Cricket Witness No 1 - Class Peace

22 Pre-Victorian Society And Sport The mania for gambling in stocks and shares proved infectious. Cards, especially, but also lotteries, were the key indoor games, with horse racing, pugilism, cricket and ‘pedestrianism’, that is, running races, the principle outdoor pursuits that attracted the gamblers. The lower orders joined in where they could, with crown and anchor and pitch and toss as well as cock-fighting and bear-baiting their more specific preserve. The esteemed 18 th century historian J.H.Plumb asserted that gambling was a national palliative against the unstable, disorderly and grisly conditions of the time. It was, he concluded ‘an antidote favoured by all classes.’ 10 The manner in which the Hanoverian nobility and gentry adopted cricket has been finely analysed by David Underdown in clear and persuasive detail. 11 At first sight, a ‘simple’ knockabout diversion of inconsistent format does not seem readily appropriate for the ‘gentle’, as opposed, for instance, to the mixed economy of riders in a horse race, for the upper echelons of society were well used to riding hard after hounds. The advantage the cricket typology had over some of the rougher pastimes was, however, that, with charging and hitting the ball twice, with the risk of injury to others, soon shunned, the physical contact which may have been demeaning was limited, At the same time, this was a manly, open-air sport. Gentlemen were keen to demonstrate to their peers and underlings alike that they were not effete. Cricket was a noble compromise. The boys of the gentry were wont to play with the boys of the labourers on the big farms and estates, something of which is illustrated by the semi- autobiographical story of Tom Brown, published in 1857. His progenitor Thomas Hughes was born in 1822 in Berkshire and was at Rugby from 1834 to 1842, just at the dawn of modern cricket. It should not be forgotten that the first three chapters deal with Tom’s dealings and exploits with the village lads. That juvenile interface with the lower orders must have immensely aided the development of cross-class cricket teams. 12 But the wager was often the primary motive. It followed that the construct of the game had to be exactly understood so that the betting could be fairly resolved. It is no accident that the first testimony we have of a formal regulo for cricket is a written concordat for such a match – according to John Arlott, a match involved gambling, a game didn’t. It dates from 1727. It is the ‘Articles of Agreement’ for two fixtures between teams raised by the 2 nd Duke of Richmond and Mr Alan Brodrick. For those fearful that a mere commoner might have been overwhelmed by the occasion, it should be added that Alan Brodrick succeeded to the title of Viscount Midleton in 1729. The Articles are described as ‘instructions’ for the avoidance of arguments over points of dispute, an awful lot of bother for a twelve guinea bet. Some commentators have argued that they refer back to an existing set of laws but this is doubtful. ‘The ball caught, the striker out’ – ‘touch the umpire’s stick’ to complete a run – for a run out ‘the wicket must be put down with ball in hand’ – pitch length of 23 yards – twelve a side: nothing is