Cricket 1901

M ay 9, 19 01. CRICKET : A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. 123 P rom the full report which was issued to the Press two or three days after the general meeting at L ord’s, we learn that the strong impression which had got abroad that the committee were almost, but not quite unanimous, in favour of the proposed new l.b.w . law was somewhat mistaken. The proportion was only 8 to 5 in favour of the law. I n his speech introducing the proposed law the H on. Alfred Lyttelton said:— The committee itself, with a majority in favour of the proposal of 8 to 5, sent circulars to the Colonies and to the secretaries of the clubs in South Africa, and they seemed against the change. And although I think my friend Mr. Warner wrote an article, I have not read it. (Laughter.) I will read i t ; but I was told that he inserted in that article the statement that the Australians, undoubtedly the persons most competent to judge in this matter after ourselves, were against the proposal. My friend Mr. Warner, if he did make that statement, I am sorry, considering the education he had in my chambers; if he did, it is inaccurate, because we have a reply from the Australians, received within the last two days, which is in favour of the proposal which we now make. (Hear, hear.) T h is led to th e fo llo w in g v e ry in terest­ in g d iscu ss io n :— Mr. A. Q-. Steel: May I ask that the com­ munication from Australia referred to by Mr. Lyttelton be read to this meeting f M r.------ : May I ask if you received any answer from America ? Captain Denison : From Philadelphia, yes. The Secretary : I have a letter from Major Wardill, who writes as secretary of the Mel­ bourne Cricket Club. (Reads letter.) Mr. P. F. Warner: I believe there haB been no meeting of the Australians, and that is merely a private communication from Major Wardill, and is not official. Just becausethere arecertain cricketers in England who are in favour, therefore you say the whole body are in favour of it. Captain Denison : My Lords and Gentle­ men,—Perhaps, as regards this Australian matter, which I do not think is of particular importance, I may merely comment upon the fact that a most extraordinary number of influential names are conspicuous by their absence.. There are only, out of those names that were read out, three or four who would carry any weight in this country, and we do not hear anything from the Hills and Darlings, and all those men who have made themselves conspicuous in the past. T h e fo llo w in g are som e o f th e latest h u n d red s :— MARCH. 23. M. A. Noble, Paddington y. Combined Country Team (Sydney) ......................161 23. H. Trumble, Melbourne C.C. v. Hawksburn 210* 23. —. Jacobs, Melbourne C.C. v. Hawksburn... 108 23. Clement Hill, East Adelaide v. West Torrens 136 23. A. Gehrs, East Adelaide v. West Torrens ... 113 MAY. 2. H. K. Longman, Mr. Hind’s Side v. Mr. Dowson’s Side (Camb. Freshmen’s Match) 115 3. H. S. Bompas, Mr. Dowson’s Side v. Mr. Hind’s Side (Camb. Freshmen’s Match)... 109 2. Braund, London County v. Surbby .............115* 4. A bbl , Surbby y. London C o u n ty ............... 105* 4.A. O. Jones, Arkley v. Stoics....................... 112 6 . StOBBB, M.C.C. V. YORKSHIRE..............................107 7. C. J . B . W o o d , London County y . Su rbey... 137 7. G . W. B eldam , London County v . Subbby... 150* * Signifies not out. THE LITTLE LAW THAT DIED. [The suggested l.b.w. law, proposed by the Hon. Alfred Lyttleton at the general meeting of the M.C.C., was thrown out because the necessary two-thirds majority of votes was not obtained in its favour.] I went one night to the ground at Lord’s— Went thither with hope but small, And softly I oped the pavilion gate, And softly the door of the hall; The proposer came out (a Lyttleton), He blessed me—and then he sighed, And his head fell on my neck and he wept For the little law that died. And when I mused on its harmlessness— Its use on a sticky day, And thought what a lovely law ’twould have been, And how soon it had passed away: “ Oh, voters ! you know not how beautiful Such experiments are,” I cried ! For, though critics despised it, the wording was fair Of the little law that died. I shall miss it when the hundreds come— What larks it would have played ! I shall miss it more by the fireside, When the smoke-room lies are made : I shall see its points and its virtues there,— They cannot be denied— And men will speak with a silent speech Of the little law that died. W . A. B. ANSWERS TO CORRESPONDENTS. R. W. C labkson .