James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Companion 1885

30 A few words about Scotch Cricket may prove interesting to some our readers. It would seem that there are certain definite rules f deciding the question of supremacy amoDg the school teams across t}* border, and these rules certainly possess the Scotch attribute of exactf tude. But it would appear—with all humility be it said—that the results are not always very satisfactory,for from the data which have reached us, we should certainly not assign the first position to B laiii L odge . Their masters and professionals form so important a part of their regular team, that, according to our ideas, they would be excluded from the competition. One of their performances is, however, worthy of mention. Against Campsie Glen they put together the vast total of 557 runs for 5 wickets, to which amount H olms contributed 303, not out. B ettes had an eleven of more than ordinary merit, while, as usual the L- oretto team was very fair, though there did not seem to have been in it any stars who ai*e likely to shine brightly in the immediate future. The return of M c L achlan to his old school will, we are sure, be hailed with delight by all true supporters of Loretto cricket. As some form of summary, however brief, is generally considered to be a necessary adjunct to every article, we may state that, after a careful consideration of the doings of the various schools, our verdict is, that “ mediocrity” was stamped on the Public School Cricket of the season. As we have said before, E ashleigu and C ochrane were probably the best men of the year, and after these, either for performances or promise, we should place L ucas & P iiilipson (Eton), B uxton (Harrow), J ones and N iciiolls (Winchester), S ale and C heales (Marlborough), C oles (Rugby), M artineau (Uppingham), L-. & E. F ord (Repton), H eath (Cheltenham), N epean (Sherborne), J ohnston (Clifton), V incent (Charterhouse) and the two Tonbridge bowlers. »