James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Annual 1894

THE COUNTIES IN 1893/2211 9 3 (1 ) K e n tv. L a n c a s h i r e. Manchester, M a y, 22, 23 and24. Avery creditable victory for Kent, the more so as they had not their full strength . In batting in particular Lancashire were seen to disadvantage , in fact there were only three scores of over 20 in the two innings . B y far the best feature indeed on the side , was the all -round cricket of Briggs . H e took eight wickets in Kent's first innings , but besides this scored 66 of 144 from the bat when h e wentin. Kent's better show in the matter of run-getting was in a great m e a s u r ethe w o r kof Messrs. W . H. Pattersona n dF. M a r c h a n t. O u tof a n aggregate of 360 these two batsmen contributed exactly 200, and the latter's 111 was the highest individual score in the match. Walter Hearne's bowling did perhaps as muchas anything to decide the result for Kent. Altogether he bowled 65overs for 114 runs and15 wickets . Mr. A. R. Layman, a wicket -keeper , madehis first appearance for Kent in this match. Kentwonby 80 runs . Kent191 and169, total 360 ; Lancashire 166 and 114, total 280 . (2) K e n tv. Middlesex. Gravesend, June19 a n d20. Owingto an injury , Walter Hearne was unable to play for Kent, and as the wicket was throughout in favour of the bowlers , he was muchmissed. Considering thatthe pitch even at the outset was rather treacherous, Middlesexdid well to reach a total of 238, a result due, in some measure , to the first two batsmen, Messrs . Stoddart and Webbe, who put on 99 for the first wicket . Kent, up to a very advanced period of the innings seemed likely to have to follow -on, and it was only a very useful score of 32 not out by Martin at the finish that saved themfromthis . The lead Middlesex got on the first handwent very near towards winning the match, as the wicket got worse, and the last twenty wickets only scored 173 against 515. Messrs. G. Thorntonand W . H. Hargreaves m a d etheir first appearance for Middlesex andKentrespectively . Middlesex wonby 84 runs . Middlesex, 288 and 98 ; total , 386. Kent, 227 and 75 ; total , 302. O v e r s. M a i d e n s. R u n s. A. Hearne(second innings Middlesex ) .... 20.1 4 4 5 (3) K e n tv. Lancashire. Tonbridge , June 26, 27, and 28. W i c k e t s. 5 Kentwere without Walter Hearne, as well as Messrs . W. H. Patterson and L. Wilson, hence their victory was the more creditable . In winning the toss they got some advantage , as the wicket did not improve , and Lancashire had all the worstof it in the fourth innings. After dismissing K e n tfor 152, Lancashire started well , so well, thanks to Mr. A. C. McLaren (61), namely, that 117 was up withonly three batsinen out. Martinand Alec Hearne, however, weretoo m u c h for the tail , and the tenth wicket fell for an addition of only forty . Martin was essentially the hero of the match from a Kentish standpoint . His second innings of65wasthe highest in the match, but, besides this , hetook tenwickets at a cost of only 70 runs . Kentwonby 71 runs . Kent, 152 and 176 ; total , 328. Lanca- shire , 157 and 104 ; total , 261. Mold(second innings Kent) Overs. 3 3 M a i d e n s. R u n s. W i c k e t s. 1 0 8 7 S (4) K e n tv. S o m e r s e t s h i r e . Tonbridge, June29 a n d30. T h ecommencementof the matchwas hardly so m u c hin favour of Kentas to indicate the ultimate result . Half the side were out for 87, but the Rev. W. Rashleigh , who went in first , was not dismissed until he hadgot 86 ; and later on Martin again shewed up well with a freely hit score of 69. Unfortunately for Somersetshire , the death of his brother -in-law compelled Mr. Hewett to return