James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Companion 1885

set them to win and the wicket was faster and better than at any pre- vious period of the match They failed utterly against Peate, however, the famous slow bow ler taking 6 wickets at a cost of only 13 runs. The Yorkshire team played up very finely, and deserved every compliment that could be paid them The best scorers for the winners were: anlV 9’ Grimshaw 8 and 33, Peel 34 and 0, Hall 13 and 18, Llyett 2.} and 7, and Peate 5 and 29. For Gloucestershire— not strongly represented—Mr. Gilbert made 40 and 8 Mr E M Grace d 19 Hay 26, Gloucester. 2nd Inns. 66 59 Total. 237 238 28and 0, and Gregg 17 an . Gloucestershire ^** 1 7 1 *' Sussex 179 * Sussex won by 7 wickets. The match was a capital one on the first innings, but at the second attempt the Gloucestershire men seemed utterly Unable to play Jesse Hide’s bowling. As the wicket was in capital order, there was no excuse for such a poor total as 66. Jesse Hide, however, bowled exceedingly well, sending down 26 overs, 16 maidens, for 22 runs and 7 wickets. Mr.McCormick’s batting was one of the features of the game. Included in his brilliant innings of 73 were two drives out of the ground for six each, and ten fours. His best supporter was Humphreys, with 41,. Though he was suffering from a had hand, Mr. AV. G. Grace was the top scorer for Gloucestershire,making 56 (notout)and 1. Mr. Gilbert scored 34 and 17. As Jesse Hide took 5 wickets for 37 runs in Gloucestershire’s first innings, his analysis for the whole match showed 12 wickets for 59 runs. June 12.—Lord’s.—Gloucestershire v. Middlesex .—(See Middlesex Review.) . /i. • June 16.—Oval.—Gloucestershire tv Surrey .—(See Surrey Review.) •Gloucestershire r. Sussex.—( See Sussex Review.) 1st Inns. 2nd Inns. Total. Gloucestershire ^ 201 79 280 Not t s ' ’ 204j " 77 *281 Notts won by 6 wickets. June 19. ■Brighton. July 14, Gloucester. As in tbe match against Sussex on the same ground, the Gloucester­ shire men started well but failed in their second innings.^ borne fine allround cricket was shown on both sides, but the individual scores were not very large. Scotton batted best for the victorious side, making 39 and 15 foot out). The wicket was difficult on the third day, and his 15 runs took him two hours to obtain. Selby made 28 and 20 (not out), G u n n 2 5 and 18 and Attewell 34. Painter 58 and 14, Mr. W. G. Grace 47 and 20 Mr H V Page 27 and 11, and Mr. Brain 25 and 5, were the m o trS f i i l 'G lo u c e s te r sh ir e batsmen. In tbe second innings of the home county, Alfred Shaw accomplished a very fine performance, • « » * _ « i a p ^ n o *• i ^ ■Manchester July 24 ---ljflUUUe»WiaiAiJ.O V. (S I Bradford.— Gloucestershire v. Yorkshire.— Review.) July 28. Review.) July 31.- Aug. 7.- Review.) -Nottingham —-Gloucestershire v. Notts —(See Notts Review.) •Clifton._'Gloucestershire tv Australians—(See Australian ■ %, b i I rt • f fI ‘