James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Annual 1886

T H E COUNTIES IN 1885. 8 1 (6) Lancashire v. Essex. Manchester , July 2, 3, and 4. Lancashire tried two new amateurs in its team, Messrs . E. C. Hornbyand H . Eccles , and a new professional -- Copeland . Essex, too , brought an amateur n e wto county cricket in Mr. C. D. Buxton, of the Cambridge eleven . Lan- cashire , who went in first , were able to claim a lead of 90 runs on the com- pletion of an innings , and this hardly left the game in doubt. Yates (57 not out) and Mr. Buxton (28 and 33) were the chief scorers for Lancashire and Essex respectively . Lancashire won by nine wickets . Lancashire , 208 and 71 (one wicket ) ; total , 279. Essex, 118 and 157 ; total , 275 . (7) Lancashire v. Surrey. Liverpool , July 16, 17, and 18. Continuous rain on the third day saved Surrey from a certain defeat . Going in first on a wet wicket , Mr. Shuter alone made any show, and he con- tributed 57 of 117. The lack of a capable wicket -keeper in Wood's absence materially affected the out-cricket of the Surrey eleven , and Briggs and Pilling did a remarkable performance . The two professionals put on in an hour and forty minutes 173 runs, the largest number, we believe , ever made for the last wicket in an important match in England. Briggs' 186 was a very fine display of hitting , though he had several lives . Pillings ' 61 (not out ) was a very creditable innings . Mr. Jowett, of Lancashire , a fast right -hand bowler , was no-balled by Platts , the umpire, on the ground that his delivery was not fair . A t the end of the second day, Surrey still wanted 34 to save the innings , with five wickets to fall , and in that condition the game was left . Lancashire , 364. Surrey , 177 and 213 (five wickets ) ; total , 330. (8) Lancashire v. Yorkshire. Huddersfield , July 23, 24, and 25 . Though Lancashire had neither Messrs . A. G. Steel , Taylor , Royle. nor Pilling , the gamewas most stoutly contested throughout . Yorkshire lost the toss , but, thanks to the fine hitting of Bates, and the good cricket of Preston (59) and Emmett(45 not out), were able to claim a lead of 69 on the first hands . Mr. G. M. Kemp, of the Cambridge Eleven, madehis first appearance for Lan- cashire in this match. A more successful debut has rarely been made in County Cricket ; indeed , he mademore than one half of the runs got from the bat, and inthe second innings was three hours at the wicket for 109 out of 156 without amistake . Bates' vigorous hitting at the finish fairly wonthe matchfor Yorkshire . H ewas let off whenhe had got six , but never gave a chance after this , and his all-round cricket was one of the very best features of the game. In the match he scored 179 for once out, besides taking seven Lancashire wickets . York- shire wonbyeight wickets . Yorkshire , 301 and 148 (two wickets ) ; total , 449 . Lancashire , 232 and 214 ; total , 446. Peate(2nd innings Lancashire ) Overs. Maidens. R u n s. Wickets. 4 4 2 3 4 4 6 (9) Lancashirev. Sussex. Manchester , July 27 and 28. A bowlers ' match on the whole , though there was nothing in the wicket to account for the small scoring . In all , forty wickets only produced an aggregate of 472runs an average of undertwelveruns. WatsonandBarlowwereunchanged in the first innings of Sussex , which only amounted to 45, of which 15 fell to the last batsman, Arthur Hide. Robinson's second score of 39 for Lancashire was the highest of the match . Lancashire won by 154 runs . Lancashire , 105 and 208 ; total , 313. Sussex, 45 and 114 ; total , 159 . Barlow(Lancashire ) J. Hide (Sussex ) Overs. Maidens. R u n s. Wickets 8 1 . 2 6 2 . 1 5 7 2 6 6 7 1 0 7 1 1 1 0