James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Annual 1899

9 6 L I L L YW H I T E ' SC R I C K E T E R SA N N U A L. (4) Lancashirev. Surrey. Manchester, June 16, 17 and18. Hayward was unable to play for Surrey , but as it happened he was not really wanted. Fromthe first the gameproved a complete triumph for the bat. Albert Ward(42) and C. R. Hartley (88) started with 102 for Lanca- shire's first wicket , the second added 91 , the third 43 runs. Fortunately for Surrey the tail generally did little , excepting W. B. Stoddart (39) and Briggs (42 not out). Surrey in their turn did even better . The fielding on both sides was faulty , or Surrey , like Lancashire , wouldnot have done so well. A sit was, Surrey's success wasdue mainlyto Abel (148) and Holland (126), w h oput on 237 for the second wicket. Holland was batting three hours anda quarter , Abel five hours and a quarter . Finally , on the third morning, rain stopped play altogether . For once Lockwood and Richardson failed , and Brockwell came out with the best bowling figures (6 for 82) for Surrey . O n the other side , too , Mold, Cuttell , and Briggs met with little success , and W . B. Stoddart (5 for 63) did most with the ball. At the finish , Surrey were 15 on with two wickets still in hand. Surrey, 369 (8 wickets ) ; Lancashire , 354. (5) Lancashirev. Somersetshire. Taunton, June20, 21 and 22. The Lancashire Elevenhad scored heavily at Taunton before , and once againcame off well . In the first innings they only did moderately well , considering the quality of the opposite bowling , and Tyldesley's 90 was the only score of any particular note . Still , their total was 81 more than could be managed by Somersetshire , who were mainly indebted to L. C. H. Palairet's 59 for their moderate aggregate of 135. W h e nLancashire went in a second time the Somersetshire m e nhad a busy time of it. Albert W a r dscored 135 in his most approved style . Butthe best cricket to watch was that of F. H. Sugg, whohit with morethan his usual vigour. His 169 only occupied three hours. Somerset at the end had 546 to get to win. Theironly hope, then, was a draw. Losing L. C. H. Palairet for a single spoiled any chance they might have had of that . Still , their cricket was bright , particularly that of S. M. J. Woods, who got his 85 in fifty minutes. Lancashire w o nby 260 runs. Inthe match 1,098 runs were scored for 40 wickets . Lancashire , 216 and 458 ; total , 674. Somerset- shire, 135 and 279 ; total , 414. Baker(1st . inns . Somerset) Overs, 2 0 . 1 M a i d e n s . R u n s. W i c k e t s. 8 (6) Lancashirev. Middlesex. Manchester, June27, 28 and29. 3 6 5 In going in first Lancashire got an advantage which practically won them the match. Rain, which prevented a commencement till after luncheon, madethe wicket easy for themat the outset , and at the end of the first day they had scored 202 with only three batsmen out. For this they had mainly to thank A. Ward(53) and Tyldesley (96). Onthe second morning run-getting was a very different matter , and J. T. Hearne bowled withsuch success that the seven outstanding wickets only added 26. For