James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Annual 1898

8 2 L I L L Y W H I T E ' SC R I C K E T E R S' A N N U A L. (9) Gloucestershire v. Lancashire. Liverpool, July 26, 27 and 28. Arepetition of the first matchbetweenthe Counties, at least so far as the result was concerned . In going in first Lancashire had all the best of the luck. O na slow but easy wicket, with frequent interruptions from rain , they made 153 for the loss of two wickets, of whichMr. M a c L a r e ncontributed 68before play ended. O n the second morning Albert Wardincreased his score to 87, and with useful innings by Smith (24),Briggs (31), and Hallam (27 not out ), the total eventually reached 312. Thanksto Messrs . W. G. Grace and Rice, each ofw h o m ade47, Gloucestershire had 95 up for the loss of one batsman. Thencamea rot , and Cuttell and Briggs bowled with such remarkable effect that only 43 were added by the nine remaining wickets . Following on in a minority of 174, and with the ground still favouring the bowlers , Gloucester- shire only fared a little better when they went in again . W. G. (37), C. L. Townsend(29), and Jessop (49) were the principal run-getters . Jessop got 49 out of 59 in twenty-five minutes . Lancashire wonby ten wickets . Lanca- shire , 312 and 14(no wicket) ; total , 326. Gloucestershire , 138 and 186 ; total , 324 . Briggs (Lancashire ) Overs. Maidens. R u n s. Wickets. 6 0 9 2 2 4 (10) Gloucestershire v. Yorkshire. Harrogate , July 29, 30 and 31 . 1 1 A ninteresting match, terminating rather unexpectedly in a victory for Gloucestershire , hardly expected even towards the finish . Mr. Jessop had a good deal to do with the result , as he not only scored 101 out of 118 while he wasat the wickets , in Gloucestershire's first innings , but besides got rid of nine Yorkshire batsmen. Besides Mr. Jessop Mr. C. L. Townsend(109 and 1) and Board(43 and 69) scored well for Gloucestershire . W.G., closing his second innings , left Yorkshire with 316 to win, and four hours and a quarter in which to get them. Brown, who had made80 in the first innings , wasagain in his best form, and Denton (55), Hirst (35), and Mr. C. E. M. Wilson (22), played so well that a draw seemed to be certain . A timely piece of bowling by Mr. W . S. A. Brown, whotook four wickets for 17 runs, however, turned the scale entirely in favour of the other side , with the result that Gloucestershire wonby 140 runs. Gloucestershire , 370 and 271 (9 wickets , innings declared ) ; total , 641. Yorkshire , 276 and 225 ; total , 501 . (11) Gloucestershire v. Sussex. Bristol , Aug. 2, 3 and 4. A run-getting match, with little or no chance of a definite finish at any period . The veterans , W. G. Grace and W. L. Murdoch, were both in rare form. The former had only one innings , to the tune of 116, while Murdoch (130and53) had two knocks , with in the result an aggregate of 183. Next to these the most successful batsmen were Parris (18 and 70) and Marlow(59 and 27), both of Sussex . Only three innings were completed , and as the gamewas left Gloucestershirewouldhave wanted311 to win with all their wickets in hand. Sussex, 367 and 249 ; total , 616. Gloucestershire , 306. (12) Gloucestershire v. Middlesex. Bristol , Aug. 3, 4 and5. It wasparticularly unfortunate ,in view of the fact that the matchwas for the benefit of the Gloucestershire bowler, F. G. Roberts, that rain should have spoiled the gameso completely . Middlesex , though without both Messrs. Stoddart and McGregor, did fairly well , as the wicket was at the outset , to make175. For this total they were mainly indebted to Mr. H. B. Hayman, who was at his best , scoring 84 each time . In the second innings Messrs . H a y m a nand Warnerput on 121 for the first wicket , but the later batsmen did so little that in the end the total was only 218 for nine wickets . Gloucester