James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Annual 1889

8 8 LILLYWHITE'SCRICKETERS' A N N U A L. Barlow, who took an hour and twenty -five minutes scoring 3 singles , and three hours and twenty -five minutes making 17. Notts were only equal to 73, to which their opponents replied with 64. Requiring 104 to win, Notts had only three- quarters of an hour to play, and lost two batsmen for 15 whenrain put a n end to a tedious match. Lancashire , 102 and 64; total , 166. Notts , 73 and 15 (twowickets ) ; total , 88 . (10) Lancashirev. Australians. Manchester , M a y24 and 25. Thefirst defeat of the Australian team, and a highly creditable victory for Lancashire . The county was fortunate enough to get first innings , but the wicket washardly so good as is usually provided at Old Trafford , and Messrs . Turner and Ferris bowled unchanged, the latter taking eight of the ten wickets at a cost of only 41 runs . Thankschiefly to a capital score of 57 by Mr. S. P. Jones , the Australians got a lead of 65 runs at the end of an innings , but Mr. Steel , Mr. Eccles , and Barlow did so well when Lancashire batted again , that at one time they were 25 on with only two batsmen out. The downfall of six wickets for an addition of 30 runs, however, turned the game again in favour of the Australians , and it was only a vigorously -hit 37 by Rev. J. R. Napier that caused the issue to be doubtful . Withonly 90 to win the Australians h a dgot 30 of t h e mw h e nthe second wicket fell . T h elater bats- men, though, fared badly against the bowling of Briggs and Mr. Napier, which bumped a good deal , and as the remaining batsmen only added 36, Lancashire wasable to win in fine style with 23 runs to spare . Lancashire , 98 and 154 ; total , 252. Australians , 163 and 66 ; total , 229 . (11 ) Lancashire v. Oxford University . Oxford, M a y28 and 29. Apoor show by the University against a team from which Mr. Hornby, Mr. A. G. Steel , and Sugg were absentees . A good display of free cricket by Mr. Eccles for 75 was the chief feature in Lancashire's first innings , which ter- minated for 179. The University lost six wickets for 35 runs , and would not have saved the follow onbut for a useful stand by Mr. Nepean(29) and Mr. Philipson (21). Lancashire , with 76 runs in hand , Mr. Jowett (53), Briggs ( 58 ), andRobinson (51) all hit very hard, and the two first -namedmade as m a n y as 100 runs in a little over fifty minutes . The Oxonians had to go in against 332-a task far above their capabilities , and eventually lost the match by 221 runs. Lancashire , 179 and 255 ; total , 434. Oxford University , 103 and 110 ; total , 213. (12) Lancashirev. OxfordUniversity. Manchester, June 21 and 22. Abrilliant victory for Lancashire , the more creditable as they had not only a great disadvantage on the first hands, but in some measure the worst of the luck afterwards . The University , winning the toss , made 315 , of which as manyas 211 were contributed by Mr. Gresson (114) and LordGeorge Scott (97). Theformer, whose first score of a hundred this was in animportant match, was in three hours and a quarter without giving a chance , Lord George Scott fifteen minutes longer . Lancashire , following on in a minority of 110, had a bad light as well as a bad pitch to contend against , and whenthe eighth wicket fell 17 runs were still wanted to save the innings . Some lively hitting by Messrs .