The Early Years: Hatfield Cricket Club in the Nineteenth Century

147PRESIDENT— Lord Cranborne, M.P. VICE-PRESIDENTS— CAPTAIN— A. R. Dagg, Esq. COMMITTEE— HON. SEC— Mr. F. J. Hankin MATCHES FOR 1886 To Commence at 11 o’clockP. Collinson, Esq, Dr. Burke. G. Curtiss, Esq. W. Church, Esq. Lt.-Col. Daniell. L. Drage, Esq. C. V. R. Hall, Esq.F. Hohler, Esq. H. G. O. Kendall, Esq. P. C. Ried, Esq. Admiral Sir F. Sullivan. Lord Wolmer. Colonel Fellows. J. Lloyd, Esq.Mr. C. Bradshaw. “ T. Cash. “ J. Cox. “ W. Groom “ H. H. HankinMr. C. Lambert. “ J. H. Wane. “ H. Page. “ W. Whitby “ A. WhitbyApril 26 ..Monday ..Club v. Town ..HatfieldMay 22 ..Saturday ..New Barnet ..DittoJune 5 ..Ditto ..Herts County Cup ..Hertford “ 14 ..Monday ..Wheathampstead ..Hatfield \" 15 ..Tuesday ..Thespian ..DittoJuly 8 ..Thursday ..Hertford ..Ditto \" 17 ..Saturday ..New Barnet ..New Barnet \" 28 ..Friday ..Luton P. C. ..HatfieldAug. 2 ..Monday ..Wheathampstead Wheathampstead \" 12 ..Thursday ..Hertford ..Hertford \" 19 ..Ditto ..Potters Bar ..Hatfield \" 25 ..Wednesday ..Luton P. C. ..LutonSep. 1 ..Ditto H. G. O. Kendall’s XI ..Hatfield \" 8 ..Ditto ..Greville ..Lord’s “ 15 ..Ditto ..Club v. Town ..Hatfield DATE. DAY. CLUB. WHERE PLAYED.

The Hertfordshire County Challenge Cup In a slight deviation from the strict narrative of Hatfield Cricket Club, a look at this long-forgotten competition may shed some light on the comparative strengths of the county clubs at this juncture in time. Information on it is hard to find; in R G Simons’s book Cricket in Hertfordshire, a lengthy tome on the subject from the eighteenth century onwards, there is a solitary sentence dedicated to the topic. For six short-lived years, eight decades before the launch of the Hertfordshire Cricket Competition, the county’s ‘elite’ competed for the right to hold a silver cup. The genesis of the competition can be traced back to 1881, when the Herts Advertiser edition of 17 December published a letter written by Charles Edward Keyser (1848-1929) of Watford Cricket Club, reporting on a recent meeting of the General Meeting of the Herts County Cricket Club, at which the desirability of an annual Challenge Cup under the auspices of the County Club was discussed. The consensus of the meeting was that it would be ‘advisable, before entering fully into the matter, to endeavour to obtain the opinion of the various club secretaries and others interested in cricket.’ The letter concluded with Keyser inviting interested parties to correspond with his London address. The County Club can’t be accused of rushing its decision. It wasn’t until 29 December 1884 that its committee agreed to issue invitations for entry. In February 1885, the sub-committee responsible for overseeing the Challenge Cup announced the draw for the inaugural staging of the competition. Eight clubs had answered the call: Chorleywood, Hertford, Hemel Hempstead, Hitchin, Potters Bar, St Albans, Stevenage, and Ware. In the twentieth century, the Hatfield club was consistently negative or cautious towards any proposals for introducing competitive cricket. This appears to have been deep-rooted, with its earlier counterparts taking a wait-and-see approach to the new cup. A perhaps more surprising absentee was that of Keyser’s club, Watford. Potters Bar’s inclusion, on the other hand, may have been controversial, since it was part of Middlesex at the time; indeed, it remained so until 1965. In case anyone was wondering, this was not a limitedovers affair, with matches played in the usual two-innings format, with the result decided on the first innings should it be uncompleted. Draws were a rarity at the time, so one-day cricket as we know it today would have been unthinkable. Eight clubs may sound like a small number; however, regulations regarding player qualification would have hampered the village sides. As has been mentioned elsewhere, the better players in the county would play for mul148

tiple clubs, but for the competition, they had to nail their colours to the mast of a single club. Essendon, for example, although a strong club side, their strength came from borrowing players from Hertford and St Albans. Also, all players had to be qualified to play for Hertfordshire, which excluded imports from the likes of Middlesex, and would have impacted heavily on Potters Bar. Clubs had to submit a list of players to Captain Beresford, the Hon. Secretary of the County Club, for approval, and among the names put forward by Hertford CC was Arthur Dagg of Hatfield CC (who may have been captain at the time), although there is no evidence of him making an appearance for the county town side. Hatfield’s interest in the 1885 cup was restricted to two former players who were in the Potters Bar squad. Crosby Haynes Stallabrass (1846-1922) had begun playing for Hatfield when still in his teens and continued to do so until 1882 when he married and appears to have moved to the South Mimms area. Tom Blinko (who is discussed at length elsewhere), who, like Stallabrass, was a cattle dealer, was a regular for the club between 1875 and 1884, and would return in 1890 and later captain the club. Of the four scheduled first-round fixtures, results have only surfaced for two of them. Whether or not the others were played will have to remain a mystery. It is possible that Chorleywood didn’t fancy the long trip to Hertford, but it is hard to imagine Hitchin not being able to raise an eleven for a home fixture. Pre-season, the North Herts club were bemoaning the fact that their star bowler was ineligible to play, so maybe they were on the wrong side of a thrashing and declined to submit a match report. In the matches that took place, despite Ware knocking up the decent total of 111 (Charles Pallett five wickets), inspired by innings of 99 from the Reverend Frederick Poland, and 48 from William Wadsworth, Stevenage finished on 249 all out to win on the first innings by 148 runs. The other match was a tighter affair. Five wickets for Henry Tylecote had helped dismiss St Albans for 74 against Hemel Hempstead at Boxmoor. However, Charles Brown’s six wickets for 14 runs gave the visitors a narrow first-innings lead of 13 runs.1 St Albans found the going easier in the second innings and batted Hemel out of the game. In the first semi-final, played at Ball’s Park, Potters Bar upset the odds by beating Hertford. The home side would have felt confident after batting first and scoring 131 (George Skerman 26, R L Knight 35). However, the Bar’s opening batsmen did the hard graft to ensure victory. Matthews topscored with 35, but the real hero was the Reverend Thurston Dale, who followed his haul of five wickets with 29 runs.2 At Bernard’s Heath, St Al149

bans, despite eight wickets for Henry Webdale, the home team was no match for Stevenage.3 In reply to St Albans’ total of 60, the Reverend Poland was in the runs again, hitting 31 as the visitors amassed 126 runs. The final, played at Hitchin, was played despite the presence of bad light and rain and was marred by controversy. Stevenage won the toss and decided to bat first, and with, in the words of the Herts Advertiser, ‘nothing sensational in the innings’, they were bowled out for 96. The Reverend Dale, described as Potters Bar’s best batsman, opened the batting, and when he had scored six runs, ‘a decision was given in his favour which was fought by many of those present to be a rather doubtful one,’ which presumably translates as Stevenage accusing the Potters Bar umpire of cheating! Dale went on to score 39 as Potters Bar secured a match-winning total of 103. To be generous to Stevenage, it was probably as a result of desperately trying to hit quick runs to force a win that resulted in them being dismissed for 21 in their second innings. For Potters Bar, Dale returned match figures of ten for 53, and W H Curtis eight wickets for 22. It must have been deemed a successful experiment because the 1886 edition expanded to include at least ten clubs. I say ‘at least’ because the draw that I have been able to piece together shows two clubs receiving byes in the first round, which was against the norm for the competition. Hatfield was among the clubs taking advantage of an entry fee of a guinea, which secured entry for three seasons. The other new boys were Abbots Langley, Redbourn, and Watford. Chorleywood and, surprisingly, St Albans and the holders, Potters Bar, were missing in action. Forced to guess, I would speculate that either Redbourn or Watford played St Albans in the first round with the result not being reported. There was a surprise omission from the Hatfield CC cup squad, with Charles Lambert presumably choosing not to play, since he did not seem to fall foul of any of the qualifying criteria that was published in the Herts Advertiser, namely that: ‘No professional who has played for the county to be allowed to play in the cup matches’; ‘All players in the cup matches must be qualified to play for the county’; and ‘No player to play for more than one club. To which club he must be a subscriber.’ As previously noted, Hatfield warmed-up for the tournament by staging a practice match between the County Cup XI and the rest of the club, captained by Lambert. A quirk of the competition rules concerned the venue of matches. The team drawn first had the choice of grounds; however, not all clubs claimed home advantage, with several matches played on neutral territory to reduce long journeys. One such example was Hatfield’s first-round encounter with 150

