Cricket 1910

CR I CKET : A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. APR IL 28 , 1910 . “ Together joined in Cricket’s manly toil.”— Byron. No 835. v o l . xxix. THURSDAY, APRIL 28, 1910. o n e p e n n y . EDWARD MILLS GRACE. By the K e y . E. S. H olmes . The announcement of the serious illness of Dr. Grace, following so soon after his retirement from the secretariat of the Gloucestershire County Club, has suggested this tribute of affection. What a name his once was to con­ jure with, as they can testify whose memory carries them back fifty years. It is difficult for the present generation of cricketers to realise the furore which then was excited by the name of Grace. It was in 1861 that that name first became a household word; it has since proved immortal. At any rate, it has made history in cricket. Nobody, however, looked for a phenomenal cricketer in a county that was terra incognita as far as cricket was concerned. But it could boast of one or two enthusiasts —a doctor and his brother-in- law, who years before had prevailed on old Clarke to go West, with his famous All England Eleven. The score of one of these matches is now before me : the venue Bristol, the date August 6 th, 1855, the local team 22 of West Gloucestershire. The doctor and three of his boys played, one of them being E. M., then only 13 years old. Now, I don’t say that he had fairly earned his place in such a match, but bowlers like Willsher, Bickley and Tinley could not dismiss the little fellow for a duck in either innings, and he long- stopped so well that Clarke made him a present of a bat, the first of some hundreds that were to come to him. Six years later he made his bow at Lord’s ; but not for the county of his birth. A Gloucestershire County Club was not formed until 1870. The South Wales Club, long since extinct, introduced both E. M. and W. G. to the London public. It was a memorable first performance on the famous ground, with scores of 14 and 41 not out, and a bagful of no less than 15 M.C.C wickets. E. M. was the taik of the town. Here was a cricketing genius who was a law to himself: a born cricketer, if ever there was one, right to his finger tips, of boundless enthusiasm, inexhaustible vitality and of most original methods. Old fogeydom was scandalised to see a straight, fast half-volley Photo by] [ F. C. Poole, Tliornbury. DR. E. M. ORACE. driven to the boundary or pulled ruthlessly to square-leg. It was not cricket; orthodoxy insisted that such balls should be quietly blocked back to the bowler. “ A fig for your conservatism,” cried this youngster; let me play my own game ; as long as I make runs what matters it whether I conform to or dissent from your ways?” I cannot remember when I first-saw E. M.' There were few first-class matches in those days; ilone at Lord’s after the Schools’ match. Consequently schoolboys had to be contented with an occasional visit-to the" Oval -later on. - I was there in 1863,- when 5 Surrey met England. E. M. was playing," aud he was our hero. Forhad he not brought- off a wonderful double-first - at Canterbury the year before?- Ne-ver shall I forget how that performance made -us long to see him repeat it. - It- was in the II.C.C. v. Kent match. Now E. M. was 'not a- membef of the famous clubv but the Kent secretary had promised his father that he' should take part in this match if he would allow him to be fetched to play in the first match of the Canterbury Week as a substitute.-; His share in the Kent match was, an innings of 192 not out. out of a total of 305 from the bat, and 15 wickets— all that fell (ten) in the second innings. Twelve a- side p’ayed, and one of the Kent batsmen was absent, else E, M. might have bagsred his wicket as well. On the M.C.C. side was another mag­ nificent batsman, R. A. H. Mitchell, who on this occasion did not get a run. Well, in the Oval match in 1863 E. M. failed, and great was ■ our disappointment when he was dismissed for a paltry 5, but Mitchell was in form, at his very best, and there was nothing better than his best, and carried out his bat for 89. It seems only recently when at lunch hour on the first day Surrey’s score was 143 for one wicket, but immediately after lunch — perhaps the lunch was responsible for the change — four of their wickets fell iu one over, and the over in those days consisted of only four balls. It was at the close of that season that E. M. was invited to form one of the second Australian team. I believe that the invita­ tionexpressly stipulated that he should be of the party. George Parr was captain. In those days a young amateur did not deem