THE FIRST INTERCOLONIAL CRICKET MATCH.

Otago Witness, Issue 1891, 17 February 1888, Page 27

THE FIRST INTERCOLONIAL CRICKET MATCH.

An Account of the First Intercolonial Cricket Match, Victoria v. New South Wales, Played in Melbourne in March 1856, by One of the Players of New South Wales. (Prom the Sydney Mall,) Having been one of the representatives of New South Wales in the match above referred to, I shall esteem it a favour if you will kindly allow me space in your valuable journal to lay before your readers, I think, some interesting facts previous to and during the playing of sajd match, and also what subsequently took place in reference thereto. As far as ray memory serves me, a challenge was inserted in some of the Melbourne papers, to the effect that eleven of Victoria would play an equal number of cricketers of New South Wales for a certain sum of money, to be named ; the match to he played in Melbourne. The challenge, however, lapsed for some time. At last a. Mr T. Bennett (now in Sydney) happened at the time to be in Melbourne, and meeting some gentlemen connected with cricket in that city, the matter was talked over, and he stated that h.e would find an eleven in New South Wales to play a similar number of Victorians, which was agreed to. It was also arranged that the return match should take place in Sydney, each party to pay its own expenses. Hence the first intercolonial cricket match between the two colonies. I may state at the time jihere was a difficulty in getting the necessary funds to send an eleven from Sydney to Melbourne. However, a subscription-list was opened for the purpose of defraying the expenses of our men going to and returning from Melbourne. Of course, at that time the fares were very much higher than they are now— l think, nearly double. A few days before leaving for Melbourne, our secretary, the late Mr R. Driver, jun., called a meeting of the players, and I remember so well bis stating that the actual amount of subscrintjjpn received was about £60 less than the amount required for the purpose. Our secretary, goqdrhearted fellow as hewas,Baid: "Gentlemen, I have been promised a number of subscriptions, but I have not had time to collect some ; but I believe it is all right, and here is the amount," patting his' hand into his pocket and pulling out a bag of sovereigns containing the sum required to make up the deficiency. I may also state that several of our men paid their own passages and expenses, and that there was some difficulty in getting the full number of men required. Several who had been chosen almost at the last moment could not go ; the result was your humble servant and another volunteered their services, and so filled up the gap. Wo left Sydney on Wednesday, 19th March 1856, by s.s. Telegraph, Captain Gilmore, now deceased. Among the passengers were two distinguished gentlemen— viz., Mr Charles Gavan Duffy (now Sir Charles), formerly Speaker of the Legislative Assembly, Victoria, and the late Mr T. S. Mort. As far as I can recollect, the passage occupied 48 hours from Sydney Heads to Port Phillip Head". We arrived in Melbourne on a Good Friday, about 5 p.m. It being a holiday, the business places were all closed, and the buildings being built of dark (basalt) stone gave the place a very sombre and gloomy look. On Saturday moining a deputation of Melbourne cricketers waited on us to congratulate us on our safe arrival, and expressed their surprise at our having made such a quick passage, and stated it was their intention to have been at the wharf and to have given us a most cordial reception, but that we had arrived sooner than they expeoted. After our arrival, unfortunately for us, the first two or three days were wet; but as soon as the weather was fine enough, the Emerald HUJ

