James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Annual 1889

6 6 LILLYWHITE'SCRICKETERS' A N N U A L. the Gentlemen , particularly when it was found that one of their best bowlers , Mr. A. G. Steel , wasan absentee . As it happened, too , the Gentlemenwere un- fortunate enough to lose the toss , and there seemed every prospect of a prolonged innings . These forebodings , however , were not realized , for the Australian total only reached 179 , of which the best feature wasan extremely good innings of 61 by Mr. Jones . W h e nMessrs . Shuter and Grace wentin for the Gentle- m e nsome exceptionally fine batting was shown, and the score was 158 before Mr. Shuterretired for a faultless 71. A tthe end of the first day the total w a s 236 , with only Mr. Shuter out, and Mr. Grace with 150 to his credit , got without the shadow of a chance. Thelatter added 15 on the following morning, but he had been altogether three hours and forty minutes at the wickets , and his play wasquite up to the standard of his best days. Mr. Readadded 109 in free style , andit is worthy of remark that in his score , which only took himtwo hours and forty minutes , were ten boundary hits . In a minority of 311 , and with three hours still left for play , it was quite on the cards that the Australians might lose . Messrs . Bonnorand Bannerman, however, quickly dispelled anysuch idea, and in an hour and ten minutes 151 runs had been scored , of which Bonnor had claimed 119. W h e nthe gameended the Australians were 98 behind , with nine wickets to fall . Australians , 179 and 213 (one wicket ) ; total , 392. Gentle- m e n, 490. (4) Middlesexv. K e n t. M a y31 and June 1. Kent, being fortunate enough to win the toss , madeevery use of the advan- tage,andranup a score of 271 before the tenth wicket fell , Frankand George Hearnemaking78 and 57 respectively . Mr. Hedley and Martin followed this up by disposing of a strong batting side for 97 runs. At the next attempt Middlesex showed up better , and, thanks to a very fine batting performance b y Mr. S. W. Scott (121 not out), and40 from Mr. Hadow, gave their opponents 5 3 to get to win. Mr. Hedley took fourteen wickets for 109 runs . Mr.P. North- cote played for Middlesex for the first time. Kent wonby seven wickets . Kent, 271 and 55 (three wickets ) ; total , 326. Middlesex , 97 and 226 ; total , 323 . Mr. Hedley (1st inns . Middlesex )........ O v e r s. 2 6 . 1 Maidens. 1 1 R u n s. 3 1 Wickets. 8 (5) Middlesexv. Lancashire. June 4 and5. Afterhaving had all the worst of the first part , the Lancashire eleven w o n a close and very interesting match by 24 runs . Lancashire were all dismissed for the small total of 108-a creditable performance due to Burton and Dunkley , thelatter of w h o mtook six wickets for 42 runs. T h eh o m eteamshowedbetter form with the bat , and totalled 171. Of these Mr. Hadow, by excellent cricket , contributed 47 (not out). Thethree first batsmen in Lancashire's second innings changed the aspect of affairs , as they accounted for 204 runs between them, Mr. Crosfield making23, Barlow 84, and Mr. Eccles 97 (the latter a fine exhibition of free cricket ) . Middlesex made a very plucky attempt to obtain the 223 runs necessary to win, but failed by24 runs. Lancashire , 108 and 285 ; total , 393. Middlesex , 171 and 198 ; total , 369 . (6) M i d d l e s e xv. N o t t s. June 7, 8, and 9. •The Notts team were not favoured by fortune in this match , as, besides losing the toss , rain (ameon whenthey had to bat, and spoilt the wickets . The