Cricket 1892

wTogether joined in cricket’s manly toil.”— Byron* No. 314- VOL. X I. Registered for TransmissionAbroad. THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 8, 1892. PRICE 2d. CRICKET NOTCHES. B y the R ev . R . S . H olmes . T h e cricket of last week need not detain us long. Somersetshire will have good reason to remember it for some time to come; they managed to find just under three hours in the six days in which cricket of some sort was possible. How’s that for a record ? Thus their last three matches resulted iu the only drawn games they have played this season. And both Gloucestershire and Sussex, as well as Yorkshire, might have added to their victories. Never mind, they come out third among the first-class counties, and that ought to satisfy them in their second year. The best of weather last week would not have made any difference in their final position. Middlesex were more fortunate at Brighton, and wound up their county work with the easiest win— an innings and 43 runs. Two men bulked big, the Westlndian, P. J. T. Henery with the bat - 81 not out; and young Hearne with the b a ll- 12 wickets for only 91 runs, which gave him the respectable aggregate of 100 wickets for his county this year. Not a ball was bowled at Birmingham, and so, apart from the players’ remuneration. Surrey’s return with Warwickshire might just as well not have been arranged. And there was less than one full day’ 8 cricket at Trent-Bridge, and so Kent were let off more lightly than might have otherwise been the case. But if Notts didn’t get an inn­ ings, they got something far more substantial, a very generous testimonal. And all because of their splendid victory over Surrey in the first days of August. How­ ever marked their subsequent failures, nothing can discount the splendour of that famous win. It speaks eloquently for the enthusi­ asm of their County admirers, that a sum of no less than £200 was quickly subscribed in honour of that event. Like every other county, Notts can appreciate the genuine artiole. Their honorary secretary spoke in the name of all sportsmen when he urged the men to play cricket, rather for the sake of winning matches than of improving individual averages. And there was the ring of the true sportsman (who is always a gentleman) in the Captain’s acknowledgment of the compliment; no excuse for recent defeats, no back-banded slaps at their con­ querors, but a manly, honest confession that they had been beaten by superior cricket. It is always becoming to take a lioking like a man. And the Notts Committee are going to agitate an alteration in the Closure Law. This is peculiarly gratifying news to me. I have been urging this change all along, in season and out of season, though oonscious that I was a voice crying in the wilderness. But 1 had long made up my mind to go on W . A T T E W E L L , Notts Eleven. From a photograph by R. W. Thomas, 121, Cheapsido, E. crying, until somebody listened and heeded s Fortunately the laws of cricket are not fixed and unchangeable. New conditions create the necessity for fresh legislation. As this law now stands, it marks a distinct advance; but it can be improved ; the sooner, the better. I daresay Notts would not have stirred in the matter but for their return match with Gloucestershire. What of that ? Nearly all great reforms have had modest beginnings, springing oxitofipdjvidual sepseof wrong. Was it not the Willsher no-ball episode in the England v. Surrey match of 1862 that resulted in the readjustment of LawNo. 10? But for John Lillywhite’s aotion on that occasion, the old Law might still have been in operation. On several occasion I have pointed out what seemed to me to be defects or omissions in the Laws of Cricket, in the earnest hope that they will be subjected to a further revision before long. That duty of oourse will fall to the M.C.C., and they are far too conservative to make any changes where such are not imperatively demanded. Therein is the basis of oiir confidence in that “ Parliament of Cricket.” I trust, however, they will solicit the help of veterans like Richard Daft, H. H. Stephenson, and that keenest of all umpires, the genial, evergreen Thoms. Does any man living know more of the intricacies of the game than Thoms ? I venture to answer, No. What man has seen so much cricket, especially club cricket, where incidents are continually cropping up for which the Laws do not provide ? Read old Tom Barker’s Commentary on the Laws as recorded in ,rCricketana.” What a cute old fellow he was! So is Thoms. To look at him, onewould never dream that he was 67 years old. Forty-one years ago he was a member of the famous All-England Eleven. Why, we are all novices compared with him. And he can tell out all that is in him, and write it too with the lightest of pens. And besides, he forgets nothing. Here’s an incident be reminded me of not so very long ago; it happened 30 years since. We were down at the Oval: I forget the match; Thoms was “ standing.” In the interval we youngsters were inspecting the wicket (just as lads do to-day and will continue to do through all time), when Thoms came up. He asked us if we would kindly find him four stones to oount the balls with. Delighted to be entrusted with a job of this moment, we went on the search for tones—outside the ground : and brought back about four of the biggest stones ever used on a Macadam road. And we did it in the innocence of our heart; it was no boyish lark. The larger, the better for such an important piece of business, so we thought. We were not a little disappointed when our offer was rejected with a good hearty laugh. To-day this lives as a bright and pleasing memory of one’s early days of cricket enthu­ siasm. Apd perhaps one’searly cricketmatches