ground having been kindly placed at our dis. posal, we had several hours' practice there, as also at what was then called the Richmond Paddock— the cricket ground now— and if; was at this place where the match referred to was played. In going to the Emerald Hill cricket ground we had to cross the Yarra river in a kind of punt, for which a charge of Id each was made. At that time there were very few houses at Emerald Hill. I omitted to state that when we left Sydney we hed only 10 men ; the eleventh was a Mr J. Rutter, of Parramatra, who was to follow us in the next steamer, which was to arrive in Melbourne on the Tuesday before the match took place, Wednesday being j the day fixed for the match. I need scarcely say on the Tuesday morning on going down to the wharf how disappointed we were to find he ! had not arrived — he was one of our principal I bowlers. To us, of course, the loss was very great, and we were all in tho " dumps." So after consultation amongst ourselves, it was decided that our secretary, the late Mr R. Driver, jun., who was our chosen umpire, should fill the vacancy, and as there was a gentleman, a Mr Bradshaw, in Melbourne, not lon^ from Sydney, he was communicated with and courteously consented to act as our umpire. In conversation with the other umpire, Mr C. F. Cameron, he (Mr Bradshaw) raised a rather curious point of cricket. It was this: where more than two runs are made, and one short called out by the umpire, instead of one being short there must be two short, because if the first one was short the return must also bo short. However, it was arranged between them to follow the old practice as laid down in the laws of cricket. At the time it was a thing unprecedented in the annals of cricket to go 450 miles to play a game of cricket, and was also the idea of making a charge for witnessing the game. The Melbourne people were the first to make a charge for admission, aud we followed suit. A piece of ground had been previously and specially made for the match to be played on, but on the morning of the match, when we came to examine the ground, we found it was not fit to play on, the ground being too new and not properly consolidated ; so we had to pitch tue wickets close by the newly-made ground. Just before the match commenced a misunderstanding occurred, and I remember Mr Driver coming to myself and two others of the players and saying that the umpires had tossed aud we had lost the toss, and our opponents had decided on sending us ro the wickets. I remonstrated with him (being our secretary), and said there is an old law of cricket which says " that parties leaving home have the option of going in first or not," and I for one declined to play. But our opponents argued that the rule referred to had become obsolete, and that it was customary for the umpires to toss ; but as several of our players, including myself, decided to leave the ground and not play, unleas we were allowed the privilege, which we maintained as visitors we had a right to, our opponents gave way, and we sent them in first. To my mind, having gained this point was one of the principal causes of our winning the match. I found, on looking through the Sydney Mail, that the Marylebone Club (England) proposed to reintroduce the old rule referred to. I think very properly so, in consequence of visitors leaving home being placed at a great disadvantage. In passing, I may say that the old custom had always beeu adhered to in all previous matches played amongst ourselves. It was the usual practice with us, whoever won the toss, to send their opponents in first, as it was always considered a decided advantage in this way : the party winning the toss and going in last at the wickets knows the exact number of runs to get to win, and so manipulates and regulates the sending in of the batsmen accordingly. Of course the practice of late is the reverse ; now, and for many years previously, it is generally considered that the party going in first at the wickets, a3 a rule, has the best of the ground for batting purposes. As regards the actual merits of the game, there is no doubt we had to compete against some really first-class players, and, taking man for man, our opponents, I think, were superior. Their bowling was first-class. It was no joke playing against such bowlers as Elliot, Coulstock, and Lowe — the latter from Geelong. The small number of runs obtained by us, and the great number of maiden overn, prove the bowling to have been excellent, although the bowling became loose at the latter portion of the first innings. Elliot was a very fast round-arm bowler, splendid length, with break. Coulstock, not quite so fast, round arm, good length, and straight on the wicket. Lowe was of a high delivery, round arm, capital length, and rose quickly ; a most difficult bowler to play. Morris, round arm, apparently good style, but out of practice. The bowlers on our side were : M'Kone, a first-class fast underhand, good length, with a twist or break on the ball— a very difficult bowler to play ; Gilbert, round arm, medium pace, with a break, good length ; Murray, fast underhand, straight, no break, but dead on the wicket. There was some very good batting on both sides, but of the two I think our batting was the better, considering the superior bowling wo had to contend with. I remember M'Kone and Tunks were in nearly half an hour before either of them got a run. The latter was clean bowled without adding to the score. He was a very steady and careful ban, as was also M'Kone, but in addition could hit very hard. After the first clay's play had concluded, I suggested to one of our players the advisability — seeing that our opponents could not play M'Kone's underhand bowling, but were more at home with Gilbert's (our captain) round arm— of putting on the underhand bowlers the second day. After consultation amongst ourselves, it was decided to put on two underhand bowlers, M'Kone and Murray. The result was that our opponents only got 28 runs in their second innings, leaving us only 16 runs to get to win the match ; but our wipkets fell so rapidly j in our second innings, owing to their having adopted a similar line of tactics as ourselves, by a change in the bowling, and bowling being so good, that it was with the greatest difficulty we got the required number of runs. However, we won the match by three wickets. Before the [ umpires left the ground we were asked by some gentlemen who had the management to continue the match, as the people had paid for admission, and would most likely wish to see the game continued through. Our reply was that, as we had won the match, we would follow the old rule of crioket and cease playing, which was done accordingly. The following are the names of players, umpires, and scorers on both sides, who took part in the match referred to : — New South Wales : R. Murray,* W. Tunks, J. S. Bradridge,= G. Gilbert, H.; Billiard, J. M'Kone * R. Vaughan,* E. Sadler, J. Beal, R. Driver ,* G. Howell. Victoria: D. M. Sargent, J. Mather, R. Coulstock, T. Morres, Captain Hotham, C. Cumberland, W. Philpott, F. Lowe, P. Kingston, A. Lewis, G. Elliot. Umpires : For Victoria, Mr C. F. Cameron ; for New South Wales, Mr J. B. Bradshaw. Scorers : For Victoria, Mr H. Biers ; for New South Wales, Mr F. Wyatt. Of the players of New South Wales those marked with an asterisk opposite to their names are deceased. Not knowing who are deceased on the Victorian side, I am unable to mark off their namee» but some time ago I saw in the Sydney Mail that Ooulstock and Elliot were dead, On the Saturday nighfc shortly before

our leaving Melbourne a complimentary dinner was got up by natives and old denizens of Sydney then residing in Victoria, for the purpose of testifying their respect for the- Old Country through the medium of its then representatives (New South Wales Eleven). Mr Dry'sdale occupied the chair, and Mr Stubbs filled the vice-chair, both the chairman and vice* chairman being natives of Sydney.