James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Annual 1895

7 8 LILLYWHITE'S CRICKETERS' ANNUAL. Batting a second time, Gloucestershire fared even worse than before . Walter Hearne on an unplayable wicket again bowled finely , taking seven wickets for 24 runs , and the issue was soon decided . Kent wonby an innings and 101 runs . Kent, 286. Gloucestershire , 115 and70; total , 185. W . Hearne(Kent). O v e r. 3 3 . 2 Maidens. R u n s. 9 (6) Gloucestershirev. Lancashire. Bristol . July 19, 20, and 21 . 6 1 W i c k e t s. 1 3 There was little in the earlier play to indicate the result . Lancashire's innings , which realised 168, was only remarkable for the stand of Mr. McLarenandW a r d for the first wicket (40 runs ), and that of Briggs and Baker for the sixth , which produced49 runs. W h e nGloucestershire's turn came to bat, W . G. set his side a good example, but after his dismissal for 49 the venture quickly closed for 113. With a useful lead of 55 runs , Lancashire began a second innings that did not terminate until 280 had been scored . Mr. Mc. Laren (68) and Ward(109 ) again made a long stand for the first wicket , while subsequently Frank Sugg and Smith lent great assistance . Wanting 336 to win, Gloucestershire failed utterly before the bowling of Mold and Briggs , and were disposed of for only 92. Lancashire w o nby243runs. Lancashire , 168and280 ; total , 448. Gloucestershire , 113 and 92 ; total , 205. M o l d(Lancashire) O v e r s. 61.3 (7) Gloucestershirev. M a i d e n s. 2 8 R u n s. W i c k e t s. 9 1 1 2 Y o r k s h i r e . Leeds, July 23 and24. In this , a bowler's match, in which forty wickets fell for 376 runs , the power- ful Yorkshire eleven w o nby only a narrow margin. Thehomeshire , w h owent in first weredisposed of for 140, which, as it proved, was the highest innings of the game. Though Gloucestershire began in promising fashion , W. G. scoring 41 and Mr. Ferris 40, the rest of the side found Peel and Mr. Jackson unplayable , and after all , the innings terminated for 108. Yorkshire's second essay was merely a procession till the fall of the ninth wicket , when the total was only 19. Hirst andHunterthen becameassociated , and carried the score to 61 before the first- namedwas dismissed . Though the task set Gloucestershire was not a hopeless one , Wainwright's bowling proved so deadly that in the final stage the visitors could only total 67. Yorkshire won by 26 runs . Yorkshire , 140 and 61 ; total , 201. Gloucestershire , 108 and67 ; total, 175. O v e r s. Wainwright(2nd inns . Gloucester .) 27.4 47.4 Roberts(Gloucestershire) M a i d e n s. R u n s. 1 4 3 0 (8) Gloucestershirev. N o t t s. Nottingham, 26, 27 a n d28. 3 4 5 9 W i c k e t s. 7 1 0 ThoughGloucestershire madean auspicious commencement, hey failed to reach a big total . Indeed , of the 171 which was the outcome of the first innings W. G. (61), Mr. Ferris (28), Mr. H. H. Francis (not out 27) ' and Board (21 ) were responsible for 137. Flowers got rid of five batsmen at a cost of 43 runs . Notts. wholost three of their best wickets for 67, afterwards showed to great advantage . Flowers followed up his excellent bowling with a score of 102, and with useful assistance from Daft, Mr. J. S. Robinson with 43, and later on a freely -hit 37 not out from Baguley, 306 was registered as the total . Gloucestershire on going in again gave little trouble . Except for Capt. Luard, who was still in at the finish with 47 to his credit , the side could do little against the bowling of the colt Handford, w h oobtained five wickets for 25 runs. Notts w o nb y an innings and 4 4runs. Notts., 306. Gloucestershire , 171 and 91 ; total , 262.