James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Annual 1893

T H EC O U N T I E SIN 1 8 9 2 2 1 0 9 hewentonat the finish , whenthings were going against Surrey, and with re- markable results . Mr. W .W . Read(75) and Abel (50), whohadput on 156 for the first wicket against Sussex early in the week, repeated their performance , scoring 109 before the latter w a sout. W h e nthe fourth batsmanwentthe total was 174, but after this came a rot, and the remaining batsmen only realised 71. The one feature of Yorkshire's innings was the stand of Peel (37) andWainwright (73 ) for the seventh wicket . The partnership produced 112 , and as E. Smith was responsible for 33, eight of the side were jointly accountable for sixteen from the bat. Wainwright was missed at slip before he had scored , and again at 27. Wainwrightwas successful , too , with the ball whenSurrey went in a second time, and although seven batsmen got double figures , the highest score in an aggregate of 189 was Henderson's 35. With268 to win, Surrey made anunfortunate beginning , F. S. Jackson giving a chance to mid-off , which hurt Richardson's handso badly that he had to leave the field . With a second bowler hurt Surrey's chances were still further reduced , and F. S. Jackson and Wardall scored so fast after Ulyett's dismissal that 60 was up on the second night withonly one batsman out. O nthe third morning Jackson was bowled, but A. Sellers andWardall made runs so fast that 70 were added in fifty -five minutes . Thegamewas looking very bad for Surrey when, as a last resource , Lohmann wasput on. His appearance changed the whole aspect of the game, and after hewenton eight wickets fell for 66 runs . Surrey's winby72 runs was entirely d u eto his great effort at the critical time. H ebowledhis last nineteen overs for 26runs, and six wickets , five of them clean bowled. Surrey , 245 and 189 ; total , 434. Yorkshire , 167 and 195 ; total , 362 . (4) Surrey v. Sussex. Oval, July 25 and 26. Lohmannwasunable to help Surrey on this occasion , and Sharpe took his place . Sussex were this time fortunate enough to win the toss , and at lunch time hadmade118 for the loss of five wickets . W. Newham, so far, had been the only batsman able to offer any real resistance to the bowling of Lockwood and Sharpe . Nordid the tail help him very much, as the last half of the innings only realised 19. Of a total of 128 from the bat N e w h a mcontributed 16 not out, andhis runs were obtained without the semblanceof a chance. Sussex werenot fortunate enough to escape with a short outing . O nthe contrary , they were fielding for five hours and a quarter , and runs came so fast throughout as to producea total of 413. O f these only two were extras , and of the other 411 W .W. Read and Lockwood (80) contributed 276. The former, who went in first , carried his bat through the innings . H e ought to have been caught at short slip at 61, and ought to have been dismissed twice subsequently , still , his innings was a fine display of finished cricket , and with the exception that he was not quite at his ease with Humphrey's lobs , there was no flaw of any kind. Sussex were in a hopeless condition whenthey went in, wanting 278 to save the innings . Nordid they ever look like making a show. Onthe contrary , though Marlowgot 47 by free cricket , the batting was very tame, and Surrey wonbyan innings and 110 runs . Surrey , 413. Sussex , 137 and 166 ; total , 303. Lockwood(1st innings Sussex) O v e r s. M a i d e n s. R u n s. 1 7 5 3 7 (5) Surrey v. Essex. Oval, M a y16 and 17 . W i c k e t s. 5 Although minus the services of Lohmann, Abel, Sharpe , and the two Reads Surrey had a very easy victory . Essex , who were correspondingly weakwith Messrs . A. P. Lucas, Rowe, and Johnson all away, held an advantage of 35 runs on the first " hands," thanks mainly to the good cricket of Mr. D. Womersley (59 not out). In the second , however, the Surrey men completely collared the