Bishops Stortford, which was played at Ball’s Park, Hertford. The journey from Hatfield to Bishop’s Stortford at this time consisted of a train from Hatfield to Hertford Cowbridge (which was adjacent to the McMullens Brewery), a walk to Hertford East station, from Hertford East to Broxbourne, and then on to Bishop’s Stortford.4 At a later date, Stortford insisted that Hemel Hempstead traipsed across the county; it is assumed that it was Hatfield who made the magnanimous gesture. Although costs for preparing the wicket were split between the clubs, it still set Hatfield back 15s 6d (about £80 in 2025). As seen below, Hatfield didn’t miss Charles Lambert on this occasion. HATFIELD v. BISHOP’S STORTFORD The contest between these clubs for the Silver Challenge Cup offered by the County Cricket Club took place in Balls Park, Hertford, on Saturday, and was won by the Hatfield team by 21 runs on the first innings. For the victors, the two Whitbys (Walter and Alfred) played well, as also did George Elliott, Percy Dagg, and William Groom. On the Stortford side, Lewis Wigan played a good innings of 42 until he was cleverly caught by Elliott. Swift, the acknowledged best man of the Stortford Club, has this season been peculiarly unfortunate with his bat, though in this match, he was a little more successful. The weather was beautifully fine, and the match was watched with considerable interest by a large number of spectators. The following are the scores: – 1st Innings HATFIELD 2nd innings C Bradshaw st G Pritchard b J Wigan 0 b H Wigan 0W Groom b T Pritchett 13 P Collinson b J Wigan 2 b H Wigan 5P H Dagg b Swift 16 c Slater b Bowtell 5A R Dagg lbw b Swift 9 not out 5W Whitby lbw b Swift 32 A Whitby c T Pritchett b Swift 20 c Swift b Bowtell 4G Elliott c J Wigan b T Pritchett 21 T Cash run out 5 H Broom c Taylor b T Pritchett 1 c Slater b H Wigan 0W Parker not out 2 b H Wigan 7Extras 12 Extras 3Total 133 Total 29BISHOP’S STORTFORDF Page b Bradshaw 3P W Taylor c A Dagg b W Whitby 11T Bowtell b W Whitby 3E L Swift b Bradshaw 8L D Wigan c Elliott b Bradshaw 42J S Brunskill b W Whitby 0H W Wigan c Elliott b Bradshaw 5151

E Slater b Bradshaw 16 G E B Pritchett run out 5T W Pritchett not out 7J L Wigan st Groom b Bradshaw 7Extras 5Total 112Hertfordshire Mercury - 12 June 1886 Also in the first round, Abbots Langley were humbled at St Albans, losing to Stevenage in the first innings by 162 runs to 21. At Hitchin, Ware produced the biggest winning margin in the competition to date, beating their hosts by an innings and 19 runs. After winning the toss and deciding to bat, Ware had got off to a stuttering start, losing three wickets with the score on 21. Henry Taylor steadied the ship with 38 runs before F Smith rode his luck to take the match out of Hitchin’s reach with 74, having been dropped several times, two of which were described as ‘being of the easiest description’. His innings included one six, ‘a big hit which pitched over the gate leading into the London Road and into the field opposite’. After being bowled out for 53 in reply, Hitchin followed on, faced with a daunting deficit of 124 runs, which they failed to overcome. It was a more closely fought contest at Hemel, with the home side edging through by 6 runs on the first innings, mainly thanks to the efforts of Ellis Woodman and John Wildman, who scored 31 and 23 respectively. Redbourn, who may or may not have received a bye in the first round, hosted a large contingent of Hemel Hempstead supporters, who were rewarded by seeing their side defeat what was described as a strong Redbourn team. They may have been concerned when their team was struggling at 93 for 8 wickets, 34 of which came from the bat of Charles Tylecote. A strong resistance from the tail lifted the final score to 150 all out. After lunch, in the home side’s first innings, it was Henry Tylecote turning the screw, taking six wickets for 26 runs. After making only 35 runs at the first attempt, Redbourn didn’t do much better the second time around, all out for 41, having recovered from 18 for 8, and defeated by an innings and 74 runs. Two days later, at Ware, the home side would have been disappointed to have been dismissed for 64. In reply, the Reverend Poland was Stevenage’s top scorer with 27 out of a total of 96. After a second turn at the wicket, Ware had an 85-run advantage, but, alas, there was no time for the visitors to bat again, so Stevenage progressed with a 32-run first innings. The remaining second-round tie was between Watford and Hatfield, and the logic for believing that there is a missing first-round game is that the 152

way the draw panned out, the winner of this match would receive a bye in the semi-finals. This makes it all the more frustrating that Hatfield narrowly lost a match on a one-innings basis that they would probably have won over two innings had time allowed. David Halsey’s 36 was the difference between the sides. Hatfield’s players traversed by train to the ground at the Rose and Crown Meadow, which, if it was located where I believe it was, was about a mile from Watford Junction Station, accessible from Hatfield via the St Albans branch line. The Rose and Crown Hotel used to be situated at 72 High Street, and the meadow was presumably the large expanse of land that lay to the west. Within this area is the present-day ground of West Herts CC, so it would not be unreasonable to assume that this is where the game took place. WATFORD v. HATFIELD – CUP MATCH This match in the second round of the Hertfordshire Cricket Challenge Cup was played in the Rose and Crown Meadow, on Saturday, the 10th inst., and resulted, after a close game, in favour of Watford, by 7 runs on the first innings. Scored:– 1st Innings WATFORD 2nd innings D Halsey b Bradshaw 36 retired 14Lovegrove b W Whitby 2 b W Whitby 0E B Brown b W Whitby 6 b Austin 2F Sargent run out 7 b Bradshaw 28F Fensom c Elliott b W Whitby 4 b Bradshaw 18C E Keyser c Groom b Bradshaw 17 b Austin 8T J Villers b W Whitby 12 c P Dagg b A Dagg 7J Beaumont b W Whitby 4 b A Dagg 4Rev. J B Myers c Elliott b Bradshaw 0 c Elliott b Bradshaw 3S A Bradley not out 0 b W Whitby 6G Waterman b W Whitby 4 not out 0Extras 4 Extras 2Total 96 Total 921st Innings HATFIELD 2nd innings C Bradshaw lbw b Waterman 2 run out 4G Elliott c Waterman b Beaumont 29 S Booth b Waterman 0 c and b Waterman 15P H Dagg lbw b Lovegrove 8 b Keyser 13A R Dagg c Sargent b Keyser 4 not out 14W Groom b Beaumont 5 W Whitby b Waterman 0 A Whitby not out 14 V Austin c Lovegrove b Keyser 10 H Broom c Bradley b Keyser 2 W Parker lbw b Lovegrove 1 
153

Extras 14 Extras 3Total 89 Total 49Watford Observer - 17 July 1886 Playing for the right to oppose Watford in the final, Hemel Hempstead met Stevenage on neutral territory in St Albans, presumably Bernard’s Heath. If the Hemel Hempstead Gazette is to be believed, Hemel were unfortunate. The match was originally due to have been played on Monday, 26 July, when their advertised team had been identical to that which had humbled Redbourn in the previous round. A week before the tie was to have been played, St Albans requested a postponement. For the rearranged fixture on 17 August, Hemel were missing Henry and Charles Tylecote, Ellis Woodman, and John Wildman. Batting first, the Hemel innings didn’t go well. George Pallett took seven wickets as Hemel were reduced to 73 all out. Courtesy of the Reverend Frederick Poland (78) and William Bracey (31), Stevenage didn’t lose their second wicket until 100 was on the board. The telegraph read 150 for two before the final eight wickets fell for the addition of only 27 runs. In fairness, the collapse was irrelevant as the match was already won. It was a case of what might have been for Hatfield CC as the team they could have beaten won the final at a canter. In the sunshine at Bernard’s Heath, St Albans, the Watford skipper, Frederick Sargent, won the toss, elected to bat, and never looked back. After a flurry of early wickets, Sargent (42) was joined in the middle by Charles Keyser (36), and the pair batted Stevenage out of the game. Replying to Watford’s total of 176, only William Bracey, with 32 not out, offered any meaningful resistance, and with George Waterman taking six wickets for 25 runs, they were all out for 78, a deficit of 98. The second innings of Stevenage ended at half-past five, with Watford clinching the cup by an innings and 13 runs. With eleven clubs entered in 1887, the ten confirmed to have competed in 1886, plus St Albans, which adds credence to the likelihood that they played the previous season. Not forgetting, of course, that the entrance fee they paid in 1885 had entitled them to three seasons in the competition. Hatfield will have regretted their presence. The inclusion of Charles Lambert in Hatfield’s ranks would have been a morale booster and proves that his absence the previous year was from choice, and not as the result of any qualification issues. In the first round, Hatfield were drawn away to St Albans, with the fixture played at Bernard’s Heath. As the below match report shows, thanks to five wickets from Lambert, Hatfield enjoyed a healthy ad154

