Cricket 1903

S ept . 10, 1903. CRICKET: A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. 403 BUSEY’S “DEMON DRIVERS. <CCB« GEO, G. BUSSEY & CO Desire to inform Cricketers all over the world who may experience a difficulty in ob­ taining “ Demon Drivers” that this difficulty arises in consequence oftheever-increas­ ing demand exceeding the supply. Headers of G e o . G . B u s se y & Co.’s pamphlet, entitled “ Evolution of the Demon Driver,” are aware that a fea­ ture of the success of the “Demon Driver ” is due to a special process, occupying a long period,that thebatsunder­ go before leaving the works, and although there are always a large number of Bats under this treatment which could be placed on the market, G e o . G . B u s s e y & Co., in the interest of cricketers and their own repu­ tation, will not deviate fromthe system that has made the The Finest Bat the World produces. GEO.6.BDSSEY i CO., 3 6 & 38 , QUEENVICTORIASTREET, E.G. Manufactory—PECKHAM, S.E. Timber Mills—ELMSWELL SUFFOLK. A T T H E SIGN OF T H E W IC K E T . B t F . 8 . A sh ib y -C o o fh b . AGENTS ALL OVER THE WORLD. A match in which a county plays single- hsfladed against England is always of interest, and on this account the appearance of Middle­ sex at the Oval on Monday next is bound to attract considerable attention. Since great matches were first played severalcounties have essayed the task, with more or less success, and as far back as 1744 James Love, the earliest laureate of the game, told how “ Ficrce Kent, ambitious of theworld’sapplause, Against theworld combined asserts her cause.’* Both Kent and Surrey in the pre-Hambledon days played England single-handed, but, apart from the famous match of June 18th, 1744, in the Artillery-Ground, London, the scores have yet to be discovered. Old stagers, whose memories carry them back to the days of the great Kent eleven of which Pilch, Mynn, Felix, Dorrinton, Adams, Hillyer, Wenman, &c., were shining lights are never more delightedthan when recallingthe various occasions upon which their county met All England. Sussex, too, on twenty-sixoccasions between 1827 and 1854 faced such odds, but only seldomdid the full strength of the country take the field against them. As everybody knows, or should know, the Surrey teamof one hundred years ago was one of the strongest— perhaps the strongest—which any county has ever been able to muster. Be that as it may, however, the fact that Surrey were able to defeat England in twenty-three out of forty- nine matches played between 1793 and 1831 is wondeiful testimony to the strength of the side. In 1800, and again in 1809, they lent England their best man, Beldham, and still won ! This is a boast which no other county can make, and possibly never will be able to make. One is tempted to linger lovingly over those old matches, and to record the great doings of Beldham, the Walkers, John Wells, Lambert, and the other famous men who did so much for Surrey in those happy days, but one must pass on to more recent times, for, unfortunately, not all followers of present-day cricket are interested in the history of the game. Surrey’s early great­ ness practically ceased in 1810, but when, in 1845, the present County C.C. was estab­ lished, one enthusiast was bold enough to prophesy that before ten years had gone by the county would again be able to meet England in eleven aside matches. This prediction, strange to say, proved correct, as in 1849 Surrey (with Box and Hillyer) twice played England, losing at Lord’s by one wicket but winning by 31 runs in the return at the Oval. Between 1849 and 1866 four­ teen such matches took place, of which the county won six and lost four. Some of the games have become historic. Thus, the 1858 fixture will always be remembered on account of Caffyn’s great innings of 102—the supreme effort of a most brilliant career—whilst that of the following year was rendered remark­ able through the wonderful all-round display of Mr. V. E. Walker. It is doubtful whether, apart from W. G., there has ever been a finer gentleman player than Mr. Walker, who, in addition to being probably the best lob-bowler of whom we possess any record, was also a batsman of the highest class and a splendid fieldsman, especially to his own bowling. In the match under notice he scored 20 not out and 108 and obtained all ten wickets in the first innings (having also the eleventh manmissed off him) at a cost of 74 runs, and four in the second for 17. This performance, remarkable as it appears on paper, was in reality still more so, as in the first innings John Jackson and Bickley, two of the greatest professional players of that generation, were bowling from the other end. The records of cricket would be searched in vain for a feat of greater magnitude. Again, in the 1862 match, occurred the no-balling of Willsher six times in succession by John Lillywhite for his arm being above his shoulder at the time of delivery. So much commotion was caused by this incident that the alteration in the wording of the law, on June 10th, 1864, resulted. Surrey were fortunate to escape defeat in the match, their scores being but 102 and 154 for six wickets, whilst England’s was 503, Grundy (95) and Willsher (54) obtaining 124 for the first wicket, and Hayward (117) and Carpenter (94) adding 153 for the fourth. In the meeting of 1863 four Surrey wickets fell in the course of an over delivered by George Bennett, of Kent—there were only four balls to an over in those days —H. H. Stephenson being stumped by Bid- dulph off the first, Caffyn run out off the second, Mr. E. Dowson (still a regular attend­ ant at tha Oval) bowled by the third, and Ben Griffith caught by E. M. Grace at point off the fourth, recalling the fact that in the 1849 match at the Oval five wickets, those of Brockwell (uncle of the present-day player), Chester, Felix, Martingell and Coltson, at one period fell in the county’s second innings for but a single run. In 1866 Surrey lost heavily, being defeated by an innings and 296 runs, W. G. Grace, then eighteenyears of age, scoring 224 not out —his first three-figure score in big matches —C. Payne 86, and V. E. Walker 54. This latter match was the last of the series of fourteen to which reference has already been made, and it was only appropriate that it should be marked by so wonderful an innings on the part of the Champion. The scoring in the fourteen matches may be considered to have been higher than the average of forty and fifty years ago. The chief innings have already been briefly referred to, but, in addi­ tion, George Brockwell scored 57 at Lord’s in 1849, Guy 64, Parr 48 and 20, Chester 64 and 24 and Brockwell 5 and 47 in 1852 at Lord’s, Caffyn 21 and 52, and George Parr 50 and 11 in 1855, Alfred Diver (for so many years coach at Rugby School) 1 and 51 in 1858, C. G. Lane, of whom Prowse wrote :— “ You may join with me in wishing that theOval, once 8 gain, Shall resound with hearty plaudits to the praise of Mr. Lane.” 72 and 53 not out in 1860, Caffyn 58 and 46, and E. Dowson 80 and 36 the following year, R. A. H. Mitchell (one of the best batsmen of his own or any age) 89 not out in 1863, E. M. Grace 78 and 31, Tom Humphrey 94, Jupp 65 (the two making 129 for the first wicket), Lockyer 79, and Mortlock 55 in 1864, and Tom Hearne 69, E. M. Grace 44, W. G. 35, G. M. Kelson 40, Tom Humphrey 10 and 69, and Pooley 18 and 59 in 1865. One will gather from the above that remarkable bowl­ ing feats were not numerous, but in 1849 William Lillywhite (then 57 years of age) obtained ten wickets, in 1852 Tom Sherman —still alive and well—took seven for 32 and Alfred Mynn six for 16, in 1858 Stephenson claimed twelve for 94, and in 1859 John Jackson six for 21. ‘ ‘ Hastings ! ” To those south country enthusiasts who are in the habit of visiting the premier cinque port during the Festival, the name cannot fa^l to recall many happy hours. At the conclusion of a busy season, the week’s cricket comes as a pleasurable relaxation. ^ot that the play is of a “ free and easy ” nature, and undeserving to be re­ garded as what is generally known as first-