, or the difficulties which have arisen with regard to the arrange­ ment of the match card of 1886 would have been altogether avoided. Acting on an ex­ pression of opinion at the first meeting, the Secretary of the Surrey Club wired to the Secretary of the Melbourne Club to the follow­ ing effect—“ English fixtures made. If coming do best possible, telegraph immediately full authority. No objection to men.” The receipt of this telegram had, as will be seen from a report of the proceedings in another column, a reassuring effect 011 the adjourned meeting of the Melbourne Club on Dec. 12, and acting on the message conveying the intention of the Next Issue February 25-