vantage after the completion of the first innings, only to capitulate in the second and be consigned to a miserable exit at the first hurdle. COUNTY CHALLENGE CUP MATCH HATFIELD v. ST ALBANSThis match was played on Bernard’s Heath, St. Albans, on Thursday, in splendid weather, and ended in a victory for the home team by 67 runs. The St Albans men played in excellent form, the best fielding perhaps being that of E Bumball, while their fielding, on the whole, was much stronger than that of their opponents, who played very loosely during the second innings of the St. Albans team, missing Hartley some half a dozen times. The bowling of Frederick Johnstone and Herbert Chatterton was especially good. In the first innings, Johnstone took 6 wickets in 15 overs for 26 runs. Hartley in 8 overs took 1 wicket after 30 runs had been obtained. Golds and Chatterton also took a wicket each, Chatterton taking his with his second ball. In the second innings of their opponents, the St Albans’ men did good service in the bowling as in 14 overs and 3 balls Johnstone took 5 wickets for only 12 runs, 10 of the overs being maidens. Chatterton took 6 wickets for 13 runs in 12 overs, 7 of which were maidens. Golds took no wickets in his two overs, a run being obtained in each. When St Albans went to bat, they obtained no runs until the fall of the second wicket, and at the fall of the third there were 9 runs, which increased very slowly, as at the fall of the eighth there were only 29, and when the last wicket fell there were but 48. In the second innings, however, they amply atoned for the first, as at the fall of the second wicket there were 49 runs, and when all the men were out the score stood at 145. The following is the score: 1st Innings HATFIELD 2nd innings A Whitby b Hartley 2 b Johnstone 3G Elliott c Hartley b Johnstone 14 c Gentle b Johnstone 5G C Curtis b Johnstone 20 c Gentle b Chatterton 1S B Booth b Johnstone 4 b Chatterton 0P Collinson b Gold 18 c Gentle b Chatterton 5A R Dagg c Grimston b Chatterton 21 not out 12C Lambert c Blanks b Gold 1 b Chatterton 4P H Dagg b Johnstone 0 c Johnstone b Chatterton 0H Groom c Golds b Johnstone 5 c Payne b Johnstone 1G A Cranfield b Johnstone 0 b Johnstone 0H Diddams not out 0 b Johnstone 0Extras 8 Extras 2Total 93 Total 331st Innings ST ALBANS 2nd innings F Johnstone c Curtis b Lambert 0 st Groom b Lambert 11H Rumball st Groom b Lambert 0 c Groom b Lambert 10H C Johnson b Lambert 0 c Groom b Curtis 2A J Goodridge c Lambert b Curtis 10 c Groom b A Dagg 36H W Gold c and b Curtis 6 c Curtis b A Dagg 3155

G Hartley c A Whitby b Curtis 0 c P Dagg b Lambert 23W Payne c Booth b Lambert 2 b P Dagg 18F Blanks b Lambert 0 not out 7Hon. W Grimston b Lambert 13 b P Dagg 9H Gentle not out 6 b A Whitby 18H O Chatterton b P Dagg 0 b Lambert 1Extras 11 Extras 7Total 48 Total 145Herts Advertiser - 18 June 1887 The first match in the first round to be completed was at Stevenage when Hertford overcame the home side by 8 runs in a low-scoring game, which was accounted for by ‘the fact that the bad weather had made the wicket so bad that large scores were almost an impossibility.’ Elsewhere, Ware beat Hitchin by 15 runs, and Hemel Hempstead received a walkover against Abbots Langley, who were unable to raise a side. The remaining tie was marred by controversy. On 9 June, Redbourn had beaten Watford by 28 runs, only for the Watford secretary to enter an objection to the inclusion of a player called Goodyear whom they believed broke the rules. In an angry letter to the editor of the Herts Advertiser, Charles Harvey, Hon. Secretary of Redbourn CC, claimed that eight days before the match he had received ‘plain permission’ to play Goodyear. This is an interesting interpretation as, in his letter, he quotes Mr Pigg of the Herts County Cricket Committee as saying ‘he thought Goodyear had no qualifications.’ The proviso that ‘provided you break none of the rules as forwarded to you, then you are all right’ is hardly a ringing endorsement. It took a month for the sub-committee to declare that the match must be replayed, the reason being that Goodyear had played as a professional for another county. It is difficult to understand the motivation behind Watford’s appeal seeing as when the teams reconvened they arrived with only eight men in tow. They did eventually muster ten players, however, the damage had already been done with Frederick Field (57) and Gregory Webb (42) the top scorers in an imposing total of 207. Redbourn ended the match as victors by 119 runs. In the second round, Bishops Stortford scored 202 against Hertford to win by 127 runs, with Ernest Luciano Swift contributing 84. Ware had been considered the favourites ahead of their fixture against St Albans at Bernard’s Heath, but the home side upset the odds to triumph by 8 runs on the first innings. Once again, the county cup sub-committee had opted against issuing byes in the first round to create a geometric sequence, and St Albans were rewarded for their victory with a bye in the semi-finals. The much156

delayed final tie in the round witnessed the exit of Redbourn. A late-order flourish enabled the visitors to Boxmoor to limp to a total of 69, but Hemel Hempstead, with Henry Dunham scoring a half-century at number nine, eased past the target and finished on 125. Bishops Stortford declined to offer Hemel Hempstead the option of playing their semi-final tie on neutral territory, despite it being the longest journey possible in the competition. To put this into some kind of perspective, a horse-drawn carriage could travel a maximum of approximately 30 miles per day; Hemel is over 50 miles from Stortford. Today, by train, the journey can be completed in just under two hours. It probably took longer than that 150 years ago. If the hope was to unsettle the Hemel players, the ploy backfired. Winning the toss and batting, Stortford managed to put 107 on the board, but thanks to half-centuries from Harry (62) and Ellis Woodman (58), Hemel passed the target with only two wickets down, ending with 203 all out and a place in the final. In the final, played on Redbourn Common, the St Albans batsmen failed to get on top of the Hemel bowlers, with Henry and Charles Tylecote taking eight wickets between them. St Albans’ total of 85 was passed at 5.10 pm in spectacular style with Henry Austin driving for five (a hit over the boundary wasn’t rewarded with six runs until 1910). Hemel Hempstead eventually won the match by 54 runs. Maybe the novelty was beginning to wear off as Abbots Langley, St Albans, and Ware all waved goodbye to the County Cup, and the 1888 edition down to eight clubs. It was a disjointed competition, with Hatfield’s first-round tie the only one to be completed on its designated date. The rain ended the first attempt to play the Redbourn v. Stevenage tie, with Stevenage on 48 for the loss of no wickets. Five days later, with the venue switched to Stevenage, the weather was so bad that the match was abandoned without a ball being bowled. A month later, despite the best efforts of the weather (play didn’t commence until 3 o’clock), the match was completed at the third time of asking on a wicket that deteriorated as it dried. Redbourn, boosted by the inclusion of three St Albans players, struggled to a total of 73 before the Stevenage batsmen completely capitulated and were dismissed for 12 runs (Joseph Winchester five wickets). Rain also interfered at Ball’s Park when Hertford entertained Watford. After the start of play had been delayed until after lunch, Eustace Malden (111) and George Nicholls (72) scored runs at a rapid rate. The laws of cricket at this time did not allow for a declaration, so there followed the bizarre spectacle of the Hertford batsmen deliberately throwing their wickets away to allow themselves enough time to bowl Watford out. Despite the rain that had been falling for 157

