Cricket 1911

D ecember 9, 1911. BUGBY FOOTBALL AND CBICKET. 591 25—Worcester, Worcestershire v. 25—Blackheath, Kent v. Surrey. Middlesex. 25—Bath, Somerset v. Northauts. 25—Nottingham, Notts, v. Gloucester- 29—Edgbaston, Warwickshire v. Mid- shire. dlesex. 25—Chesterfield, Derbyshire v. 29—The Oval, Surrey v. Leicestershire. Leicestershire. 29—Southampton, Hampshire v. 25—Southampton, Hampshire v. York- Gloucestershire. shire. 29—Bradford, Yorkshire v. Sussex. AUGUST. 1—The Oval. Surrey v.Worcestershire. 15.—Taunton, Somerset v. Kent 1—Leyton, Essex v. Kent. 15.—Southampton, Hants v. Essex 1—Southampton, Hants, v. Leicester- 17.—Northampton, Northamptonshire shire. v. Derbyshire 1—Hull—Yorkshire v. Warwickshire. 19.—Nottingham, Notts v. Middlesex 1— I'aunton, Somerset v. Sussex. 19.—Manchester, Lancashire v. War- 2—Lord’s, Cheltenham v. Haileybury. wickshire 5—(Bank Holiday). Lord’s, M.C.C. 19.—Cheltenham, Gloucestershire v. v. Public Schools. Surrey (Cheltenham Festival) 5—The Oval, Surrey v. Notts. 19.—Dover, Kent v. Leicestershire 5—Manchester, Lancashire, v. Yorks. (Dover Week) 6 —Canterbury, Kent v. Hampshire 19.—Portsmouth, Hants v. Sussex (Canterbury Week). 19.—Stourbridge, Worcestershire 5—Derby, Derbyshire v. Essex. Somerset 5—Brighton, Sussex v. Middlesex. 22 —Lord’s, Middlesex v. Surrey 5—Edgbaston, Warwickshire v. Wor- 22.— Dover, Kent v. Gloucestershire cestershire. (Dover Week) 5 - Bristol,Gloucestershire v. Somerset 22.—Leyton, Essex v. Hampshire 5—Leicester, Leicestershire v. North- 22.— Hastings, Sussex v. Northampton- amptonshire. shire (Hastings Week) S—Canterbury—Kent v. Notts (Can- 22.—Worcester,Worcestershire v. York- terbury Week). shire. S—The Oval. Surrey v. Middlesex. 22—Hinckley, Leicestershire v. War- 8—Leyton, Essex v. Yorkshire. wickshire. 8—Edgbaston, Warwickshire v. 20—Lord’s, Middlesex v. Kent. Gloucestershire. 20—Hastings, Sussex v. Warwickshire 8—Northampton, Northamptonshire (Hastings Week). v. Sussex. 26—Bristol, Gloucestershire v. Wor- S—Taunton, Somerset v. Worcester- cestershire. ► hire. 26—Taunton, Somerset v. Yorkshire. 8—Manchester, Lancashire v. Derby- 26— Blackwell, Derbyshire v. Notts. shire. 26—Leicester, Leicestershire v. Lancs. 12. —Leed*, Yorkshire v. Middlesex 26—Bournemouth, Hants v. Surrey 12.—Eastbourne, Sussex v. Essex. (Bournemouth Festival). 12.—Cheltenham, Gloucestershire v 29—Lord’s, Middlesex v. Worcester- Kent (Ch»-ltenham Festival) shire. 15.—Liverpool, Lancs, v. Middlesex 29—The Oval, Surrey v. Essex. 15.—Harrogate, Yorkshire v. Notts. 29—Brighton, Sussex v. Yorkshire. 15.—Edjrbaston, Warwickshire v. 29—Bournemouth, Hants v. Warwick- Surrey shire (Bournemouth Festival)- SEPTEMBER. 2—Scarborough, Yorks v. M.C C. and 16—The Oval, Champion County v Ground (Scarborough Festival) England (four days). 5—The Oval, Surrey v. Warwickshire The Eton v. Harrow match will be played on July 12th, and that between Rugby and Marlborough on July 31st. © b t t n a r i r . S i r WILLIAM GRANTHAM. It is with regret we announce that Sir William Grants ham, the famous judge, died in London on the 30th ult. He was born on October 23rd, 1835, and had therefore completed his seventy-sixth year. Although never much of a player, he was very fond of cricket, and when over 70 took part in a local match. In 1886, whilst playing at Barcombe(Sussex) he broke a tendon of his leg and had to be conveyed to his residence. In the previous season he had met with a similar accident. S i r HENRY HARBEN, d . l ., j . p . Sir Henry Harben, who died at Warnham Lodge (where he had a cricket ground), on Saturday last, was born at Bloomsbury on August 24th, 1823, and was thus in his eighty-ninth year at the time of his death. He took a keen interest in the game, and it was chiefly through him that Cyril Bland qualified for Sussex. It was also due largely to him that Cox was tried in the County Eleven. Sir Henry was a Vice-President of the Sussex County C.C., and in 1901 and 1906 was its President. For over sixty years he was identified with the Prudential Assurance Company, of which ,at the time of his death, he was President. He was cousin of the Rt. Hon. Joseph Chamberlain. CRICKET IN AUSTRAL IA . NEW SOUTH WALES v. SOUTH AUSTRALIA. Played at Sydney on December 1, 2, 4, 5 and 6, and won by New South Wales by 361 runs. The total scores were New South Wales. 