James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Annaul 1897

T H EC O U N T I E SIN 1 8 9 6. 1 1 1 to Mr. E. Rowley (65), who played equally good cricket in the second innings for his 61. There were nine double figures in the second innings , including Ward's 66 and Paul's 60. The pitch was at its worst when Warwickshire went in first , and though the first two batsmen made 23 the total only reached 49. The game was then practically lost , and though Lilley played fine cricket in the second innings for 54 the collective result was only 143. Lancashire won by 293 runs . Lancashire , 168 and 317 ; total , 485. Warwickshire , 49 and 143 ; total , 192 . Briggs (Lancashire ) Hallam(Lancashire ) ... Overs. Maidens. R u n s. Wickets. 2 7 2 7 1 4 1 5 4 9 3 6 8 6 (5) Lancashire v. Surrey. Manchester, June 18 and19. Whatluck there was favoured Lancashire , and, as it happened , in going in second they had all the best of it. The most interesting batting of the match was at the commencement of Surrey's second innings , when Abel (56) and Brockwell (53) put on 107 for the first wicket . But the Surrey tail failed utterly , and in the two innings the last five batsmen only made 52. The later wickets of Lancashire's first innings did even worse , the last six adding but 18. A t the finish Lancashire had 83 to get to win, and Richardson bowled so well that half the side were out for 35. Baker, who had played capital cricket in the first innings , however , found a useful partner at the crisis in Briggs , and they won the match for Lancashire with three wickets to spare . Lancashire , 157 and 86 (7 wickets ) ; total , 243. Surrey , 78 and 161; total , 239 . Mold(Lancashire ) O v e r s. M a i d e n s. 4 6 . 2 1 8 (6) Lancashirev. Somersetshire. Taunton, June 22 and23. R u n s. W i c k e t s. 1 0 1 1 2 Somersetshire lost any outside chance they might ever have had by getting out first on a good wicket for 149. In the second innings they did even worse , and indeed Messrs . Woods(41 each time) and Lionel Palairet (26 and 30) alone got over 20 in either innings . Ward's 77 was the best feature of Lancashire's batting , although some praise was also due to the Colt I'Anson for a useful score of 37 not out towards the end of the first innings . Lanca- shire wonby ten wickets . Lancashire , 229 and 33 (no wicket ) ; total , 262 . Somersetshire , 149 and 110 ; total , 259 . (7) Lancashire v. Middlesex. Manchester , June 29, 30 and July 1. Thoughrain fell heavily during the first night, the scoring was above the average. Thelowest of the three completed innings was 193, and Middlesex certainly did a good performance in getting 221 in the fourth innings for the loss of only six wickets . The best cricket of the earlier part of the game was by Messrs . Stoddart (75) and Hayman(63) at the commencementof the first innings of Middlesex. It was Mr. Stoddart's match altogether , as his second score of 109 was even better . Baker, who was of great use to Lancashire in the early matches , was again principal scorer with 94 and 12. Middlesex w o nby four wickets . Middlesex, 223 and 221 (6 wickets ) ;; total , 444. Lancashire , 250 and 193 ; total , 443 .