most of the afternoon getting heavier, the Watford reply commenced; however, at 6.05 pm the rain became so heavy that the match was abandoned as a draw. At the second time of asking, again in unpleasant conditions, interrupted by rain, Hertford triumphed by 75 runs on the first innings, mainly due to the efforts of William Nicholls, who took six wickets. Hatfield’s adventure was ended by Theodore and George Pritchett, while Hemel Hempstead’s tie with Hitchin was postponed for a reason more dramatic than the weather… The first-round tie between Hemel Hempstead and Hitchin which was due to have been played on 16 June, was postponed owing to a fatal accident to one of the Hitchin players, Edward Mwyndeg Hughes (1815-1888). Hughes came from a very well-to-do family, who owned Offley Place, Offley, Hitchin, and an inquisitive reading of the newspapers of the time has pieced together something for the conspiracy theorists among you. The incident occurred at the Ranelagh Club, Barn Elms, Barnes, London, on Saturday, 9 June 1888, during polo pony races. Hughes was riding his mare, Skit, in the Ladies’ Plate in the presence of the King of Sweden. At the last corner, in the words of the Pall Mall Gazette, he had ‘by some means, brought his animal into violent contact with a white trestle, which had been placed to mark the course.’ The mare, with a wound to its chest, was killed on the spot, and Hughes, who sustained a fractured collarbone and a dislocated shoulder, succumbed to his injuries two days later without having recovered consciousness. Dr James Adams, who conducted the post-mortem, stated that the cause of death was ‘haemorrhage into the brain, the result of a fall, and that no doubt the mare had rolled over Mr Hughes.’ So, where is the conspiracy, I hear you ask? The Birmingham Daily Post reported that Hughes’s brother, a magistrate, wishing to take the body to Hertfordshire, had obtained a doctor’s certificate and taken it to the registrar, who issued him an order for burial. The certificate made no mention of an ‘accident’. The Pall Mall Gazette had reported that, only two months before his death, Hughes had ensured his life against accidents for £1,000. Consequently, his brother reported the matter to the coroner. The inquest, which lasted three hours, was held at the Ranelagh Club on Thursday, 14 June. The Morning Post divulged that Reginald Herbert, the proprietor of the club and a judge of the race, told the inquest that Hughes was so far adrift that 200 yards from the bottom of the bottom turn, he ‘directed his attention to the other horses and only heard of the accident after the race.’ There were no eyewitnesses to the accident… In the absence of any reports to the contrary, it is to be assumed that 158

having failed to agree on a suitable date, Hitchin conceded the tie, and Hemel Hempstead advanced to the next round unchallenged. THE COUNTY CRICKET CHALLENGE CUP HATFIELD v. BISHOP’S STORTFORDThe first tie between the Hatfield and Bishop Stortford Clubs for the Silver Challenge Cup offered by the Herts County Cricket Club was played in Balls Park, Hertford, on Saturday. Stortford, Having won the toss, commenced batting with the Rev. L J Westell and T Bowtell, but they made a bad start, Westell being caught from the first ball. J S Brunskill took the vacant place, and after 14 runs had been obtained Bowtell was dismissed to a catch by Richardson. T W Pritchett joined Brunskill and between them they carried the score to 46, when Brunskill was caught in the slips by Lambert, after contributing a very useful 24. H W Wigan followed, and a good stand was made, the total being run up to 118 when Wigan was bowled for 16, his score including a capital leg hit for 5. G B Pritchett then joined his brother, and some good hitting followed by both batsmen, the score being carried to 164 before a parting was effected. T W Pritchard was then caught by Groom, having played a brilliant innings of 91, which included 8 fours, 3 threes, and 19 twos. G E B Pritchett also showed excellent form, and his score of 62 was a very good one. Nothing much was done afterwards, L D Wigan making 15 and Oliver 10, but beyond this, no stand was made and the innings closed for 237, a very good performance. Altogether six changes were tried in the bowling, but W Whitby was credited with seven wickets and Lambert with two. The fielding of the Hatfield team was somewhat loose at times, and several catches were missed, both the Pritchetts being let off before they had scored many runs. So far the weather had continued fine, but soon after the Hatfield commenced batting rain began to fall, and the innings was several times interrupted by heavy showers. C Lambert and G Elliott went in first, to the bowling of J L Wigan and T W Pritchett. Elliott made a good hit for four, but he was twice let off in the first over, and directly afterwards was caught in the slips without adding to his score. G E Curtis filled the vacant place, and a good catch by Bowtell soon disposed of Lambert, two wickets being thus down for nine runs. W Groom went in next, and although he narrowly escaped being run out, a bit of a stand was made, interrupted only by the rain, and the score was run up to 35, when Curtis, who seemed to be getting well set, succumbed to a “yorker” from J L Wigan. His 22 was a very useful contribution and included one four, one three, and six twos. W Whitby took his place but only added four when he was run out. P Collinson went in next, and at 63 Groom was well caught by H W Wigan at long leg. He had been a long time at the wickets and had played a very careful innings, notwithstanding the drawback of a sprained ankle. His 21 included two fours, one three, and a two. With the score at 76 G B Pritchett went on bowling in his brother’s place, and Bowdell kept wicket. Soon afterwards Broom made a rattling hit, close up to the pavilion, which was splendidly caught by H W Wigan, who had to run a long distance to get to it. Collinson made the top score of the team, 24, when he was 159

caught by J L Wigan. The remaining batsmen did very little, and the innings closed for 95, the match thus ending in an easy victory for Stortford. The bowling and fielding of the winners was very good, and they were altogether the stronger team. G Skerman and A Fisher of Hertford were the umpires. The following is the full score:– BISHOP’S STORTFORD HATFIELDRev. L J Westell c Curtis b W Whitby 0 C Lambert c T Bowtell b T Pritchett 5T Bowtell c Richardson b W Whitby 6 G Elliott c T Pritchett b J Wigan 4J S Brunskill c Lambert b W Whitby 24 G C Curtis b J Wigan 22T W Pritchett c Groom b W Whitby 91 W Groom c H Wigan b J Wigan 21H W Wigan b W Whitby 16 W Whitby run out 4G W B Pritchett c Curtis b W Whitby 62 P Collinson c J Wigan b G Pritchett 24H Gee run out 5 H Broom c H Wigan b J Wigan 4L D Wigan c Collinson b Whitby 15 A Whitby b J Wigan 6W Oliver st Groom b Lambert 10 J Richardson c Gee b G Pritchett 2E Slater not out 0 G Cranfield not out 0J L Wigan b Lambert 0 W Horsey b G Pritchett 0Extras 8 Extras 3Total 237 Total 95Hertfordshire Mercury - 16 June 1888 For the second year in a row, Hemel Hempstead travelled to Bishops Stortford in the semi-final; however, this time the roles were reversed, and the holders were deposed. Henry Dunham scored 31 in Hemel’s total of 103, but John Brunskill (40) and George Pritchett (45) eased the home team to 206 all out. Uncharacteristically for 1988, the sun was shining at Ball’s Park when Hertford met Redbourn. Thomas Connor was the mainstay of the Redbourn innings, hitting 56 out of an imposing total of 199. With the home team’s innings not commencing until 4.50 pm, the odds were strongly against them overhauling Redbourn’s total, so batting out time and forcing a reply was their most realistic chance of staying in the cup. Alas, things didn’t go to plan, and they were skittled in an hour and ten minutes out for 43. The absence of St Albans was beginning to play a major role in Redbourn’s campaign, with the Hertfordshire player Frederick Johnstone producing match-winning figures of eight for 18. Johnstone was in the wickets again at Ball’s Park in the final, taking five of Bishop’s Stortford’s wickets. Gregory Webb’s 40 helped Redbourn make 120 before Stortford were dismissed for 73, a deficit in the first innings of 47 runs. At the call of ‘time’, Redbourn were 200 runs to the good with three wickets still to fall. In three matches, Johnstone had taken 17 wickets for 55 runs at an average of 3.24. And then there were six. Hatfield and Stevenage Cricket Clubs had joined the exodus. The holders opened their defence at Boxmoor and 160

hammered Hemel Hempstead by an innings and four runs. At Ball’s Park, Hertford triumphed against Watford by 30 runs on the first innings, and had the match been played to a conclusion, the winning margin would have been more substantial. Defending a total of 99, Hertford’s William Nicholls took five wickets for 38 to help reduce Watford to 69 all out. Batting again, Hertford had made 170 for four by the close. Ismael Fish, an occasional player for Hatfield, ended the match on 65 not out. The result of the final first-round tie, scheduled to take place at Ball’s Park between Hitchin and Bishop’s Stortford, was not reported; however, it was Hitchin who progressed into the semi-final. Hitchin would have been left feeling frustrated at not progressing to the final at the expense of Hertford. The wicket at Hitchin was something of a road, and half-centuries for Henry Taylor (52) and Godfrey (54 not out) enabled Hertford to take advantage of a change to the laws of the game and declare their innings at 235 for eight. Having given themselves just over two hours to try and take ten wickets, it was a decision that almost spectacularly backfired. Runs came even more readily for the home side, and with Herbert Hughes (52) and Herbert Amos (69) both being run out in the chase, Hitchin ended the match with a total of 227 for four, a mere nine runs shy of victory. At the same ground the following week, the Hitchin batsmen couldn’t replicate their form and were disappointingly bowled out for 80. Charles Wodehouse made 95 and Godfrey 72 as Hertford cruised to victory with 209 for six and a place in the final against Redbourn, who had received a bye. With a dwindling number of clubs taking part, the selection of a neutral ground had become problematical, and the high-scoring ground at Hitchin was chosen despite it being nowhere near either of the finalists. Had Hatfield still been involved, it would have been an ideal venue. Henry Tylecote was the hero for Redbourn, and they retained the cup by a margin of 31 runs on the first innings. After scoring 58 runs in Redbourn’s total of 167, Tylecote then took five of Hertford’s wickets. By 1890, the competition was on its last legs. Watford had dropped out, which would have necessitated a change in the rules to allow it to proceed with only five clubs. On the plus side, the organising sub-committee had finally decided to alter the number of byes in the first round to prevent anyone from being awarded one in the semi-final. The result of this was that Redbourn v. Hitchin was the only tie in the first round, with Bishops Stortford, Hemel Hempstead, and Hertford straight into the last four. The writing was on the wall for Hitchin when Redbourn brought up three figures 161

