Cricket 1900

M a y 3. 1 9 0 0 . CRICKET : A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. 101 THE METROPOLITAN CLUBS IN 1900. Continued from page 94. B a r n e s will rely very much on the same players as last season. These were H.E. Barham, P. R. Earnshaw, W. F. L. Frith, E. H . Frith, C. E. Batcliff, H. A. Busher, 8. E. Busher, F. D. Bird, A. G. H. Stevens, M. H. Erskine, F. W. Beusted, R. H. Wood, and J. G. M. Bobertson. The last-named, whose address is “ Gil- nock,” Dryburgh Boad, Putney, 8.W., has succeeded A. G. H. Stevens as hon. sec. MAY. 5. Barnes, v. Hampton W ick 5. K iDgston, v. Brunswick 12. Tulse Hill, v. J. C. Lovell’s X I. 12. Kent House, v. Kent House Park 16. Oval, v. Surrey Colts 19. Ewell, v. Ewell 19. Barnes, v. Spencer (2) 26. Chiswick Park, v. St. Thomas’s Hospital 26. Barnes, v. Kingston Hill JUNE. 2. Kent House, v. Kent House Park 4. Dulwich, v. Ibis (2) 9. Bromley, v. Bromley 9. Dulwich, v. Alleyn’s School 13. Chiswick Park, v. St. Thomas’s Hospital 16. Hampton W ick, v. Hampton Wick 16. Chiswick Park, v. St. Thomas’s Hospital (2) 16. Barnes, v. Beverley House School 20. Dulwich, v. Alleyn’s School 23. St. Margarets, v. St. Margarets 23. Kingston Hill, v. Kingston Bill 30. Dulwich, v. Ibis 30. Barnes, v. St. Thomas’s Hospital (2) JU LY. 7. Acton, v. Pallingswick 7. Barnes, v. St. Margarets (2) 14. Chiswick Park, v. Chiswick Park 14. Barnes, v. Beverley House School 21. Dulwich, v. Dulwich 21. Barnes, v. E. C. White’s X I. 28. Tulse Hill, v. J. C. Lovell’s X I. 28. Wandsworth Common, v. Spdncer (2) AUGUST. 4. Catford Bridge, v. Private Banks 4. Catford, v. Panther (2) 6. Richmond, v. Richmond 6. St. Margarets, v. St. Margarets (2) 11. Teddington, v. Teddington 11. Barnes, v. Brunswick 18. St. Margarets, v. St. Margarets 18. Barnes, v. Sutton 26. Barnes, v. Panther 25. R chmond, v. West Shene 8EPTEMBER. 1. Acton, v. Pallingswick 1. Hampton W ick, v. Hampton W ick 8. Dulwich, v. Dulwich 8. Dulwich, v. Ibis (2) 16. Barnes, v. E. C. White’s X I. H o n o r O a k ’ s first eleven will be cap­ tained by H . Burton, who for the last three or four years has been one of the batting mainstays of the club. The team he will have to command will be very much the same as last year. H. L. Hol- ford (15, The Gardens, Peckham Rye, S.E.) remains hon. sec. M AY . 3. Oval, v. Surrey Colts 12. Honor Oak, v. Leyton 19. Cheshunt, v. Chesnunt 26. Clapton, v. Clapton JUNE. 2. Honor Oak, v. Townley Park 9. Battersea, v. Battersea 13. Honor Oak, v. Bees 16. H onor Oak, v. Old Charlton 26. Honor Oak, v. Surrey Colts JU LY. 7. Honor Oak. v. Stanley 14. Leyton, v. Leyton 21. Charlton Park, v. Old Charlton 28. Honor Oak, v. Goldsmiths’ Institute AUGUST. 4. Honor Oak, v. Battersea 11. Dulwich, v. Townley Park 15. Honor Oak, v. Sutton 18. Honor Oak, v. Ilford 25. New Cross, v. Goldsmiths’ Institute SEPTEMBER. 1. Honor Oak, v. W est Kent Wanderers 8. Ilford, v. Ilford SECOND E L E V E N .-M A Y . 5. Honor Oak, v. Marlboro’ 5. Honor Oak, v. Eclectic 12 Leyton, v. Leyton 19. Honor Oak, v. Linden 26. Honor Oak, v. Clapton 29. Honor Oak, v. Pearl Assurance JUNE. 2. Dulwich, v. Townley Park 9. Honor Oak, v. Battersea 16. Charlton Park, v. Old Charlton 23. New Beckenham, v. Consolidated Gold Fields 30. Honor Oak, v. Crofton Park JU LY . 7. Priory Farm, v. Linden 10. Honor Oak, v. Pearl Assurance 14. Honor Oak, v. Leyton 21. Honor Oak, v. Old Charlton 28. Brockley, v. Crofton Park AUGUST. 4. Battersea, v. Battersea 6. Honor Oak, v. Marlboro’ 11. Honor Oak, v. Townley Park 18. Ivy Field, v. Eclipse 25. Honor Oak, v. Consolidated Gold Fields SEPTEMBER. 1. Honor Oak, v. Marlboro’ 8. Honor Oak, v. Chelsea 15. Honor Oak, v. Eclipse 22. Honor Oak, v. Eclectic L eyton ’ s resources enable it to put three elevens in the field pretty well every Saturday during the season. The last two Saturdays have been reserved for practice, and the first match (against the Old Citizens) is not till Saturday next. W. Hayward (235, Vicarage Boad, Leyton, E.) is the Hon. Sec. The ground man is W. Bussell. M AY . 