James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Annual 1895

T H EC O U N T I E SIN 1894. 9 3 (11) L a n c a s h i r ev N o t t s. Manchester , August 24, 25. Agame played out with several interruptions from rain . A n hour was the extent of the cricket on the first day, and in that time Notts . scored 46 for the loss of one batsman. Briggs in the previous weekhad strained himself badly at Lord's , and Lancaster , of Enfield , took his place successfully , as the result proved . Onthe second morning he proved very effective , and the completion of the innings showedthath eh a dtakensevenof the ten wicketsat a cost of 5 4 runs. T h e scoring for the first three innings was very level , so much so that the totals only varied f r o m1 1 4to133. T h ebest cricket of the m a t c hw a sseen at the finish. Lancashire for the fourth innings had 132 to get to win and two hours and a quarter left for play. Withthe wicket still far from easy this was no easy task. Mr. MacLaren(58 not out) and Sugg (not out 64), however, becoming partners at 15 soon got the measure of the Notts. bowlers , and adding 101 in the last fifty minutes wonthe match in fine style with eight wickets to spare . Lancashire , 117 and 132 (two wickets ) ; total , 249. Mold(Lancashire ) Notts., 114 and 133 ; total , 247. O v e r s. 67.3 M a i d e n s. R u n s. 3 3 7 9 E X T R AM A T C H E S . L a n c a s h i r ev O x f o r dU n i v e r s i t y. Oxford, June4, 5, 6. W i c k e t s. 1 0 Owing to rain the match could not be begun till the second day, and even then play had several times to be interrupted . Lancashire , though without Sugg and Tinsley , did well to reach a total of 195. The foundation of the score was laid by Mr. McLaren(53) andAlbert Ward(46), whoput on 113 before they were parted . They had, of course , the best of the pitch , and the later batsmen on the drying wicket found the bowling of Mr. Bardswell very puzzling . Briggs was even more difficult for the University whenthey went in, and, though in the second innings Messrs . R. C. Palairet (70) and H. Leveson-Gower(34) played well , failed to save the innings by one run. Lancashire , 195. Oxford University , 61 and 133 ; total , 194. O v e r s. M a i d e n s. R u n s. 5 1 . 4 2 8 1 7 6 1 3 6 W i c k e t s. 1 2 6 Briggs (Lancashire ) Mr. G. R.Bardswell (1stinns .Lancashire ) 34 L a n c a s h i r ev D e r b y s h i r e . Derby, June11, 12, 13. Heavy rainfall had made the wicket so treacherous that the game was over quite early on the second morning . The bowlers had things so muchtheir own waythat the best score of the match was Sugg's 24 in Lancashire's second innings . Altogether , indeed , thirty -four wickets only realised an aggregate of 225, or an average of under four runs . Thebowling figures of Hulmeand Mold were notic- able even in a bowler's match. Asthe ground was at the finish it was a creditable performance for Derbyshire to make54, wanted to win, for the loss of only half the side. Goodwinand Thomasmadetheir first appearance for Lancashire in this match. Derbyshire , 59 and54 (five wickets ) ; total , 113. Lancashire , 35 and 77 ; total , 112. M o l d(Lancashire). Hulme(Derbyshire ). Davidson(Derbyshire) O v e r s . 3 2 . 3 2 2 . 3 3 6 . 4 M a i d e n s. R u n s. W i c k e t s. 1 6 3 0 9 9 3 2 7 1 9 4 9 7 L a n c a s h i r ev O x f o r dU n i v e r s i t y. Manchester, June21, 22, 23. This time Lancashire hadno easy task to win, and, indeed, Oxfordm a d ea most creditable fight for it although they were 74 to the bad on the first innings . Mr.