with only one wicket lost. Charles Tylecote (65) and Gregory Webb (42) enabled the home side to post a total of 212 before Henry Tylecote helped reduce Hitchin to 63 all out with six wickets. The weather was the victor at Redbourn Common in the first semi-final. The home side had made 26 without loss when, after half an hour’s play, the heavens opened. The rain relented at 3 o’clock, but the wicket was too wet for play to resume, and a heavy downpour an hour later put pay to any hopes of a resumption. On the toss of a coin, Redbourn retained home advantage. With a treacherous wicket being pleaded in extenuation, Redbourn were skittled for 35. Hemel Hempstead replied with 95, but with time against them, after declaring on 134 for seven, Redbourn only had an hour to take ten wickets. Funnily enough, they didn’t and lost on the first innings. Then the hand of fate intervened. No explanation appeared on the pages of the local papers, but Hemel Hempstead were expelled from the competition for ‘breaking the rules’. With interest falling, there was no report on the other semi-final, but Bishops Stortford prevailed at the expense of Hertford. The weather was the victor at Redbourn Common in the first semi-final. The home side had made 26 without loss when, after half an hour’s play, the heavens opened. The rain relented at 3 o’clock, but the wicket was too wet for play to resume, and a heavy downpour an hour later put pay to any hopes of a resumption. On the toss of a coin, Redbourn retained home advantage. With a treacherous wicket being pleaded in extenuation, Redbourn were skittled for 35. Hemel Hempstead replied with 95, but with time against them, after declaring on 134 for seven, Redbourn only had an hour to take ten wickets. Funnily enough, they didn’t and lost on the first innings. Then the hand of fate intervened. No explanation appeared on the pages of the local papers, but Hemel Hempstead were expelled from the competition for ‘breaking the rules’. With interest falling, there was no report on the other semi-final, but Bishops Stortford prevailed at the expense of Hertford. Luckily, the finalists allowed for a sensible venue, and Ball’s Park, Hertford, was chosen as the venue. Rain was again in abundance, and no play was possible before lunch. The precipitation eased around 3 o’clock, and the match began, but persistent rain ended proceedings with Stortford on 67 for five. A whole month passed by before the two teams tried again at the same venue. The sun shone, but the Stortford batsmen were unable to make hay. George Hillyard secured seven wickets for 35 as Stortford slumped to 76 all out. Redbourn didn’t lose their third wicket until the scores were tied 162

and were eventually dismissed for 181. Redbourn’s victory would have been received by the Herts County Club with great relief. The County Cup’s rules stipulated that if a club won the cup for three consecutive years, then they would keep the silver cup. Redbourn’s triumph relieved the county from any obligation to revive the competition in 1891. Which they didn’t. As it turned out, this was the only countywide competition to exist under the umbrella of the County, with the leagues and cups that emerged in the second half of the twentieth century administered by bodies elected by the clubs involved. 1 Although the ground is described as being in Boxmoor, such has been the urbansprawl of Hemel Hempstead that the site of the current ground would have beenin Boxmoor in the 1880s. 2 The Reverend Dale had previously played a couple of games for Hatfield in 1879. 3 St Albans played their home matches on Bernard’s Heath before Clarence Parkwas opened in 1894. 4 Speaking in 1903, Dr J Earl Norman of St Albans CC described the difficulties oftravelling East/West in Hertfordshire. The journey from St Albans to Bishops Stortford (via Hatfield) took three hours. The return trip occurred after the branch lineshad finished for the day, necessitating travelling via London, and not arriving backin St Albans until 11 pm. 163

Best Performances These are the best recorded performances by Hatfield CC players in the years before 1901. HIGHEST SCORES111 F G J Ford vs. Frogmore 1894 100 W Lambert vs. Essendon 187495 L Whitehead vs. Three Counties Asylum 1891 92 W Hearn vs. Hertford 1874 91 T Hammond vs. St Albans 1850 90 E A Nepean vs. Welwyn 1897 83* G Elliott vs. Bell Bar 1897 81 C G J Bradshaw vs. Hertford 1886 80* B Bamford vs. St Mark’s 1896 75 F G J Ford vs. Welwyn 1896 74 W Stocks vs. Luton 1849 74 J Walby vs. Bohemians 1871 73 C H Wheeler vs. Neasden 1889 72 W Walby vs. North London 1865 71 T C W Blinko vs. Luton Montrose 1890 71 W Thorogood vs. Cockfosters 1899 70 E Woolley vs. Essenden 1873 70 R Townsend vs. Ayot St Lawrence 1874 70 M Johnson vs. St Mark’s 1898 69 C Lawrence vs. St John’s Wood Ramblers 1874 69 W T Westell vs. Greville 1881 69 B Bamford vs. Wrotham Park 1896 68 C G Lambert vs. Hertford 1872 67 W Faircloth vs. Ware 1841 67 W Lambert vs. Bohemians 1871 67 B Bamford vs. Cockfosters 1896 65 W S Church vs. Charterhouse 1857 65 W Walby vs. North London 1865 63 G Brockwell vs. Wimbledon 1855 63 H Cox vs. Essendon 1895 62 W Stocks vs. Ware 1846 60 C J Smith vs. Second Life Guards 1854 60 G Elliott vs. St Marks 1895 60 B Bamford vs. Hatfield Lawn Tennis Club 1896 58 T Hammond vs. Ware 1841 58 F G Faithfull vs. South Herts 1852 164

58 J R Kewley vs. Hertford 1866 58 A R Dagg vs. Single 1886 57 W Walby vs. Hertford 1871 57 W Lambert vs. Luton Montrose 1890 56* C Lambert vs. Stevenage 1883 56* F G Bashford vs. Colney Heath 1898 55 F Stocks vs. North London 1866 55 F G J Ford vs. Frogmore 1894 55 H Cox vs. Arkley 1898 54 W Faircloth vs. Clapton 1857 54 W S Church vs. Clapton 1858 54 A Tregaskiss vs. Clapton 1859 54 G Elliott vs. GNRAA 1897 53 W Stocks vs. Ware 1835 53 W Stocks vs. County of Hertford 1841 53 W Faircloth vs. Hertford 1847 53 W Faircloth vs. St Albans 1850 53 C G J Bradshaw vs. Greville 1882 53 F C Almond vs. Three Counties Asylum 1891 53 H Cox vs. Arkely 1898 52* G Champion vs. Enfield 1859 52* G Elliott vs. Wheathampstead 1898 52 W Faircloth vs. Ball’s Park 1843 52 J G Hale vs. Charterhouse 1857 52 A Cheshire vs. Greville 1879 52 T A Pearce vs. Hertford 1890 52 G Elliott vs. Totteridge 1895 52 W Whitby vs. H W Strides’s XI 1895 51* W Walby vs. F G Faithfull’s XI 1861 51 A J Groom vs. Hertford 1862 51 J R Kewley vs. Hertford 1866 51 T C W Blinko vs. Kilburn 1893 50 W Faircloth vs. Enfield 1859 50 J Walby vs. North London 1865 50 W T Westell vs. Holborn 1882 50 W Lambert vs. Hertford 1885 50 H Wells vs. City Police 1899 BEST BOWLING FIGURES10-14 C Lambert vs. Cockfosters 1894 10-?? C Lambert vs. Young Hertfordshire 1877 10-?? C Lambert vs. Harpenden 1891 165

