Cricket 1893

52 CRICKET: A WEEKLY EECOED OF THE GAME. APRIL 13, 1893 CRICKET_N0TCHES. By the R e v . R . S. H o lm es . LANCASH IRE CR ICKET AND CR ICKETERS. The Lancashire County Cricket Club was established in 1864, though there were several strong clubs all over the county long before that date, and many cricketers of front-rank ability. Thus, the Manchester Club was started in 1816, that in Liverpool soon after; as early as 1826 these rival teams met for the first time, when Manchester won by 39 runs ; and with scarcely a single interval this match has been an annual fixture up to the present time. A sort of county match was played in 1851 between Lancashire and Yorkshire, Lancashire having “ given men,” though even with outside help they were twice beaten by their formidable neighbours. The Broughton Club—-one o f the numerous Manchester clubs—was set afoot in 1823 or 1824 ; and, following the example of Manchester, who in 1850 had twice thrown down the gauntlet to the famous All England Eleven, B rough­ ton, the year after, welcomed the same combination, and in many subsequent years. It was one o f the very few clubs that relied exclusively on their own members when Clarke’s team had to be faced. In 1860, 20 o f the Broughton Club beat the A .E .E . by 11 wickets ; that match is worthy of especial honour, from the fact that Joseph Makinson, o f Cam­ bridge University fame, hit up the largest innings (104) ever made previously against either of the Elevens o f England. There were other clubs deserving of pass­ ing notice that had kept cricket to the front in different parts of the county. Preston had a club in 1845, Bury in 1848, St. Helens in 1849, and Bolton in 1852. So that it was not very surprising that, immediately alter the inauguration of the County Club in 1864, Lancashire proved equal to the task of engaging with success the other first-class counties that then existed, A county club alone was wanted to disclose the real condition of things in the County Palatine. There were then four brothers, all of them much above the average, two being quite first- class. I refer, of course, to the brothers Row ley. A. B. and E. B . came to be known far and wide, and to the latter attaches the honour of being the first captain elected by the County Club, which office he retained until his retirement from active cricket in 1880. S. H. Swire —now for- many years the valued hon. see. o f Lancashire, E. Whittaker, J. B. Payne, and F. W . Wright (who when only 18 years old had scored an innings of 50 for North v. South at Lord’s, in 1862), and others were the leading amateurs in Lancashire from 1864 onward ; whilst the professional element was well represented by W . H ickton and Enoch Storer, of Derbyshire, Roger Iddi- eon and G. Holgate, of Yorkshire. Corne­ lius Coward, who at first played as an amateur, was the only “ native ” of the earlier Lancashire professional cricketers. The first year (1864) no County matches proper were played. Gentlemen’s matches alone were attempted, Shrop­ shire, Warwickshire and Yorkshire being their opponents. Indeed, these amateur matches were long the fashion in Lancashire cricket. Birkenhead Park, a very powerful Cheshire Club in those days, and ever since, provided the first match played by the young cou n ty; both that and the return were drawn. Birkenhead had a famous stumper then—W . P. Lockhart, who in 1859 was chosen for the Genilemen v. Players at the Oval, and who, since he has given up cricket, has been a prominent figure in Liverpool religious work. 1865 saw the first regular county match, Lancashire v. Middlesex. Lan­ cashire won somewhat easily by 62 runs, in spite of a wonderful bowling perform- j ance by V. E . Walker, who in the second innings took all the ten wickets. As everybody knows, the Middlesex amateur had twice before brought off the same record, viz., against Surrey in 1859, and against the Gentlemen of Kent in 1864. But I have no intention of lingering over the history of Lancashire County Cricket. Space forbids. My purpose is rather to summarize it in much the