5 Leyton, v. Old Citizens 12. Honor Oak, v. Honor Oak 19. jjeyton, 7 . Edmonton 26. County, v. Essex Club and Ground JUNE. 2. Leyton, v. Finchley 4. Leyton, v. Clapham United 9. Hornsey, v. Holborn 16. Leyton, v. Polytechnic 23. Beckton, v. Beckton 30. Leyton, v. Tottenham JU LY. 7. Tidal Basin, v. South W est Ham 14. Leyton, v. Honor Oak 21. Edmonton, v. Edmonton 23. Leyton, v. Beckton AUGUST. 4. Finchley, v. Finchley 6. Leyton, v. Crouch End 11. Leyton, v. Clapton 18. Merton Hall, Wimbledon, v. Polytechnic 25. Leyton, v. Holborn SEPTEMBER. 1. Clapton, v. Clapton 8. Leyton, v. South W est Ham 2s d X I .—MAY. 5. Dulwich, v. Metropolitan Asylums Board 12. Leyton, v. Honor Oak 19. Edmonton, v. Edmonton 26. Leyton, v. Old Holloway Collegians JUNE. 2. Finchley, v. Finchley 4. Crickiewood, v. Brondesbury 9. Leyton, v. Holborn 16. Crouch End, v. Old Holloway Collegians 23. Leyton, v. Beckton 30. Tottenham, v. Tottenham JU LY . 7. Leyton, v. South W est Ham 14. Honor Oak, v. Honor Oak 21. Leyton, v. Edmonton 28. Beckton, v. Beckton AUGUST. 4. Layton, v. Finchley 6. Crouch End, v. Highgate 11. Clapton, v. Clapton 18. Leyton, v. Guildhall Cricket and Athletic 25. Hornsey, v. Holborn SEPTEMBER. 1. Leyton, v. Clapton 8. Tidal Basin, v. South W est Ham 15. Leyton, v. Metropolitan Asylums Board L o n d o n S c o t t is h has now C. Hoe Cciild (42, Boundary Boad, St. John’s Wood, N.W.) for its Hon. Sec. Among the club’s opponents this year are Hamp­ stead, Blackheath, Ealing, Bichmond, Kensington Park, Hornsey, Finchley, Charlton Park, and Pal]iogswick. M AY. 5. Brondesbury, v. Married v. Single 12. Hampstead, v. Hampstead 12. Brondesbury,v. University Coll. School (Old Boys) 19. Brondesbury, v. Blackheath 26. Ealing, v. Ealing 26. Brondesbury, v. Westminster Hospital JUNE. 2. W ood Lane, v. Kensington 2. Brondesbnry, v. Kensington 9. Brondesbury, v. Richmond 9. M ill Hill, v. Mill Hill 16. Brondesbury. v. Ealing 16. Neasden, v University College School 23. Brondesbury, v. Kensington Park 23. Acton, v. Belgrave 30. Claybury, v. Claybury Asylum 30. Brondesbury, v. St. Augustine’s Church JU LY. 7. Brondesbury. v. Hornsey 7. Finchley, v. Finch’ey 14. Kensington Park, v. Kensington Park 14. Brondesbury, v. University College School 21. Charlton, v. Charlton Park 21. Brondestury, v. Charlton Park 28. Richmond, v. Bichmond 28. Brondesbury, v. Finchley AUGUST. 4. Brondesbury, v. Hampstead 11. Brondesbury, v. Honourable Artillery Company 18. Brondesbury, v. Pallingswick 25. Brondesbury, v. Davy Hill SEPTEMBER. 1. Brondesbury,v. University Coll. Scho >1(Old Boys) 8. Brondesbury, v. St. Augustine’s Church 15. Brondesbury, v. Finchley The L o n d o n a n d W e s t m in s t e r B a n k opens its new ground at Norbury on Saturday with a match against Captain P. C. Trevor’s X I. Except for Catford, Forest Hill, Norbury Park, Three Coun­ ties’ Asylum, Spencer, Brixton Wan­ derers, Thames Litton, Ibis, Bomford, Hampstead, and Townley Park, the matches are against the other banks. MAY. 5. Home, v. Captain P. C. W . Trevor’ s X I. 9. Home, v. Catford1' 12 . Beckenham, v. The Three Banks 14. Beckenham, v. Union Bank* 19. Home, v. Forest Hill 21. Beckenham, v. London Joint Stock Bank* 28. Home, v. Norbury Park5 JUNE. 4. Arlesey, v. Three Connties Asylum 5. Home, v. London and County Bank* 9. Forest Hill, v. Forest Hill 13. Wandsworth Common, v. Spencer* 16. East Dulwich, v. Brixton Wanderers 18. Home, v. National Provincial Bank* 23. Thames Ditton, y. Thames Ditton 26. Home, v. London and South Western Bank* JU LY . 7. Dulwich, v. Ibis 9. Home, v. Union Bank* 14. Home, v. The Ihree Banks 17. North Dulwich, v. London and County Bank* 21. Komford, v. Romford 24. North Dulwich, v. London and S. W . Bank* 28. Home, v. Brixton Wanderers AUGUST. 1. Home, v. London Joint Stock Bank* 8. Beckenham, v. National Provincial Bank* 11. Home, v. Hampstead 25. Home, v. Waldegrave Park