James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Annual 1893

8 2 LILLYWHITE'SCRICKETERS' A N N U A L. (6) K e n tv. Lancashire. Tonbridge , July 11, 12, and 13 . Theopening match of the Tonbridge week, and the first of two defeats for Kent. As the weather was, winning the toss meantwinning the match, and in going in second Kent had not practically a look in. The Tonbridge ground favours fast run-getting , and Lancashire , whowent in first , were in all the first day. A. Wardand Sugg set a good example by scoring 87 in the first hour, and most of the other batsmen followed in their steps . A. Smith (62), Briggs (54), Tinsley (44) , and S. M. Crosfield (38) all lent useful assistance , so muchso that 293 was up whenthe sixth batsmanwent. All previous performances , though, wereput into the shade by the subsequent record of Baker(109) and Yates (74). In anhour and a half these two players added 176 runs, and their hitting was some of the very best seen during the season . Heavyrain caused the ground to be all in favour of the bowlers whenKent's turn came to bat, and on the drying wicket the batsmen were unable to do anything with the bowling of Mold and Briggs . This pair bowled unchanged and with such success that G. J. V. Weigall (38 and18) alone afforded any resistance in both innings . Mold was particularly deadly, and his bowling had very muchto do with the easy win of his side . Alec Hearnewas unable to play owing to illness , and the loss of his all -round cricket was severely felt by Kent. Lancashire wonby aninnings and 330 runs. Lancashire , 484. Kent, 97 and57 ; total , 154 . M o l d(Lancashire) Overs. 4 5 . 1 Maidens. R u n s. Wickets. 9 1 1 3 1 3 (10) K e n tv. Surrey. Tonbridge , July 14 and 15 . Abowlers ' match, at least for a considerable part the consequence of recent rainfall . Alec Hearnewasstill an absentee fromthe K e n televen from illness , and W. H. Patterson from a similar cause . Surrey , on the other hand, had a strong side , and it was rather to Kent's credit that they kept the result in doubt till close to the finish . The pitch in the earlier part of the gamewas all against the batsmen, andthe scoring on both sides was so low that twenty wickets fell for an aggregate of 177 runs . On the second morning the ground was con- siderably faster , and the run-getting improved in proportion . Still , in spite of a useful score of 42 by W . L. Knowles, the total was only 102 whenthe eighth wicket of Kent fell . The end, though, was by no means at hand, for the two bowlers , Wright and Martin , with some luck , made a useful stand , adding 53 for the ninth wicket . With141 to win, and a ground rapidly increasing in pace, Surrey's chances were hopeful enough . As it was things for a time went badly , and with four good batsmen out for 51 Kenthad a look in. J. Shuter was the first to turn the tide in favour of Surrey, and Henderson (35) and K. J. Key (28),both not out, got the remaining runs . W. Hearne's last thirty -seven balls in first innings of Surrey got six wickets at a cost of fifteen runs . Surrey w o n by five wickets . Surrey , 97 and 142 ; total , 239. Kent, 80 and 157 ; total , 237 . W .Hearne(1st innings Surrey). Overs. Maidens. Runs. Wickets. 14.2 5 3 1 6 (8) K e n tv. Somersetshire. Taunton , July 25 and 26. With W. H. Patterson and Walter Wrightboth away, and Alec Hearne not