9-22 Rev. T G Dale vs. Hitchin 1879 9-?? G Warner vs. Hertford 1875 9-?? A R Dagg vs. Stevenage 1881 9-?? T C W Blinko vs. Hatfield Lawn Tennis Club 1896 9-?? T C W Blinko vs. Foreign Office 1897 9-?? C Lambert vs. City Police 18999-?? H Wells vs. G.N.R.A.A. 1899 8-?? J Walby vs. North London 1863 8-?? F W Woolley vs. Islington Albio 1868 8-?? W Lambert vs. Islington Albion 1870 8-?? C Wheeler vs. Welwyn 1888 8-?? W Whitby vs. Essendon 1899 8-?? C Lambert vs. Luton Monrose 1891 8-?? L Whitehead vs. Three Counties Asylum 1891 8-?? C Lambert vs. Frogmore 1894 7-?? G Brockwell vs. Clapton 1855 7-?? W Walby vs. Hertford 1865 7-?? F W Woolley vs. Hertford 1866 7-?? J Walby vs. Hertford 1867 7-?? W Lambert vs. St John’s Wood Ramblers 1870 7-?? R Townsend vs. Cambridge Victoria 1874 7-?? W Lambert vs. Hertford 1878 7-?? C Bradshaw vs. Holborn 1880 7-?? C Lambert vs. Stevenage 1881 7-?? T Pearce vs. Hertford 1882 7-?? C Lambert vs. Ware 1883 7-?? W Whitby vs. Wheathampstead 1885 7-?? C Bradshaw vs. Hertford 1886 7-?? C H Wheeler vs. Neasden 1889 7-?? E Whitby vs. The Park Wanderers 1889 7-?? O H Braun vs. Lt Col Daniell’s XII 1893 7-?? W Warsop vs. Essendon 1895 7-?? T C W Blinko vs. Cockfosters 1896 7-?? T C W Blinko vs. Welwyn 1897 7-?? W Brearley vs. Welwyn 1897 7-?? H Wells vs. H W Stride’s XI 1898 7-?? H Wells vs. City Police 1899 7-?? H W Walby vs. Neasden 1899 HAT-TRICK C H Wheeler vs. Neasden 1889[Hat-tricks were rarely reported in newspapers at this time, so there will un166

doubtedly be many unreported instances. Playing for the 2nd XI against New Town Social Club in 1890, Harry Cox took four wickets in a five ball over, which may have included three in three balls.] OUTSTANDING PERFORMANCE IN A MATCHW Stocks 53 runs & 6 wickets vs. County of Hertford 1841 W Stocks 74 runs & 5 wickets vs. Luton 1849 G Brockwell 48 runs & 5 wickets vs. Clapton 1855 F Woolley 42 runs & 6 wickets vs. Eton Ramblers 1862 W T Westell 50 runs & 6 wickets vs. Holborn 1882 C H Wheeler 73 runs & 7 wickets vs. Neasden 1889 L Whitehead 95 runs & 8 wickets vs. Three Counties Asylum 1891 T C W Blinko 51 runs & 5 wickets vs. Kilburn 1893 F G J Ford 55 runs & 5 wickets vs. Frogmore 1894 F G J Ford 75 runs & 5 wickets vs. Welwyn 1896 H Wells 50 runs & 7 wickets vs. City Police 1899 HIGHEST SCORES FOR333 vs. Bohemians 1871 283 vs. St Albans 1850 253 vs. Ware 1871 BIGGEST WINNINGS MARGINS279 runs Hatfield 92 & 253, Ware 54 & 12 1841 265 runs Hatfield 333, Bohemians 68 1871208 runs Frogmore 40, Hatfield 248 for 5 1894 192 runs Hatfield 219, Westminster Cons. 27 1875 An innings and 85 runs Clapton 35 & 80, Hatfield 170 1863 An innings and 57 runs Welwyn 10 & 11, Hatfield 79 1888 An innings and 56 runs Ware 10 & 28, Hatfield 94 1841 167

PART TWO: Match Details, Reports, etc. The second section of this book contains details of every match played by Hatfield Cricket Club in the nineteenth century for which records exist. For the most part, these have been culled from newspaper reports, with the remainder extracted from the scorebooks that were in the possession of H J Gray. To avoid duplication, if a report has been used as an illustration elsewhere in this book, a reference is provided indicating the chapter where it can be found. Also included are any reports of club meetings that were published. 168

Pre-1851 Two matches have lately been played between the Hatfield and Hertford cricketers, in both of which the Hatfield have been the conquerors. The first match was played at Hertford, which they won by five wickets. The return match was played in Hatfield Park, which they also won, beating their antagonists by sixty runs. Windsor and Eton Express - 25 September 1814 A match was played in the Marquess of Salisbury’s Park, at Hatfield, on Thursday the 7th, and Friday, the 8th instant by eleven of Hatfield, against eleven picked men of the county of Hertford, which was won by the Hatfield, beating their antagonists by 53 runs. It is supposed there were not fewer than 2,000 spectators on the first day, who seemed highly gratified by the excellent play and the beautiful scenery of Hatfield Park. The return match will commence playing at No Man’s Land, on Wednesday, the 13th. Cambridge Chronicle and Journal - 14 August 1817 A match at cricket was played in the Marquis of Salisbury’s Park, at Hatfield, on Thursday the 7th, and Friday, the 8th inst., by eleven of the parish of Hatfield, against eleven picked men of the county of Hertford, which was won by Hatfield, beating their antagonists by 53 runs. It is supposed there were not fewer than 2,000 spectators on the first day, who seemed highly gratified by the excellent play and the beautiful scenery of Hatfield Park. Suffolk Chronicle - 16 August 1817 CRICKET.– The return match between eleven Gentlemen of the County of Hertford against eleven Gentlemen of the Hatfield Club was played on No-Man’s-Land on Wednesday and Thursday, the 13th and 14th instant, which terminated in favour of the County, 185 runs. Morning Post - 19 August 1817 Return match, between eleven gentlemen of the County of Hertford against eleven of the Hatfield Club, the county won by 185 runs. Oxford University and City Herald - 19 August 1817 The grand Cricket Match at No Man’s Land, Herts, between the Hatfield Club against the County of Herts, was, after three days’ play, decided on Thursday in favour of the County. Herts won by 60 runs.– Bets at starting 6 to 4 on the County. Morning Herald (London) - 09 June 1818 1st Innings COUNTY OF HERTFORD 2nd innings 169

Lewis b Taylor 12 b Hart 0Otway b Taylor 0 ? 26E Bruton b Taylor 0 c Faithfull 59Mawray run out 27 b Hart 12Haynes c Hammond 0 c Cranborne 21Denham b Hart 39 c Faithfull 9Carter b Faithfull 8 c Cranborne 9Stanton b Taylor 2 b Hart 0Pitt b Hart 5 c Rawley 9Sibley not out 8 c Hammond 2J Otway b Hart 9 not out 15Byes 2 Byes 2Total 112 Total 1641st Innings HATFIELD 2nd innings J Hart b Carter 0 b Otway 0W Farr b Carter 4 b Otway 39T Robart b Bruton 0 b Carter 0E Taylor run out 8 c Pitt 33Hammond b Carter 18 b Otway 2Tyler b Carter 3 b Otway 26J Rawley b Carter 9 b Otway 5Faithfull b Otway 18 b Carter 1R Sibley c Pitt 0 b Otway 0C Hardum run out 8 not out 2Lord Cranborne not out 5 b Otway 33Byes 2 Byes 0Total 75 Total 141Morning Post - 09 June 1818 A grand match of cricket was played in Hatfield Park on Wednesday and Thursday, the 24th and 25th instant, between the Hatfield Club and the County, which was won by the latter by 156 runs in the second innings. Windsor and Eton Express - 28 June 1818 A grand match of cricket was played in Hatfield Park, on the 24th and 25th ult., between the Hatfield Club and the county, which was won by the latter by 156 runs and one innings. Cambridge Chronicle and Journal - 10 July 1818 CRICKET.– The grand Cricket match at Hatfield, between the Hatfield Club against the County of Herts, was decided on Friday in favour of Herts. Morning Post - 28 July 1818 On Wednesday, Thursday, June 24-25th 1818, in Hatfield Park. 1st Innings HATFIELD 2nd innings Tyler b Carter 0 b Stanton 4170

Sibley c Mowbray 12 b Stanton 10Farr run out 0 st Otway 23Taylor b Stanton 11 b Stanton 0Hart c Seabrook 11 hit wicket 24Hammond b Stanton 6 c Mowbray 2Faithfull c Bruton 5 b Otway 20Pallett c Bruton 7 c Seabrook 8Lord Cranborne b Otway 4 st Otway 1Rawley b Stanton 3 not out 1Hardum not out 3 c Stanton 2Byes 2 Byes 4Total 64 Total 99COUNTY OF HERTFORD Carter b Taylor 14Mowbray c Rawley 45Seabrook b Hammond 11Bruton c Farr 125Dunham b Hart 10Stanton run out 2Harris b Hardum 63W Otway c Hart 0Sibley st Taylor 43J Otway not out 0Bray st Taylor 0Byes 6Total 319County Chronicle for Essex, Herts - 07 July 1818 CRICKET.– The grand Cricket match at Hatfield, between the Hatfield Club against the County of Herts, was decided on Friday in favour of Herts, by 46 runs. Herts Hatfield 1st Innings 56 1st Innings 79 2nd Innings 155 2nd Innings 56 211 165 Morning Post - 28 July 1818 Thursday and Friday last, a match of cricket was played in Hatfield Park, between ten men of the parish of Hatfield, with Lord Frederick Beauclerk, and eleven of the county of Hertford, which terminated after two days of very fine play, in favour of Hatfield, who beat the county by 46 runs. Cambridge Chronicle and Journal - 31 July 1818 [There was a difference of opinion between the London newspapers and the regionals as to which team triumphed in this fixture.] 171