316 (Cotter, 82 in 50 minutes ; E. L. Waddy, 78 not o u t; Bardsley, 58) and 352 (Roy Minnett, 87 not o u t; Gregory, 76); South Australia, 209 (C. Hill, 59) and 98. In tbe second innings of the visitors Cotter took five for 34 and in the match Hazlit had nine for 104—five for 57 and four for 47. Cricket: A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. 168, UPPER THAMES STREET, LONDON, E.O. SATUBDAY, DECEMBEB 9, 1911. pavilion (Bosstp. The abstract and brief chronicle of the time. — Hamlet. opening the proceedings at Tuesday’s meeting of the County Cricket Secre­ taries Mr. P. E. Lacey, referring to the National Insurance Bill, said that the Committee of the M.C.C. had been asked by one or two counties to try to get exemption for those who were employed by cricket clubs from the operations of the bill. The Com­ mittee had to decide that they could take no action in the matter. This, however, must not be construed into meaning the Com­ mittee desired to prevent the views of those counties from being heard, neither must it be taken that they are unwill­ ing to help. Playing for East Rand Proprietary Mines v. Crown Mines, at Johannesburg on November 4th and 11th, L. J. Tancred (240 not out) and H. E. Smith (158) put on 363 together for the second wicket. The innings was declared closed with three wickets down for 423, and the E.R.P.M. won easily by 220 runs. T h e lead of 15 secured by Queensland on the first innings in the Brisbane match was by no means a bad performance; but the Bananalanders found Mr. Poster and Barnes altogether too good for them on a damaged wicket on Monday, and only Mr. Fennelly, a little man who is well-known as a sprinter in Australian circles, did any­ thing. In hitting a six and five fours while everyone else was failing this player still further enhanced a growing reputation. The season of 1809-10 was his first in the Queensland team, and both then and in 1910-11 he did really good work ; but he seems in better form than ever this campaign, as he made 71 and 78 v. New South Wales at Sydney, and 29 and 38 v. the M.C.C. Team. Mb. C l a u d e J e n n i n g s , for the State, was highest scorer in each innings ; but all except a single of his 44 in the second were made on the Saturday, before the wicket was spoiled. With 6 wickets for 101 Mr. J. W. McLaren per­ formed very creditably, and may yet run Mr. Cotter hard for the position of Australia’s fast bowler. Mr. B. Cook, a slowish right-hander, who last season took 12 wickets for 118 runs in two matches for the State, met with little success, and Mr. C. B. Barstow, who on a rain-spoiled wicket secured 8 for 51 in the second innings of New South Wales at Bris­ bane, and altogether in three matches had 19 for 254, with none at all. But one expected to see one or the other included in the Eleven of Australia on Friday, with probably Messrs. Hartigan, Jennings, Marshal, Fennelly and Evans. Why the last-named did not keep wicket in the match just finished—Mr. Bolton, a new player, occupying that position —the cablegrams failed to explain. He is a really good wicket-keeper, and a fine natural hitter, who trounced Rhodes, then at the top of his form, severely eight years ago. Q u e e n s l a n d has had four captains during the last two or three seasons, Messrs. Jennings, Haitigan, Evans and Hutcheon. The last-named is now in England, and another of the State’s best men, Mr. S. J. Redgrave, seems to have failed to please the selectors, though it is difficult to understand why Mr. Fett should have been preferred to him. Mb. C o o k has had experience of South African cricket ; but whether he is an Afrikander by birth we do not know.