Cricket 1902

80 CRICKET : A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. A p r i l 17, 1902. STUART SURRIDGE $ Co., Practical Manufacturers o f the Celebrated P.R.D. CRICKET BATS. SHOWING RUBBER As made for LORD ’S, ~ ~ ~ i^- - ■ " — BUM TOP O VAL , LEYTON , and the Principal Home and Colonial Cricket Grounds. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ SHQW1NG A|R CHAMBERS_ The “ I1.U .D .'' Bats are used by all the greatest batsmen, v iz .P r in c e Ranjitsinhji ; Lord Hawke ; W . G. Grace, E sq.; A. C. Maclaren, E sq.; C. B. Fry, E sq.; F. S. Jackson. E sq.; J. R. Mason. E *q.; A . O. Jones, E sq.; J. Darling, E sq.; Clem Hill, E sq .; P. F. Warner, E sq.; M. P. Lucas, E sq.; I). L. A . Jephson, E sq .; R. E. Foster, E sq .; S. M . J. Woods, E sq .; L. C. H. Palairet, Esq.; T. Hayward, etc. S u sse x C o u n ty C r ic k e t C l u b , B r ig h to n . The Bats made hy Stuart Surridge and Co. are excellent in every way. The willow is the right sort, and the shape and balance leaves nothing to he desired. The new blades are fit to meet new halls without fear of crack or split. C. Seasons, 1899, 1900, 1901—3,600 runs w ith this bat.-G IL B E R T L. JESSOP, Capt. Gloucester XX. 175, BOROUGH HIGH STREET, LONDON, S,E. GLAMORGAN. M AY. 19. Cardiff, v. Wiltshire JUNE. 13. Newport, v Monmouthshire 16. Oval, v. Surrey 2nd X I. 26. Birmingham, v. Waiwickshire JU LY. 11. Trowbrige, v. Wiltshire 16. Cardiff, v. Berkshire 21. Swansea, v. Surrey 2nd X I. 25. Cardiff, v. Devonshire 28. Reading, v. Berkshire AUGUST. 4. Cardiff, Glamorgan and Wiltshire v. Australians 15. Swansea, v. Monmouthshire 29. Exeter, v. Devonshire LEICESTERSHIRE. M AY. 12 Leicester, v. Lancashire 15 Yorkshire, v. Yorkshire 19 Leicester, v. Australians 22 Leicester, v. Surrey 26 Worcester, v. Worcestershire JUNE. 5 Leicester, v. Sussex 9 Crystal Palace, v. London County 12 Southampton, v. Hampshire 16 Leicester, v. Warwickshire 23 Nottingham, v. Notts. 30 Chesterfield, v. Derbyshire JULY. 3 Leicester, v. Notts 10 Leicester, v. Derbyshire 17 Birmingham, v. \Varwickshire 21 Leicester, v. Essex 28 Leicester, v. Worcestershire AUGUST. 4 Leicester, v. London County 7 Leicester, v. Yorkshire 11 Lord’s, v. M.C.C. 14 Brighton, v. Sussex 18 Leicester, v. Hampshire 25 Manchester, v. Lancashire 28 Leyton, v. Essex SEPTEMBER. 1 Oval, v. Surrey WARWICKSHIRE. M AY . 1. Birmingham, v. London County 8. Birmingham, v. Surrey 19. Worcester, v. Worcestershire 19. Birmingham, v. Worcestershire 2nd X I. 22. Birmingham, v. Gloucestershire 29. Birmingham, England v. Australia JUNE. 5. Leyton, v. Essex 9. Birmingham, v. Derbyshire 16. Leicester, v. Leicestershire 19. Birmingham, v. Yorkshire 23. Manchester, v. Lancashire 26. Birmingham, v. Glamorganshire 30. Birmingham, v. Hampshire JULY. 7. Birmingham, v. Australians 17. Birmingham, v. Leicestershire 28. Sheffield, v. Yorkshire AUGUST. 