Cricket 1895

82 CRICKET : A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. A pril 25, 1895. So that there did not seem to be an opening for any fresh men. Parr, how­ ever, asked me to play for him three days later at Trentham Park, where I not only scored 18 (not out), but secured 21 wickets, the two Shaws also playing. I don’t suppose I should have played but for the fact that most of his best men were figuring in the Canterbury week. I thus made my mark in good company, played in one more match that season for the A.E.E., and with success; and it was Parr’s recommendation which secured me a place in the Yorkshire Eleven v. Cam­ bridgeshire, which, oddly enough, was played at Ashton-under-Lyne. It was to have been played at Manchester, but Notts and Cambridgeshire had recently met there, and the result was a heavy deficiency. This was not a regular county fixture, but from that day, about the middle of September, 1865, my for­ tune on the cricket field was made. The next year, Tom Emmett and I both were engaged for county and other first-class matches, and we held our own until business necessitated my giving up cricket.” “ I will tell you how it was. Prom the first I saw clearly that, as things then were, cricket as a profession was but a poor source of income. Things are better now, thanks to the enlarged match list. So I was always on the look-out for another opening. It came in 1869. My pre«ent business was for sale; a premium of £ 10 a year for seven years was asked for it. I was persuaded by friends to risk it, they promising to give me every support in their power. I was well known throughout the neighbourhood, cricket having won me many genuine partisans and admirers. I took it, and have never looked back. But I soon discovered that a man could not both play cricket and look after business. As a married man, business must demand all one’s attention; besides, I had this burden of a premium to carry. In 1872 I made up my mind to retire from public cricket, though I played on and off for some time afterwards. Indeed the last time I appeared for Yorkshire was in 1881, against Lascelles Hall—then one of the best clubs anywhere. In this my final match I scored an innings of 60, and had 9 wickets, although Peate and Emmett were on the same side. I recall that match with pleasurable pride. I was asked to play for the Gentlemen v. The Australians in 1882 ; unfortunately I had to appear as a witness in a ‘ long-firm ’ case at the Old Bailey at the same time; but I went down to the Oval each day, where Mr. Alcock gave me the warmest of welcomes. My wife used to say that I was afraid my bowling would have been hit all over the place by the Australians. For a long while I have not bowled a ball: indeed long before a bowler reaches fifty, his cricket career is ended. We have avery fair club in Thirsk, one of the strongest in this Biding. Last season they got across the League authorities about the final match v. Pickering (I think it was), with the result that they were expelled from the League. Never mind, the match was played, and our club won. The Pickering captain presented our captain with a penny tin mug, which he treasures as dearly as the orthodox cup, and has given it a place of honor on his side­ board.” “ Tell me something of your own work on the cricket field; or if you prefer, give me some reminiscences of the men who played along with you.” “ Well, I won’t say much about myself. As you know, bowling was my forte, though I could bat as well. I was first in the Yorkshire batting averages in 1871, and used to go in early, often first—a big advantage to a fast bowler if he can make runs, for he is almost certain to have a much-needed rest before bowling. The finest innings I ever played was v. the A. E. E. in 1868. I have the score card and you may have it if you like. Tinley, Tarrant, J. C. Shaw, and Hayward, were their bowlers, but I run up 123. On the other hand, little Jack Smith, of Cam­ bridge, scored 74 and 133 against Luke Greenwood, Iddison, Atkinson, and myself, and our side numbered 22 men. That was almost the greatest batting feat I ever saw. A pity he died so young. I am afraid he did not take enough care of himself. He went with us to America in that same year, 1868, when Edgar Willsher was the English captain. Some gentleman entertained us at Everett House for a week, and would have repeated his hospitality when we returned to New York, had not Willsher accepted hospitality from a couple of Kent men over there, an arrangement by which we suffered considerably. Smith and I occupied the same room. With the exception of his innings, I can recall only two more centuries against my bowling, both by W. G.—122 for the South in 1869, and 150 for Gloucestershire in 1872 —but there may be others I have forgotten. “ You see, big scores were not so plentiful then. Of course, the improved conditions of grounds largely explains the difference between then and now. The Oral was the only perfect wicket thirty years ago. W. G. remembers Lord’s, and his innings of 66 against our Yorkshire bowling in 1870. A more wonderful innings was never played. Tom Emmett and I have often said it was a marvel the doctor was not either maimed or unnerved for the rest of his days, or killed outright. But he never flinched. I often think of his pluck on that day when I watch a modern batsman scared if a medium ball hits him on the hand. He should have seen our expresses flying about his ribs, shoulders, and head in 1870. But I preferred bowling on the Oval to any other ground, and just because it was a perfect wicket. For I al ivays bowled at the stumps, knew exactly how much spin should be put on the ball, and was vexed if the bad wickets gave it more, or a different, bias. I remember the brothers Walker playing against us in 1868. Both I. D. and B. D. were padless and gloveless the first innings, but not the second. I was thankful when the latter got out, fearing the consequences. That was at Sheffield. I. D. in that match played a couple of splendid not out innings of about 20 runs apiece, though he went in about second wicket both times. I have no hesitation in calling him the very best batsman against fast bowling of my experience. His timing was perfect. I know all about W. G., and admire his genius for cricket as much as anybody can; he has given us many a weary hour. The first time I met him he scored 122, as I said just now. In those days Old Tom and I had no long-on ; he quickly gave us an object lesson by landing me at once to the on-boundary, for which they ran five runs. I didn’t leave that boundary uncovered whilst he was in. Still, to my mind, barring W. G., and putting in the most unstinted appreciation of others, Tom Hayward I have always considered the greatest batsman of my day. I uaad to like to see him run up a big innings against us, just for the pleasure of watch­ ing his every movement of the bat. Daft had a more perfect style perhaps, Jupp wanted shifting, and Bob Carpenter on our modern wicket would never have been got out by medium and fast medium bowlers. But Hayward I place above them all. George Parr was past his prime when I first saw him ; he must have been the equal of any. I have a relic of his: an old muzzle-loader for which I gave him a ten-pound note, and which I have altered into a breech-loader —a prime favourite of mine through many years, for shooting is my delight. Old George Anderson and I pass many days together in this way each year. Fishing, too, we delight in. I wish I could hunt, but somehow I have always been funky on horseback. “ And here is a difference between present and past cricket. Bowlers went for the wicket then; none of your off- bowling in the hopes of a catch. If the batsman did get an off-ball then, he went for it. Catch men like Tom Humphrey quietly taking no notice of such a ball. They cut it. Mr. I. D. Walker would pat the top of the ball with a flat, hori­ zontal bat—a marvellous stroke of his, for the ball was off to the boundary as if it had been shot. And there was no ‘ legging’ in those days; the truth is, nearly all the bowling was fast, and so legging was impossible. I was at Scar­ borough when the Australians were over in 1890 ; don’t mention names here; but I was disgusted with a certain great bats­ man’s dodges, running out to a breaking ball, and deliberately covering his wickets with his pads. I told him it wasn’t cricket, and that if he had been playing twenty-five years ago he could not have done it, for the ball would have been on him too soon. “ I really can’t say whether cricket is better to-day than it was then. It has changed—the conditions are different. I wish I had had certain modern batsmen to bowl at before I gave up. I fancy . . . . . but there, I won’t brag. We had more travelling in those days, that is, there was not the same care exercised in the arrangement of matches, so as to save the cricketers. Thus I remember Yorkshire playing at Brighton; then from there to Land’s End for the A. E. E .; then back to Nottingham—all in consecutive matches. I did not go West, with Trent Bridge in view. So