Cricket 1895

O c t. 3 1 , 1 8 9 5 . CR ICKET : A W E E K L Y RECORD OF THE GAME. 4 3 5 CRICKET NOTCHES. B y t h e Rev. R. S. H o l m e s . Pretty general regret was felt and expressed that the cricket season closed as early as it did, seeing that we enjoyed a fortnight of the most perfect cricket weather after “ over” had been called for the last time. But no one could have anticipated such glorious sunshine at the back end of September, nor such starving cold as it is our privilege to be experienc­ ing within a month of those halcyon days. The interval has been full of interest to myself, as I will now disclose. Fresh correspondents have placed me under obligation, whilst my cricket col­ lection has been enriched by valuable gifts. From Stellenbosch, Cape Colony, comes the following curiosity “ I have seen a paragraph where it is stated that Bonnor (the Australian) used to sit on the bank of a river and catch swallows, and in that way he learned to catch so well at slip. As some of your readers may think this only a joke (it may be a joke for all I know), I wish to say that I was taking part in a cricket match about eight years ago—Royal Artillery v. Woodstock (near Cape Town)—when a smart fielder, Sergeant McGwire, caught a swallow, adding, ‘ I thought it was the ball.’ But this feat was equalled a few minutes later by Corporal Messenger, who also caught a swallow, but did not say that he thought it was the ball. I believe this is unique. I have told the yarn once or twice, and have always been laughed to scorn. Perhaps, it will now not seem any greater feat than that other credited to Bonnor, viz: throwing the cricket ball a distance of 123 yards the day after landing in England.” Well, funny things do happen at cricket, so I would advise my worthy correspondent to stick to his story in the face of the sneers of the scorner. It is no more improbable than the yam circulated about the famous Sussex bowler, Brown, who on one occasion bowled a ball which longstop—as boys often are now-a-days —armed with an ample top-coat for the sake of stopping the ball, was surprised to find went clean through the coat and killed a dog. I don’t think it has been conclusively shown whether the dog was contemplating the game from the ring, or had inadvertently strayed on to the field of play. A cricketer at Slough, who, indignant at being no-balled three times in suc­ cession for being over the line, then ‘ ‘ put cap down six yards behind wicket to bowl from. Should umpire interfere with my cap, and when over was finished, pitch it to me ? ” Yes, if he thought fit; umpires, remember, are the sole judges of fair and unfair play. Said cap might prove an obstruction either to ball or fielder. Besides, any sensible bowler makes a mark on the turf should he require such aasistance. Many do who require to take a long run, but I cannot remember ever seeing a first-class bowler make a mark at a spot from which he purposed delivering the ball. His eye fixes that spot, supposing he does not care to bowl from just behind the crease. It is to be questioned whether varieties of this sort are not more baulking to the bowler than to the batsman. A gentleman from Forest Hill has kindly asked my acceptance of the score card of the famous England v. Australia match at the Oval in 1882, when we were beaten by seven runs; andhe also enclosed the 11order-of-going-in ” lists in the handwriting of the captains, W . L. Murdoch and A. N. Hornby. I thank him most heartily for his timely gift. By the by, are there any of the earliest cards in existence ? When was the score card first issued ? In the last century scores were printed on thin sheets of paper at the close of each day’s play, I believe. Witness tha.t famous screen in the possession of Colonel Butler, of Hambledon, which is covered with the original scores of the matches of the Hambledon Club from the year 1777 down to the break-up of the Club in 1788, when it was absorbed into the Hampshire County. I have just had framed in one frame three old cards— Kent v. England, 1839 and 1841, and Sussex v. England, 1847. The first was for the benefit of Fuller Pilch, and was printed on the ground—Town Mailing— by “ G. Windsor from Gravesend.” The Sussex card is the smallest I ever saw, measuring only -1J, inches by 3 ; the match reported was played on the “ Royal Cricket Ground.” Is this Box’s ground ? Ireland Gardens was, I know, closed for cricket at the end of 1845. There is a quaint footnote to this card worth transcribing: “ Printed for G. Mant, at his Fruit and Confectionary Stall, and published every hour, at the end of each day’s play, and at the close of the game. To be had as above, a hot dinner at 2 o’clock, 2s. 6d. Carriages admitted. Good stabling on the ground. Printed by Phillips and Co., 9, Poplar Place, Brighton.” Persons interested in philology will be glad to be informed that the word “ confectionery ” was spelt somewhat differently in the year ’47. I have just bought at a stiffish figure an old and very interesting folio broadsheet, issued in 1809, entitled, “ The Laws of the Noble Game of Cricket,” at the head of which is an oval drawing in colours of a match in progress. The picture has many features in common with that which surmounts “ The Laws,” &c., pub­ lished in 1755, which has in recent years been re-issued. But in the 1809 copy most of the players are bareheaded, whilst in the background stands a cottage and a marquee where ladies are watching the game. It is not necessary to repro­ duce here the laws of cricket in 1809, they are given in full on pages 348-350 of the first volume of “ Scores and Bio­ graphies.” The width of the bat, weight of ball, length of bowling crease, distance of popping crease, and of course, the distance between the wicket were not altered between 1755 and 1809. But the stumps had grown from 22 inches by 6, to 24 by 7. Everybody knows the present law dealing with l.b.w., and very few of us are perfectly satisfied with it. I am strongly of opinion that some day we shall revert to the original law of 1755. Perhaps it will be as true of cricket as of politics, that the soundest reforms will consist in simply undoing the quite unnecessary patchwork of our immediate predecessors. Why did our legislators ever lay a finger on the original l.b.w. law ? Here it is, per­ fectly simple and yet comprehensive. “ If the striker puts his legs before the wicket with a design to stop the ball and actually prevents the ball from hitting the wicket by it.” This law, after much tinkering, runs thus in 1809 :— “ If with his foot or leg he 8tops the ball, which the bowler in the opinion of the umpire at the bowler’s wicket shall have pitched in a straight line to the wicket, and would have hit it.” This is virtually the same law as is in operation to-day. But give me the old law of 1755. I have been delighted to receive from Major Wardill a set of the Annual Re­ ports of the Melbourne Cricket Club, beginning with the season 1875-6 down to the present year. I don’t know whether 1875 marks the first appearance of these reports, but it is not improbable, as the report takes up only 17 pages, whilst the most recent reports fill about six times that space At any rate, the difference between 1875 and 1894 is amazing. I should question whether any cricket club in the world can show so striking a contrast within the same period of years. Thus, to take one item only, the cash statement: receipts in 1875-6, £1,502; in 1894-5, £13,342. In 1874 there were 198 subscriptions, that is from members; in 1894, 2,013. This does not include county and junior members. Altogether in members’ fees a sum of £6,235 was received ; in 1874, this was £533, whilst in 1885, it amounted to £3,968. And town members pay an entrance fee of three guineas, as against two guineas formerly, whilst their “ sub.” is two guineas. No County Club at home could afford to fix their member­ ship terms so high. What I like about this Melbourne Club is that it is open to “ juniors ” at one-half the ordinary fees. The age limit is not given; perhaps it goes up to 18 or even 21 years. Our own Kent C.C. issues different members’ tickets, varying from half a guinea to three guineas; whilst Somersetshire issue tickets at reduced charges to members of a subscriber’s family residing under his roof, 10s. for the first, and 5s. for every additional ticket. Other County Clubs may make similar arrangements; but, for all I know to the contrary, Somerset­ shire is the only first-class county which makes generous provision for the nu­ merous enthusiastic juniors to be found in almost every household. One of the most attractive items in the last Mel­ bourne sheet is a nett profit to the Club of £3,599 from the matches played in Victoria by Stoddart’s eleven. I know that balance-sheets are not final tests by any means either of individuals or of clubs, and yet money is the pulse of character, and we can’t have flourishing cricket clubs without well-lined money­ bags. I have carefully read through all