4. Birmingham, v. Worcestershire 4. Worcester, v. Worcestershire 2nd X I. 7. Birmingham, v. Lancashire 14 Derby, v. Derbyshire 18 Birmingham, v. Essex 21 Crystal Palace, v. London County 25 Bristol, v. Gloucestershire 28 Bournemouth, v. Hampshire SEPTEMBER. 4 Oval, v. Surrey YORKSHIRE. MAY. 1. Nottingham, Yorks. Colts v. Notts. Colts 5. Lord’s, Yorks, v. M.C.C. 8. Leyton, Yorks, v. Essex 12. Leeds, Yorks, v. Sussex 15. Huddersfield, Yorks, v. Leicestershire 19. Sheffield, Yorks, v. Lancashire 19. Manchester, Yorks. 2nd X I. v. Lancs. 2nd X I. 22. Cambridge. Yorks, v. Cambridge University 26. Bradford, Yorks, v. Kent 29. Dewsbury, Yorks, v. Derbyshire JUNE. 2. Leeds, Yorks, v. Australians 5. Chesterfield, Yorks, v. Derbyshire 6. Oval, Yorks. 2nd X I. v. Surrey 2nd X I. 9. Bradford, Yorks, v. Middlesex 9. Newcastle, Yorks. 2nd X I. v. Northumberland 11. Durham, Yorks. 2nd X I. v. Durham 16. Sheffield, Yorks, v. Somersetshire 19. Birmingham, Yorks, v. Warwickshire 23. Bradford, Yorks, v. Australians 26. Hull, Yorks, v. Notts 30. Leeds, Yorks, v. Surrey JULY. 2. Harrogate, Yorks. 2nd X I. v. Surrey 2nd X I. 3. Sheffield, England v. Australians 10. Brighton, Yorks, v. Sussex 14. Bradford, Yorks, v. Essex 14. Halifax, Yorks. 2nd X I. v. Northumberland 16. Barnsley, Yorks. 2nd X I. v. Northampton 17. Nottingham, Yorks, v. Notts. 21. Leeds, Yorks, v. Gloucestershire 24. Worcester. Yorks, v. Worcestershire 28. Sheffield, Yorks, v. Warwickshire 31. Oval. Yorks, v. Surrey. AUGUST. 4. Manchester, Yorks, v. Lancashire 4. Barnsley, Yorks. 2nd X I. v. Lancashire 2nd X I. 6. Northampton, Yorks. 2nd X I. v. Northampton 7. Leicester, Yorks, v. Leicestershire 11. Harrogate, Yorks, v. Worcesteishire 14. Cheltenham, Yorks, v. Gloucestershire 18. Taunton, Yorks, v. Somersetshire 21. Lord’s, Yorks, v. Middlesex 22. Middlesbro’, Yorks. 2nd X I. v. Durham 25. Catford, Yorks, v. Kent 28. Scarboro’ Festival A p poin ted b y R o y a l W a rra n t. M a n u fa ctu rers o f H o rticu ltu ra l M a ch in ery to H is M ajesty, K ing1E dw a rd V II. RANSOMES’ LAWN MOWERS TH E BEST I N THE WORLD . Possessin Improvements embodied in no other Machines. p a t e n t d o u b l e a n g l e c u t t in g b a r r e l . P A T E N T S P R IN G H A N D L E 8 P R E V E N T IN G V IB R A T IO N , P A T E N T S IN G L E S C R E W A D J U S T M E N T . Made in Six Sizes, 26 to 48 inches wide. HAHD-POWER MACHINES IN ALL SIZES TO SUIT EYERY REQUIREMENT. RANSOMES, SIMS & JEFFERIES, Ltd., IPSWICH VIEWOF SP81NU Printed and Published for the Proprietor by M e rritt & H atch er, L td ., 167, 168, and 169, Upper Thames Street, London. E.C.. Anril 17th. 1902.