James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Annual 1895

T H EM A R Y L E B O N EC L U BIN 1894. 5 5 (3) M . C . C .a n dG r o u n dv. L a n c a s h i r e . Lord's, M a y10 and11. Alittle over two hours and a quarter formed the extent of the three days cricket , thanks to the incessant rain . Fourteen runs to Lancashire without the loss of a wicket represented the first day's play . O nthe second , two hours were occupied over the completion of the Countyinnings . Inthe other ten minutes Mr. DeTrafford and Alec Hearne scored 12, and as no play was possible on the second afternoon or the third day, only ten wickets fell in the match. J. T. Hearne very nearly effected the feat of taking all Lancashire's wickets . H e took all but one, which fell to Martin. A. Ward(23) and Mr. W. H. Houldsworth (20) made morethan one-half of Lancashire's total . Lancashire , 77 ; M.C.C. and Ground, 1 2for n owicket. J. T. Hearne(M.C.C.) .. O v e r s. M a i d e n s. R u n s. W i c k e t s. 9 2 8 - 3 1 4 4 3 (4) M.C.C.a n dG r o u n dv. D e r b y s h i r e . Lord's , M a y17 and18. Acreditable victory for Derbyshire . Though with four good bowlers in J. T. Hearne, Rawlin, Mead, and Flowers , M.C.C. had only a weak batting side , hence their failure . Still , the Derbyshire eleven were seen to great advantage at all points . All the six first batsmen got double figures , and Chatterton did well bothtimes, scoring 68 for once out. M.C.C.'s first innings only lasted an hour and twenty minutes , and though they madea better show in the second it was chiefly due to Barnes, whoplayed extremely good cricket for his 58. Derbyshire hadthe best of the wicket for the fourth innings and their success , with only 64 to win, was never in doubt. Derbyshire wonby seven wickets . Derbyshire , 164 and 64 (three wickets ) ; total , 231. M.C.C. 61 and169 ; total , 230. (5) M.C.C.a n dG r o u n dv. K e n t. Lord's , M a y21 and 22. TheKenteleven , certainly not the best available , were out-played at all points and the result was never in doubt. A tthe outset Mr. J. R. MasonandAlec Hearne put on 40 runs, but the nine later batsmen could only account for 23 betweenthem. They failed even more completely in the second innings before the bowling of Pougher and J. T. Hearne, and Messrs . Weigall , Marchant, and Taylor-Jones were responsible for 45 of their total of 62. O n the other side Mr. Stoddart and Lord Hawketook the sting out of Kent's bowling at the very outset . In an hour and a quarter they scored 131 for the first wicket of M.C.C. , or twomore than the double total of Kent. Pougher and J. T. Hearne bowled throughout both innings of Kent. M.C.C. won by an innings and 132 runs . M.C.C. and Ground, 261; Kent, 67 and62 ; total , 129. J. T. Hearne(M.C.C.) Overs. Maidens. 3 8 1 5 R u n s. W i c k e t s. 6 6 1 4 (6) M.C.C. a n dG r o u n dv. C a m b r i d g eUniversity. Cambridge, M a y24, 25 and26. Thoughwith only a fair side M.C.C. had all the best of the match throughout . T h eCambridge batting was uneven, particularly in the first innings , which was only relieved by a finely hit 88 by Mr. T. N. Perkins , the result of an hour and a half's cricket . Messrs . J. Douglas and F. Mitchell put on 61 in forty minutes for the first wicket in the second , and they accounted for 91 of the total of 229. The stand of Mr. W. G. Grace (139) and Chatterton (113) for the second wicket wasthe feature of M.C.C.'s batting . They put on 256 in about four hours and a quarter , and without achance . M.C.C. won by eight wickets . M.C.C. and Ground , 390 and 29 (two wickets ) ; total , 419. Cambridge University , 189 and 229 ; total, 418.