CRICKET.– The return match, between ten men of the Parish of Hatfield, with Lord Frederick Beauclerk, and eleven picked men of the county of Hertford, commenced playing at No Man’s Land, on Wednesday, the 26th of August. The game was renewed the following day, but the weather being unfavourable, was not played out till Saturday the 29th, when it terminated in favour of the Hatfield, who won the match, with ten wickets to go down. The county were very nearly beaten in one innings, as the Hatfield went in the second time for only eight runs, which they got without a wicket going down. Morning Post - 01 September 1818 CRICKET.– The return match, between ten men of the Parish of Hatfield, with Lord Frederick Beauclerk, and eleven picked men of Hertfordshire, was decided last week, in favour of Hatfield, with ten wickets to go down. Star (London) - 01 September 1818 CRICKET.– The Grand Cricket Match between the Hatfield Club with Lord F Beauclerk, against the County of Herts, was decided on Saturday in favour of the Hatfield Club. Herts Hatfield 1st Innings 111 214 2nd Innings 109 7 220 221 Hatfield won by 10 wickets.– The County the favourites at starting. Morning Post - 02 September 1818 On Monday last, a match of cricket was played in Hatfield Park between eleven gentlemen of the Hatfield Club and ten gentlemen of the Kimpton Club, and one given man, for 50 guineas, aside from which was decided as follows:– In favour of Hatfield runs, 32.– Betting 3 to 2 in favour of Kimpton at the commencement of the game. Pierce Egan’s Life in London, and Sporting Guide - 15 August 1824 A Match of Cricket was played on Wednesday in Hatfield Park between the Hatfield and Albion Clubs. HATFIELD KIMPTONFirst Innings 90 First Innings 136Second Innings 125 Second Innings 47215 183HATFIELD ALBIONFirst Innings 76 First Innings 132Second Innings 55172

Albion won in one Innings and one run. Morning Post - 09 July 1825 On Tuesday, July 5th 1825. At Hatfield Park. 1st Innings HATFIELD 2nd innings Stocks b Dodswell 11 run out 0W Beasney c Smith 15 lbw 12Hart lbw 11 c John Brewster 4J Taylor b Dodswell 9 c Dodswell 11G Taylor b Dodswell 0 c Smith 1Sibley run out 0 st Arabin 0Rawley run out 8 b Dodswell 0Hammond not out 17 c Dodswell 3Archer b Jas Brewster 0 not out 6Smith b Schabner 0 b Rose 18Bigg b Rose 0 c Jas Brewster 0Byes 3 Byes 2Total 74 Total 57ISLINGTON ALBION Arabin b Hart 0Delvalle b Rawley 15 Rose b Rawley 3Schabner c Rawley 44John Brewster c G Taylor 14Jardine b J Taylor 14Smith c Beasney 11Dodswell b Rawley 8Jas. Brewster b Rawley 2Hinxsman c Beasney 5Lamport not out 0Byes 16Total 132County Herald - 09 July 1825 The Return Cricket Match between the Hatfield and Albion Clubs was played at Hackney and decided in favour of Hatfield. The Hatfield won by eight wickets. Morning Post - 22 July 1825 On Tuesday and Wednesday, July 26-27th 1825. At Islington. 131 132HATFIELD ALBIONFirst Innings 124 First Innings 96Second Innings 60 Second Innings 87184 183173

1st Innings ISLINGTON ALBION 2nd innings Rose c Hart 12 lbw 7Schabner b Rawley 6 c Rawley 0Dyer b G Taylor 14 b G Taylor 0John Brewster lbw 8 run out 24Dodswell c Hart 12 c Walpole 8Jardine b G Taylor 2 c Walpole 8Smith b J Taylor 8 b Rawley 6Arabin not out 9 not out 6Delvalle b J Taylor 0 b G Taylor 0Gould b Hart 19 b G Taylor 13Lamport c Leach 0 b G Taylor 0Byes 6 Byes 13Total 96 Total 871st Innings HATFIELD 2nd innings Hammond not out 1 c Dodswell 16Walpole c Smith 0 c Smith 6J Taylor c Dodswell 3 not out 13Hayward b Dodswell 45 not out 10Leach d Arabin 1 Archer run out 0 Hart b Rose 2 G Taylor b Rose 5 W Beasney b Jardine 25 R Sibley b Rose 32 Rawley b Rose 0 Byes 10 Byes 16Total 124 Total 61County Herald - 30 July 1825 The third and conquering match of cricket between eleven gentlemen of the Hatfield Club and eleven gentlemen of the South Mimms Village Club was played at South Mimms on Tuesday, and won by the latter club by 15 runs, as follows:– Hatfield, first innings, 23: second innings 34;– South Mimms, first innings 43: second innings 29. Weekly Dispatch - 04 September 1825 On Monday and Tuesday, September 11-12th 1826. At Welwyn. 1st Innings WELWYN 2nd innings Crow b Stocks 13 c Archer 1Jones b Hart 21 c Young 0S Otway b Hart 18 c Archer 2W Otway b Stocks 5 b Beasney 74J Otway b Stocks 7 b Hart 55R Deards b Hart 4 b Beasney 7W Deards b Hart 8 hit wicket 0Field run out 1 not out 5174

Wynn c Archer 2 b Hammond 9Catlin b Hart 4 c Sibley 20Waller not out 4 b Stocks 8Byes 6 Byes 8Total 93 Total 1891st Innings HATFIELD 2nd innings R Young b W Otway 0 b J Otway 0G Hammond b Catlin 4 st Jones 5Beasney b W Otway 4 b W Otway 3Hart b J Otway 5 b J Otway 13Lines b W Otway 0 b J Otway 3Archer b W Otway 0 b J Otway 34Sibley not out 8 b W Otway 0Hammond c Jones 0 b W Otway 2W Stocks b W Otway 5 c W Otway 10T Stocks run out 7 b W Otway 1Smith b W Otway 0 not out 1Byes 7 Byes 3Total 40 Total 75Hertfordshire Mercury - 16 September 1826 A grand match at cricket was played on Wednesday and Thursday in Ware Marsh, between eleven gentlemen of Ware and eleven gentlemen of Hatfield:– Ware, first innings, 141, second innings, 96:– Hatfield first innings, 76; second innings, 53. Ware and Hatfield will play the game out tomorrow. There are 53 runs got out of 161 and two wickets down. Weekly Dispatch - 19 August 1827 WARE AGAINST HATFIELDThe match between Eleven Gentlemen of Ware and Eleven Gentlemen of Hatfield was finished on Monday last, in Ware Marsh. The result was as follows:– Ware, 1st innings, 141; 2nd innings, 96;–total 236 Hatfield, 1st innings, 76; 2nd innings, 78;–total 154 Ware winning by 83 runs Bell's Life in London and Sporting Chronicle - 26 August 1827 The match of cricket between Ware and Hatfield was played out on Monday last, in Ware Marsh; when it began on Monday, Hatfield had got 53 runs out of 161, and two wickets down. The remaining eight wickets went down for 25 runs; the first four of which without a run; and at the conclusion it stood as follows:– Ware, 1st innings 141 Hatfield, 1st innings 76 2nd innings 96 2nd innings 78 Total 237 Total 154 175

