James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Annual 1899

7 2 L I L L YW H I T E ' SC R I C K E T E R S' A N N U A L. m e n out. The following morning 63 were added for the loss of two morewickets , and only four runs were still wanting to win. Thenthree bats- m e nfell , andRoberts, the last m a n, c a m ein with one run to tie . This he got, andthen G. L. Jessop won a splendid match for Gloucestershire with only onewicket in hand. C. J. Kortright very nearly wonthe match for Essex byhis bowling at the finish . H e took seven of the nine wickets at cost of 57 runs . Gloucestershire , 231 and 151 (9 wickets ) ; total , 382. Essex, 128 and 250; total , 378. (9) Essexv Lancashire. Manchester , July 14, 15 and 16 . Avery fine victory for Essex, particularly as they had had all the worst of the first innings . Lancashire , whowent in first , had at one time 200 up with only two wickets down. Sugg (104) and Tyldesley (85) between them scored 189, but theirs were the only successes , as the other nine batsmen in all scored 58 between them. Russell's wicket -keeping accounted for a good deal of their failures . H e caught four and stumped two batsmen. Essex looked like having to follow on, but a useful stand by C. McGaheyand Meadaverted this . In Lancashire's second innings the tail once more failed badly with the one exception of Cuttell . Again Sugg(70) and Tyldesley (61) gave the Essex bowlers a lot of trouble . C. R. Hartley's 61 at the start was even of greater use . With 336 to win Essex had apparently little or no chance. A sit was, C. McGahey (145), P. Perrin (61), H. G. Owen (44), and Carpenter (34) made success a certainty , and Essex wona grand victory with four wickets to spare . In the match1,012 runs were scored for 36 wickets . Essex, 169 and 339 (6 wickets ) ; total , 508. Lancashire , 254 and 250; total , 504. (10) Essexv. Kent. Leyton , July 21, 22 and 23 . Whatcricket there was found the batsmen at a great advantage . The earlier batsmen of Kent did not appear to be troubled by the Essex bowling . C. J. Burnup(131) and J. R. Mason(77) put on 117 for the second wicket in an hour and a half . Thencame a collapse , and so complete that the last eight batsmenonly got 48 between them. W h e nrain stopped play on the second dayearly Essexhad scored 137 for three wickets . This the rest increased to 334, P. Perrin carrying out his bat for 106, the result of six hours and a half batting . There was no chance of finishing the match when Kent went in a second time 54 to the bad. It was another triumph for C. J. Burnup (62 not out) and J. R. Mason(not out 33), and they were still in at the finish with 120 up for one wicket . Kent, 280 and 120 (1 wicket ) ; total , 400. Essex, 334 . (11) Essexv. Hampshire. Leyton, July 25, 26 and27. A tthe outset, though Soar and Webbwere soon disposed of, Hampshire seemedin for a big score . A. J. L. Hill (104) and Major Poore (107) put on 183 for the second wicket . There their successes stopped , as except Capt. Quinton, who carried out his bat for 42, no one got over 17 runs. O nthe other hand, all the Essex batsmen got double figures except Mead, and h e madenine. Thestand of McGahey(73) and A. J. Turner (69) fairly took the edge off the Hampshirebowling . Butthe best cricket on the side was shown byRussell . H ehit vigorously from the first , andhis 122 was, without a doubt, the best innings he has ever played . Hampshire's stand in the second innings wascertainly disappointing . The bowling of F. G. Bull and Mead, indeed , provedtoo muchfor them, and E. I. M. Barrett's 40 not out was the only redeem- ing feature of the later batting . Essex wonby nine wickets . Essex, 425 and 14(1 wicket ) ; total , 439. Hampshire, 296 and 139 ; total , 435 . M e a d(Essex) O v e r s. M a i d e n s. 5 9 2 2 R u n s. 1 6 1 Wickets. 1 2