same way as Nottinghamshire cricket was treated in the last issue of this journal. As in the case of Notts, so here, it would be ungenerous not to acknowledge most heartily the help furnished in compiling the tables following by such authors (or publishers) as Messrs. F. Reynolds, Flet­ cher and Speight, Capleton, andT. Axon. One of the cheapest bargains I ever picked up in the shape of cricket litera- | ture, was a deiry 18mo. volume of 254 j pp., containing full scores o f the | “ Matches of the Liverpool Cricket Club, | 1847-1861.” I found it in a box o f penny | books outside a bookshop one day, after the proprietor had assured me he had not anything on cricket. That is not the only time in which I have secured a literary prize by searching for myself. Well then, Lancashire played first against the other first-class counties as follows : Middlesex, 1865 ; Surrey, 1866 ; Yorkshire, 1867"; Notts, 1868; Sussex, 1869 , Hampshire, 1870 (and that year only) ; Kent, 1871; Derbyshire, 1871; Gloucestershire,1878; Somersetshire, 1891. The last-named, it should be stated, had been as early as 1882 on the Lancashire list o f fixtures, but it was not until 1891 that the Western County was reckoned first-class. In addition to these counties, other front-rank matches were inau­ gurated in this ord er: M.C.C., 1867 ; Australians, 1878; Cambridge Univer-' sity, 1881 ; Oxford University, 1833. The matches against both Universities in 1871 are not included, for these were played by the Gentlemen of Lancashire. N.B.—The following tables comprise all the first-clas3 matches played by Lancashire from 1865 to 1892 inclusive. TA B L E No. 1. First-Class Counties. Opponents. Matches Won by Lst. by Dm. Plyd. Lncshre. Lncshre. 1 Middlesex ... 17 ... 7 ... 8 .. 2 2 Surrey ........... ... 38 .. 37 ... It . . 7 3 Yorkshire ... 48 .. 21 .. 19 . . 9 4 Notts... ........... ... 82 .. 8 .. 13 . . U 5 Sussex ........... ... 22 .. 16 .. 4 . . 2 6 Hampshire ... ... 2 .. 2 ... — . . — 7 K e n t ................... ... 33 ... 25 ... 11 . . 3 8 Derbyshire ... ... »4 ... 25 ... 5 . . 3 9 Gloucestershire ... 30 .. 11 .. 6 . . 10 10 Somersetshire ... 4 ... 3 ... 1 . .. — T o'a l ... 2J6 138 81 47 Extra First Clas3 Matches. Mtch? W on by Lost by Pjyd. Lane. Lane. D m M.C.C......................... ... 19 ... 8 . . 10 .. 1 Australians *.......... ... 6 ... 1 . . 8 .. 2 Cambridge ........... ... 3 ... 1 . . 1 .. 1 Oxford ................... ... 13 ... 14 . . 4 .. 2 Total 46 24 IS 6 P.S.—The m itch es against Derbyshire are not counted after 1887, when that county ceased to be first-c’ass. TABLE No. 2. R esults Y ear by Y ear . Played Won Lost Dm . 1835 ... 2 1 1 ... — - I860 ... 4 .. — 3 1 1667 ... 5 — 3 2 1868 ... 5 1 4 — 1669 ... 4 2 2 — 1870 ... 4 3 1 — 1871 ... 6 3 3 — 1872 ... 4 4 •— .. —■ 1873 ... 7 4 3 — 1874 ... 6 1 3 2 1875 ... 6 4 1 1 1876* ... ... 10 5 5 ... — 1877 ... ... 10 6 4 —. 1878 ... ... 10 5 3 2 1879 ... ... 10 5 1 4 1880 ... ... 12 6 3 3 1881 ... ... 13 .. 10 — 3 1882 ... ... 14 .. 10 1 8 1883 ... ... 12 6 5 1 1884 ... ... 10 5 4 1 1885 ... ... 11 6 3 2 1886 ... ... 14 5 .. 5 4 1687 ... ... 14 10 H 1 1888 ... ... 14 4 5 5 1889 ... ... 14 .. 10 3 1 1890 ... ... 14 7 3 4 1891 ... ... 15 8 4 8 1892 ... ... 16 7 5 4 266 138 81 47 P.S.— In 1885, owing to the Kentish protest against Crossland’s bowling, the T able N o . 3. H IGHEST AND LOW EST SCORE3 FOR AND AG 1IN 9T LAN CASH IRE. 1. Middlesex 2. Surrey 3. Yorkshire 4. Notts. 5. Sussex 6. Hampshire 7. Kent 8. Derbyshire 9. Gloucestershire 10. Somersetshire. Highest Inns. | for | Low est Inns, for H ghe3t Inns, against | Low est Inna. 1 again s'; 439 74 372 85 in 1882 in 1839 in 1891 in 1868 429 35 557 33 in 1867 in 1888 in 1857 in 1873 471 3D 590 47 in 1892 in 1868 in 1887 in 187-? 323 42 375 42 in 1883 in 1886 in 1887 in 1832 3:6 55 28) 24 in 1693 in 1892 in 1888 in 1893 JrtM li3 138 77 in 1870 in >870 in 1870 in 1870 484 61 3(9 38 in 1892 in 188 \ in 1683 in 1681 334 25 318 40 in 1883 in 1871 in 1885 in 1886 444 53 3i9 33 in 1887 in 1679 | in 1690 in 1868 215 48 156 58 in 1891 in 1892 in 1891 in 1892