— A letter was sent to you atBlack- pool. It was returned: “ Gone; no address.” If you will send youraddrees it shall be forwarded. FOREST HILL v. DULWICH. Hill on May 5, F orest H ill . -Played at Perry C. G. Hill, b Phillips .. 14 W.M.Bradley,bPhillips 2 C.J.Welchman,runout 31 P. Gibbon, not out ... 4 F. Skipper, not out ... 0 Extras............... 36 B.Batchelor,bPhillips 0 H. A. Hooker, lbw, b Huntley ........ ... 66 Dr. Bundy, c Huntley, b Proctor............... 0 C.F. Phillips,b Phillips 23 R. Nixon, b Phillips... 1 W. R. Williams, lbw, Total (9 wkts)*207 b Eastwood .........30 * Innings declared closed. D ulw ich . R.Longley, c Bradley, S.E.Huntley,bBradley b Batchelor .........28 P.J.Loft, b Welchman E. J. Heasman, c J. Eastwood, c Bundy, Hooker, b Williams 32 b Welchman ......... J. T. Shepley, not out 48 C.P. Tregellas, not out L. Phillips, b Welch- Extras................ man ...................... 0 — G.Proctor,bWelchman 13 Total (8 wkts) 141 P.H. Slater, b Bradley 0 J. F. Colyer did not bat. BICKLEY PARK v. WANDERERS.—Played at Bickley on May 4. B ickley P a b k . C. Hurlbatt, lbw, b Taylor ............... 14 H. Batty-Smith, c and b Colman............... 16 Rev. E. Y. Orlebar, b Taylor ................ 6 W. Phillips, b Taylor 24 A. H. Sutherland, b Taylor ............... 0 F. de Solb 6 , lbw, b Brown ............... 0 J.H.Kelsey, c Colman, b Taylor ............... 17 W.J.Chattell, bTaylor 0 W andbbebs . A.W.Bowley, b Taylor 0 H. D. Carroll, not out 51 E. Willett, b Taylor... 27 B 2, lb 6 ......... 8 Total ...163 E.E.Bamett,b Suther­ land ......................56 P.P.Lincoln, c Bowley, b Sutherland.........75 W. S. A. Brown, b Sutherland ............20 R. B. Brooks, b Hurl­ batt ....................... 4 S. Colman, not out ... 56 R.A.Hill,csub,bWillett 2 J. A. G. Hadath, csub, b Carroll............... 25 B 11, lb 1, nb 1... 13 Total (7 wkts) 251 G. E. Bicknell, O. Taylor, H. D. Wyatt, and A. H. Behrend did not bat. THE METROPOLITAN CLUBS IN 1901. {Continued from page 103). Many well-known, and some of them famous, artists appear in the list of the officials of the A r t i s t s C.C., which began its season on Tuesday last with what is known as the E .A . opening match. The membersmustbeeither painters, sculptors, or architects, the raison d’ etre of the club being to arrange a few matches each season between artists and members of kindred professions. We should doubt whether there is any other club in the world of which the members are so well known outside the game itself. Mr. E . A . Abbey, E .A ., is the president, Mr. H . H . La Thangue, A .R .A ., the vice-president, Mr. A. ChevallierTayler the hon. treasurer, while the committee consists of Messrs. Arnesby Brown, Beginald Blomfield, Henry J. Ford, Charles W. Furse, George Gascoyne, G. P. Jacomb-H ood, Herbert Marshall, Philip Norman, Dermod O ’Brien, Edward Stott, and Arthur H. Studd. Many other distinguished artists are among the members. The hon. secretary is Mr. G. H . Swinstead, The Studio, 81, Hornsey Rise, N. MAY. 7. R.A. Opening Day Match. Kensington Park, v. Chelsea Arts Club 14. Kensington Park, v. Walter Frith’s XI. 20. Winchneld, v. Allahakbarrie, J. M. Barrie’s XI. 27. Winchfleld, v. Winchfleld, Nigel Playfair’s XI. JUNE. 6 . Kensington Park, v. Saville Club, G. P. Jacomb- Hood’s XI. 14. Amberley, v. Sussex Artists. Match arranged by Messrs. H. H. La Thangue and Edward Stott 21. Esher, v. Authors, W. E. Hornung’s XI. 28. Kensington Park, v. Musicians, R. A. Streat- field’s XI. JULY. 8 . Oxf ord, v. Oxford Graduates, George Wood’s XI As usual, the G r a n v il l e C.C. has to oppose some very strong teams, and will doubtless, as usual, give an excellent account of itself, though it will take all the club’s resources to meet with success all their opponents during the home week. MAY. 11. Lee, v. Bromley 15. Woolwich, v. R.M.A. 18. Eltham, v. Eltham 25. Lee, v. Hampstead 27. Abbey Wood, v. Lessness Park JUNE. 1. Sutton, v. Sutton 5. Woolwich, v. Woolwich Garrison 8 . Lee, v. Gravesend 12. Lee, v. Tonbridge 15. Lee, v. Sutton 17. Lee, v. M.C.C. & Ground 18. Lee, v. Wanderers 19. Lee, v. Mote 20. Lee, v. Forest Hill 21. Lee, v. Erratics 22. Lee, v Blackheath 26. Lee, v. Bickley Park 29. Lee, v. Charlton Park JULY. 2. Forest Hill, v. Forest Hill 6 . Gravesend, v. Gravesend 10. Tonbridge, v. Tonbridge 13. Norwood, v. Norwood 20. Hampstead, v. Hampstead 24. Lee, v. Stoics 27. Blackheath, v. Blackheath 31. Lee, v. Woolwich Garrison AUGUST. 3. Lee, v. Eltham 5. Lee, v. Lessness Park 7. Beckenham, v. Beckenham 10. Bickley Park, v. Bickley Park 24. Lee, v. Norwood 31. Streatham, v. Streatham Home Week.