SPORT ANCIENT AND MODERN 



always been — to allude to such superb merit in 

 every department is superfluous — he was not 

 able to assist Lancashire nearly as much as was 

 desired, nor was his form on most occasions — 

 except in 1881 — commensurate with the 

 magnificent displays he gave for other teams. 

 Three other brothers at difiFerent periods attracted 

 attention by their ability, though their play 

 never approached his standard. 



The batting of Mr. A. N. Hornby and Barlow 

 needs no commendation, and they have passed 

 into the list of famous pairs who opened the 

 innings. It may be mentioned that in i88i 

 Mr. Hornby was responsible for almost a third 

 of the runs scored for Lancashire. He scored 

 1,531 runs with an average of 41, which was 

 far ahead of any other cricketer in the season, 

 his 188 against Derbyshire being also the largest 

 individual contribution. That summer the side 

 was never beaten, and six of the ten victories 

 were with an innings to spare. A match 

 between Cambridge University and the county, 

 arranged to open the Aigburth ground at 

 Liverpool, ended in a reverse by 7 wickets, 

 though Mr. A. G. Steel claimed 6 wickets for 

 22 against his old comrades. But apart from 

 Messrs. Hornby and A. G. Steel with Barlow, 

 the batting was not of great account. With more 

 experience Mr. R. Wood should have made a 

 really excellent run-getter. The Rev. V. F. Royle, 

 though at times a hard hitter, was really notable 

 as being the finest field in the world, and to-day 

 on better grounds his superior cannot be named. 

 Mr. F. Taylor, a steady bat, was somewhat 

 uncertain on first going in, and Robinson, a 

 punishing hitter, gave possibly the most useful 

 support. Pilling was the last and emphatically 

 the greatest of the P. brigade of wicket- 

 keepers, his predecessors being Finder, Pooley, 

 Plumb, and Phillips. The high standard of the 

 fielding of Lancashire at this epoch deserves a 

 cordial tribute. 



In 1882 there was doubt whether Lanca- 

 shire or Nottinghamshire was champion. In the 

 inter-county matches each only lost one match, 

 Nottinghamshire being defeated by Yorkshire by 

 8 wickets and Lancashire by Nottinghamshire 

 by 34 runs. Barlow carried his bat through 

 that last innings for 5, which took him two and 

 a half hours to accumulate. Crossland clean 

 bowled 5 for i run at the Oval amid a most 

 hostile demonstration, renewed on occasions to 

 a lesser degree in subsequent seasons. The 

 next year was notable, because the County 

 Palatine started with seven victories off the reel 

 and then failed. Mr. S. M. Crossfield, a 

 capital field and an attractive bat, first appeared, 

 but it was not until 1884 that Barlow played 

 his first three-figure innings. The other feature 

 was the refusal of Notts to meet Lancashire on 

 the ground that the latter employed bowlers 

 whose delivery was unfair. The controversy 



on this topic overshadowed 1885, but Briggs 

 then developed into the wonderful slow bowler 

 he showed himself until the tragic end of his 

 career. He was a cricketer full of animation, 

 cleverness, and enthusiasm, a magnificent cover- 

 point and a lively bat. 



It was not until 1888 that Lancashire again 

 attained second place. F. H. Sugg, a powerful 

 hitter, and Mr. J. Eccles, a sound batsman, both 

 came into the side, and only three defeats, from 

 Surrey, Notts, and Yorkshire, were recorded, 

 but all these three were with an innings to spare. 

 Again in 1889 there were brilliant performances 

 by that destructive fast bowler Arthur Mold, 

 while the head of the batting was taken by Albert 

 Ward in his first season under qualification. 

 Possessing great judgement, and playing with 

 praiseworthy care. Ward remained for years one 

 of the best bats in the county. The side, 

 which was most consistent in 1890, under- 

 went further transformation, as ill-health caused 

 Pilling to give up the gloves to Mr. A. T. 

 Kemble, while in August Mr. A. C. McLaren 

 obtained his first trial. Gifted with confidence 

 and judgement Mr. McLaren proved in after 

 years alike brilliant and judicious, whilst in 

 the field he has hardly had a superior. Mention 

 must be made of the match with Sussex in which, 

 after scoring 246 for two wickets, Lancashire 

 twice dismissed Sussex for an aggregate of 59, 

 Briggs and Watson being the bowlers. 



Mold and Briggs divided 3 1 5 of the 453 wickets 

 captured in 189 1. Though the batting was 

 uncertain, runs were generally obtained, so that 

 against the four defeats could be set not only 

 eight victories but also eight additional successes 

 in the eight extraneous fixtures. Albert Ward 

 finished in fine form, Mr. S. M. Crossfield 

 showed spirited cricket, and Mr. A. T. Kemble 

 kept wicket successfully. The stern logic of facts 

 disproved the agreeable theory that on paper the 

 side of 1892 was considerably stronger. The 

 fact that Mr. Hornby had handed over the 

 captaincy to Mr. Crossfield had little to do with 

 the decline, for the new captain was keen 

 as well as in capital run-getting vein. Mr. 

 McLaren, Ward, and Sugg all seemed out of 

 form, but Smith by watchful cricket rendered 

 genuine service, and Baker showed himself one 

 of the most improved bats in the county. Ward 

 batted for five hours for 180 in the match 

 against Yorkshire, when Briggs took only two 

 and a half hours to hit up 115. With the ball 

 Watson did wonders considering his advancing 

 years. 



In 1893 Lancashire again took second place, 

 though there was not much superiority over the 

 achievements of both Middlesex and Kent, the 

 actual results showing nine victories against seven 

 defeats. Opponents always kept wondering 

 what would happen if either Briggs or Mold 

 should be disabled, but both stuck to their work 



491 



