Cricket 1908

CRICKET A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. M a y 7, 19 0 8 . Many years then pass ere we again hear of cricket being played in the County. From this, however, it must not be in­ ferred that the game was not indulged in ; it is possible, and, in fact, probable, that it retained its popularity through the rest of the sixteenth century and the whole of the seventeenth, but was never considered of sufficient importance to warrant refer­ ence being made to it in the publications of those times. In the Post Boy of March, 1700, we come across the following adver­ tisement :—“ These are to inform Gentle­ men, or others, who delight in Cricket- playing, That a Match at Cricket, of 10 Gentlemen on each side, will be Play’d on Clapham-Common, near Fox-Hall, on Kaster-Mondav next, for ^ 7 io a Head each Game (five being defign’d) and £ 2 0 the Odd one.” Fox Hall was, of course, Vauxhall. No report of the game was published, which is regrettable, for the match is the only one known to have been played with the old-fashioned hurdle wicket—two stumps, one foot high and two apart, surmounted by ji single bail— in use. During the two following decades Walworth Common and Kennington Com­ mon were much frequented by cricketers, and sides representing London, Surrey, Mitcham, and Kent often took the field. Clubs sprang up all over the County, those at Richmond and Addington becoming very celebrated. By 1723 enthusiasts had gained the patronage of Frederick Louis, Prince of Wales, and in the Daily Courant of that year is to be found a description of a match on Moulsey Hurst, between Lon­ don and Surrey, and the manner in which the players were entertained by the Prince. His Royal Highness promoted many Surrey matches, and on several occasions the teams were chosen by him. His love of the game caused many of the nobility to have similar tastes, and amongst the numerous titled supporters cricket could claim before 1750 may be instanced Lord Chesterfield, the Earl of Onslow, Lord J. P. Sackville, the Earl of Sandwich, the Duke of Bedford, the Earl of Carlisle, the Duke of Marlborough, the Earl of Middle­ sex, the Duke of Richmond, the Duke of Dorset, and Lord Montford, whose fond­ ness of the game is mentioned by Horace Walpole in his correspondence of 1749. Owing to the patronage of these highly- placed personages, the game attracted great attention and increased in popularity by leaps and bounds It was, in fact, no unusual circumstance for as many as ten thousand spectators to be present at an im­ portant match in the Artillery Ground, London, or at Duppas Hill, Croydon, at both of which places, by the way, the game still continues to be indulged in. Between 1730 and 1750 Surrey are known to have played as many as 36 great matches against England, Kent, London, Middlesex, and Sussex, and it is pleasant to know that the majority of the games resulted in favour of the county whose cricketical his­ tory is here being briefly outlined. Full scores of the matches did not begin to appear until 1773, and, almost as often as not, the newspapers omitted to report even the results. The first occasion upon which we come across the names of a Surrey Eleven is in 1740, in a match played on June 2nd and 3rd that year against Eng­ land on Dartford Brent. They were Stephen Dingate, Thomas Faulkner, Joseph Harris, John Harris, George Jack­ son, Maynard, Bennet, John Bryan, James Bryan, Humphreys, and John Frame. The most renowned of these were Dingate, of Reigate, who was engaged by the Duke of Richmond, Faulkner, a famous prize­ fighter, and Frame, whose name will be found in great matches as far on as July, 1774, when he played for England against Hambledon on Sevenoaks Vine. In 1751 Surrey cricket sustained a great blow in the sudden death of the Prince of Wales, and for almost a quarter of a century— until 1773, in fact—we seldom hear of cr. eleven of the county taking the field. One match, however, owing to its curious ter­ mination, deserves mention. It was against Kent, at Carshalton in 1762, and ended abruptly in confusion owing to a dispute concerning the dismissal of a bats­ man in the first innings of Surrey. “ From words they came to blows, which occa­ sioned several broken heads, as likewise a challenge between two persons of dis­ tinction,” records a‘ contemporary account. The year 1773 marks the commencement of the second epoch in the history of Surrey County Cricket. Then it is that we first come across the names of the players with scores attached, though the name of the bowler was recorded only in the event of the wicket being bowled down. The great patron of Surrey at that time was the Earl of Tankerville, who not only promoted many matches but also kept some of the best players in his employ. In 1788 we first meet the name of another great en­ thusiast, the Earl of Winchilsea, to whom the honour of initiating matches with Hampshire and England may be ascribed, and in the same season William Beldham, Tom and Harry Walker, and John Wells made their debut for the county. All are historic figures. Beldham, who died in 1862, aged 96, has good claims to be re­ garded as the finest all-round player Surrey ever produced. He excelled in all branches of the game, and his heart was as kind and disposition cheerful as his skill as a player was great. His largest innings was 144 for M.C.C. against Middlesex at Lord’s in 1792, but an even more meritorious per­ formance was his scores of 72 and 102 for Surrey against England on the same ground two years later. Tom WTalker was the famous stone-waller, immortalized by Nyren ; he was as steady as the Pyramids and made some enormous scores, often going in first and carrying out his bat. For the White Conduit Club against Kent, at Canterbury in 1786, he came within an ace of making two separate hundreds in a match, scoring 95 not out in his first inn­ ings and 102 in his second. It would be easy to write many columns about these earlv champions if space permitted-, as well as of such men as Robinson, Lumpy, Yalden and “ Shock” White, the last of whom played a great innings of 197 for Surrey and Kent v. Middlesex and Hamp­ shire at Sevenoaks in 1771. Then in 1801 we find WTilliam Lambert, whose career was outlined in Cricket of April 9th, play­ ing his first match for Surrey, whilst in 1810 we come across the names of John Bowyer and James and John Sherman, in 1828 that of J. Saunders, a left-handed batsman who scored 99 and 100 for the Players against the Gentlemen at Lord’s in 1825 and 1827 respectively, and in 1839 those of Martingell, the Hon. F. Pon- sonbv (for 50 years President of the Surrey County C.C.), T. Sewell, sen., Cobbett, and j. Bayley. At the end of the eighteenth century Surrey was very strong, and until 1810 were practically in­ vincible. In Beldham, Lambert, 'Robinson, and the Walkers they could boast five magnificent batsmen such as no other county has ever possessed contempor­ aneously. In 1793 Surrey commenced a memorable series of 49 matches against England, of which the county won 23 and lost 26. In 1800, and again in 1809, Surrey lent England their best man, Beldham, and still won ! Of the 72 matches known to have been played against England since 1744, Surrey have won 33 and lost 31—an excellent record unmatched by any other county. After 1810 we hear little of Surrey as a cricketing county until the great revival of 1845. The shire produced many fine players during that period, however, but there was apparently nobody enterprising enough to band them together and form a county eleven. For some years cricketers, it is evident, raised no serious objection to this state of things, but when, in 1844, the old Montpelier Club, which used to play at the Beehive, Walworth, lost their ground and acquired, through Mr. William Baker, one of their members, a lease of the Oval for 31 years, the opportunity was seized of making an endeavour to in­ augurate a County Club. The support of several well-known amateurs was ob­ tained, with the result that at a meeting at the Horns Tavern on August 22nd, 1845, under the presidency of Mr. William Ward, the Surrey County C.C. was estab­ lished. Mr. William Denison was the first Honorary Secretary, and the first match played by the newlv-formed County Club was at the Oval in 1846 against Kent, who were beaten by ten wickets. In 1851 Lilly- white’s Guide said of the ground:—“ Its shape is oval, from which its name is derived ; the situation, too, is beautiful. Although some distance out of London, there is no inconvenience or expense in arriving at the spot on the occasion of a match ; omnibuses leave Temple Bar every few minutes for Kennington Gate, fare 3d.” Good cricketers were speedily gathered together, Felix and Day appear­ ing in 1846, Sherman in 1847, the Hon. S. Ponsonby in 1848, and C?esar, Lockyer and Caffyn in 1849. In 1848 XIV. of Surrey met England and won by eight wickets, and in the following year, when Box and Hillyer were included in their eleven, tw'ice played the same opponents even-handed, losing the first match by a wicket but win­ ning the return by 31 runs.. Gradually the team which was destined to achieve so many triumphs under the leadership of F. P. Miller was built up, Mortlock and Miller coming out in 1851, Stephenson in 1853, Southerton and F. Burbidge in 1854, and C. G. Lane and Griffith in 1856. Among the outstanding features of the County’s cricket about that period may be mentioned Caffyn’s innings of 102, against the bowling of V. E. Walker, Jackson, Willsher, C. D. Marsham, Tinley, and Grundy, in the match with England in 1858, and V. E. Walker’s wonderful all­ round cricket in the corresponding fixture of the following year ; the latter, then only 22 years of age, scored 20 not out and 108 and took all ten wickets for 74 runs in the first innings (Jackson and Bickley bowl­ ing from the other end) and four for 17 in the second. At the Oval in 1861 a some­ what remarkable game was played against Cambridgeshire, then one of the leading counties of the day, Caesar scoring 50 and i i i for Surrey whilst Carpenter made 100 and 15 and Hayward 108 and 46 for the visitors, who won by two wickets. Mr. Edward Dowson joined the side in i860, Pooley in 1861, and Humphrey and Jupp in 1862. On« of the most remarkable