James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Annual 1882

7 4 L I L L Y W H I T E ' SC R I C K E T E R S ' A N N U A L . while the last six wickets in the first innings only added 31, in the second their aggregate had been reduced to 27 runs. Mr. Hornby's 102 was a pun- ishing innings , if not one of his best displays ; but except for Robinson,who hit very smartly for his 90, the batting was not brilliant , and the last seven wickets were only accountable for 47 runs. Lancashire won by an innings and 46 runs. Lancashire , 285. Kent, 136 and 103 ; total , 239, Barlow (Lancashire ) . . . . . . Overs. Maidens. R u n s. Wickets. 6 7 . 2 7 3 1 1 3 1 (2) K e n tv . Yorkshire. Bradford, June 13 & 14, 1881. T h eabsenceof Mr. W . H. PattersoncausedK e n tto be evenweakerthan at Manchester , and as the ground at Bradford does not wear well , the chances of the Southerners were considerably reduced in losing the toss . The weak Kentish bowling was eminently suited to Ulyett's powers of hitting , and over 100 runs were on the telegraph board whenthe first Yorkshire wicket fell . Ulyett's contribution amounted to 79, and this proved to be 17 morethan the first innings of Kent. Mr. Mackinnonplayed very steadily the second time for 33 not out, but the ground made the three Yorkshire bowlers-Hill , Peate , and Bates-more difficult even than usual , and the total of the two Kentish innings only amounted to 126. Yorkshire wonby an innings and 87 runs. Yorkshire , 213. Kent, 62 and 6 4; total, 126. Peate (Yorkshire ) B a t e s " Overs. Maidens. R u n s. Wickets. 5 7 16.1 2 8 6 5 8 2 3 9 6 (3) K e n tv. Sussex. Brighton , July 17 & 18 , 1881 . As was to be expected , some high scoring was the product of this match, though neither side had its full batting strength . Mr. Patterson and the H o n. Ivo Bligh, each of themcredited with 78, made a good start for Kent, scoring 143 for the first wicket , and before the game was over 934 runs had been obtained with thirty -four wickets down. Sussex had to follow on in a minority of 157 runs , but in their second attempt they punished the very moderate bowling of Kent as they ought to have in the first . James Phillips ' 77 was a useful score , but the cricket was very slow until Mr. Blackman, the tenth batsman , came in , and then the scoring underwent a surprising change . Hehad the most extraordinary luck , it is true , in placing the ball , but his innings was one of the curiosities of the season , and in