James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Annual 1876

85 (l) Lancashire *'• Leicestershire- Leicester, June 14 & 15. The first match between the Counties and one not altogether un interesting . Lancashire was strong, only excepting the absence o f M r. Appleby hut its innings was not a huge affair, as 138 was the aggregate ; W a tson being m the enviable position of chief scorer w ith 4b. Leicestersh ire made a still more insignificant show, as, though 75 runs were registered for five w ickets, the total was only 99, and of these 70 were due to three batsmen, M r . C. M ar­ riott (33), Panter (24) and Mr. Hay (13). In the second inn ings o f Lan ca ­ shire the Leicestershire bow ling was tried to the utmost, as th ou gh the two great batsmen of this County, Mr. H ornby , and Barlow on ly con tr ibu ted 32, the innings came to 216, with seven double figures, the most notab le by M r . Parr (52), McIntyre, not out, 43, and Mr. Walsh 37. Leicester then wanted 256 runs to win, but the match ended in a draw, when tw o wickets had fa llen for 20 runs. Lancashire, 138 and 216, total, 354 ; Leicestersh ire 99 and 20 (two wickets), total, 119. Overs. Maidens. R un s . W ick e ts . Bishop (Leicestershire, 1st Innings) ... 43 21 49 6 (2) Lancashire v Yorkshire. M anchester , June, 24, 25 & 26 A match full of fluctuations, and one memorable fo r a w onderfu l feat at the close. The Lancashire bow ling at the outset was so true th a t the Yorksh ire - men were all dismissed for 83 runs ,Emm ett ’ s 17 being the h ighest figure. It seemed,too, as i f Lancashire w ou ld hardly be more successfu l, as 5 w ickets were down for 49, strangely enough the same number made by the Yorksh irem en at the same stage o f their innings. Mr. R ow ley and W a tson , however, made a stand, and the former with 26 and the latter w ith 31 were m a in ly in s tru ­ mental in giving Lancashire an advantage o f 76 runs on the first inn ings . The second venture of Yorkshire was a singular contrast to the first, as live ba ts ­ men scored heavily, and the result was a creditable sum o f 216, U lye tt 50, Clayton 39, and Lockwood 32. Lancashire had 146 runs to w in , and Y o rk ­ shire was thought to have a good chance. Bad management and bad fielding on their part produced the opposite result and enabled two batsmen to secure 148 runs without a wacket. M r. H o rn by was bad ly missed by P inder early in the innings, and the effect of giving such a dangerous batsman an extra life was evident. The amateur scored 78, and Barlow 50, bo th be ing not out Lancashire won by ten wickets. Lancashire 154 and 148 (n o w ickets) •to ta l 302. Yorkshire 216 and 83 *, total 299. Overs. Maidens. App leby (Yorkshire 1st Inn ings)............ 21 10 H ill (Lancashire 1st Innings) ................. 39 23 Run s . 20 34 W ickets . 5 4 Lancashire v. Yorkshire (return) Sheffield, July, 1 2 ,1 3 , & 14 Lancashire was again well represented, bu t this tim e had to be con ten t wit a signal defeat. Lancashire did little against the b ow lin g o f H i l l and Clai ton , aim its two innings on ly came to 112 and 100, Barlow be ing the large*