Majority for Ware 83 Pierce Egan’s Life in London, and Sporting Guide - 26 August 1827 On Wednesday, Thursday and Monday, August 15, 16 and 20 1827. On Ware Marsh. 1st Innings WARE 2nd innings Josh Charvill, sr st Sibley 0 b Rawley 14Wm. Heard b Stocks 13 c G Hammond 5Thos. Jones b Hart 14 c Archer 0Wm. Cobham b Stocks 1 run out 6Thos. Clibbon c Rawley 30 c T Hammond 31Josh Nelson b Hart 7 lbw 11Wm. Wilkins not out 48 c Hart 21Campkin hit wicket 1 run out 2Charvill, jr c Archer 12 c T Hammond 0Wm. Lambert b Stocks 3 b Hart 3Wm. Griggs st Hart 7 not out 0Byes 5 Byes 3Total 141 Total 961st Innings HATFIELD 2nd innings Stocks run out 6 c Cobham 8John Hart run out 0 b Wilkins 5R Sibley not out 22 b Nelson 13Archer run out 11 b Nelson 23G Hammond b Nelson 9 b Jones 0R Young b Nelson 0 b Jones 0Smith lbw 2 b Wilkins 9T Hammond c Jones 0 not out 0Hammond, sr. lbw 9 c Campkin 5Rawley b Nelson 1 c Jones 5Chas. Sibley b Wilkins 8 c Griggs 0Byes 8 Byes 5Total 76 Total 78County Herald - 18 & 25 August 1827 The Hitchin and Hatfield amateurs played a match at Hitchin last Thursday, which was won by Hitchin by 184 runs to 128. Bell’s Life in London and Sporting Chronicle - 02 August 1829 On the 7th and 8th inst., a match was played in Hatfield Park between eleven gentlemen of Hatfield and eleven of the No Man’s Land club. 1st innings, Hatfield 127 No Man’s Land 87 2nd innings, 158 72 285 159 176

Leaving Hatfield winners by 126 runs. Essex Herald - 13 July 1830 The Enfield and Hatfield Clubs played a match on Tuesday last, in Hatfield Park. The lateness of the evening prevented the match from being played out. The Hatfield scored in the first innings 110 – Enfield 93. The return match will come off on Monday, Aug. 27, in the Chase Green, Enfield. Bell's Life in London and Sporting Chronicle - 19 August 1832 The Enfield and Hatfield Clubs played their return match on Monday and Tuesday last, on the Chase Green, Enfield. Hatfield, first innings 74; second innings, 54; total, 128. Enfield, first innings, 60; second innings, 62; total, 122 – losing by six runs. Bell's Life in London and Sporting Chronicle - 09 September 1832 The return match, on Bernard’s Heath, St Albans; Hatfield had won the first in Hatfield Park. It was said that the conquering match would be played on No Man’s Land. 1st Innings HATFIELD 2nd innings W Stocks hit wicket 18 c Herbert 1W Evans b E Grimston 0 c Boys 0T Hammond c Herbert 28 b Birch 0C Sibley b Birch 3 c Herbert 2F Archer b Lacy 0 c Galer 0J Hart c Boys 0 run out 3R Sibley c Herbert 4 b Birch 7G Catling c Birch 7 b Lacy 0T Farr b Lacy 0 st Birch 5A Green st Birch 1 b Birch 11J Rawley not out 1 not out 1Byes 1, wides 2 3 Byes 2 2Total 65 Total 321st Innings ST ALBANS 2nd innings Hon E Grimston run out 14 R Galer b Catling 12 F Biddle c Archer 7 b Catling 3S Herbert st Hammond 2 not out 13Lord Grimston c C Sibley 4 b Catling 4W Titmus run out 2 st Hammond 2C Birch b Stocks 0 W Smith b Catling 5 b Stocks 1John Lacy run out 9 E Boys b Catling 2 R Mason not out 1 Byes 5 Byes 4Total 63 Total 27177

Mr Green of Essendon had only one hand; but with that one, triflingly assisted by a mechanical construction to attach the bat to his unfortunate arm, he did great execution. County Press for Herts - 28 September 1833 HATFIELD V. HITCHINA Match at cricket was played in Hatfield Park on Monday and Thursday last between the Hatfield and Hitchin Clubs. There was some excellent playing on both sides. The Hitchin winning with nine wickets to go down. The return match will be played at Hitchin, on Wednesday, the 3rd of September. 1st Innings HATFIELD 2nd innings C Sibley b Bent 3 c Gatwood 0Stocks b Bent 10 b Bent 2Hammond b Rose 35 c Josh. Hall 0Hart b Rose 15 st Josh. Hall 5Faithfull b Rose 0 run out 8Catlin b Rose 10 c Stanton 0R Sibley run out 1 st Josh. Hall 0Farr b Bent 2 b Spencer 3Evans b Spencer 0 not out 2White c Bent 0 st Josh. Hall 7Rawley not out 5 b Bent 3Wide balls 10 Wide Ball 1Total 91 Total 311st Innings HITCHIN 2nd innings Jackson st Hammond 2 Bent st Hammond 36 b Stocks 3John Hall b Stocks 2 not out 16Josh. Hall run out 0 Gatwood b Catlin 8 Barnett b Stocks 17 not out 7W Hall c Sibley 3 Spencer b Faithfull 6 Stanton run out 2 Rose b Stocks 2 T Hall not out 0 Byes and wides 8 Byes and wides 13Total 86 Total 3Essex and Herts Mercury - 26 August 1834 CRICKET.– The return match between the Hatfield and Hitchin clubs came off at Hitchin on Wednesday, which was won by the Hitchin gentlemen in one innings. Huntingdon, Bedford & Peterborough Gazette - 06 September 1834 HATFIELD V. WARE178

The following match of cricket was played in Hatfield Park, Herts, on Thursday and Friday last, and afforded great pleasure to the lovers of the game; the Ware gentlemen winning by 61 runs. - The return match is fixed for Thursday, the 20th instant, to be played at Ware. 1st Innings WARE 2nd innings A Charvill c Sibley 56 c Hart 9S Brown b T Hammond 20 b Stocks 1J Reason b T Hammond 19 not out 7W Wilkins c J Hart 24 run out 2M Campkin b Stocks 0 b Stocks 30J Jones c Hart 75 b Stocks 11G Charvill run out 2 b T Hammond 1T Clibbons b Stocks 20 b T Hammond 1J Charville b Stocks 2 b T Hammond 3W Heard not out 5 c Stocks 2S Lambert b Stocks 0 c Sibley 2Byes 10 Byes 6Wide balls 3 Wide balls 1No balls 2 No balls 2Total 238 Total 871st Innings HATFIELD 2nd innings T Farr b Wilkins 1 run out 5C Sibley b Wilkins 0 b Wilkins 21W Stocks c Jones 53 run out 14T Hammond b Wilkins 24 c Brown 16J Hart b Jones 25 c Reason 0R Sibley b Wilkins 26 b Wilkins 11F Archer c Jones 1 b Wilkins 17G Hammond b Brown 2 not out 6H Inwood b Wilkins 7 b Brown 6W Evans b Wilkins 8 b Wilkins 0J Woolley not out 3 leg before wicket 6Byes 6 Byes 4 Wide balls 2Total 156 Total 108Hertfordshire Mercury - 11 August 1835 CRICKET.– A grand match of cricket was played on Thursday and Friday last, in Hatfield Park, between the Ware and Hatfield players. Both towns being celebrated in the annals of cricketing, and the weather being uncommonly fine, a great number of spectators were attracted on both days. The Hatfield gentlemen won by 61 runs. The return match will be played at Ware on Thursday, the 20th instant. Essex and Herts Mercury - 11 August 1835 HATFIELD V. FINCHLEYOn Tuesday last, a match between the Hatfield and Finchley Clubs was com179

menced in the Park of the Marquess of Salisbury, at Hatfield House, Herts, and continued to the following day. From the celebrity of the Hatfield Club, a most interesting match was expected. The following is the score:– 1st Innings HATFIELD 2nd innings J Hart c Tombleson 0 stumped Burden 10W Stocks b Johnson 5 b Johnson 7C Sibley c Tombleson 0 leg before wicket 3R Sibley b Burden 1 stumped Burden 1T Hammond not out 41 c Tombleson 5E T Daniell b Johnson 1 stumped Burden 10Farr leg before wicket 0 leg before wicket 19Archer b Johnson 3 not out 11W Hart b Burden 1 b Burden 5Evans c Tombleson 4 c Fordham 1Rawley c G Field 8 b Tombleson 1Byes 5, wide balls 6 11 Byes 4, w b 12, no b 1 17Total 75 Total 901st Innings FINCHLEY 2nd innings Wand b Hammond 0 Dell b Stocks 0 Burden c Hammond 59 Swain b Stocks 0 not out 1Fordham c Hammond 41 not out 2Johnson not out 26 Tombleson b Stocks 18 F Field b Stocks 1 Roberts b Stocks 0 Wisdom b Stocks 0 G Field b Hammond 3 Byes 6, wide balls 10 16Total 164 Total 3Finchley beating Hatfield by two, with ten wickets to go down. The batting of Mr Thomas Hammond, of the Hatfield Club, was very fine and deserved the success it obtained; indeed, the whole of the club appeared to be generally good batsmen and good in the field. The bowling of the Finchley Club was decidedly superior and went far to produce the result of this match. Mr Swain played long-stop in an admirable manner and amply compensated for his misfortune in losing half of his spectacles in the first innings. The bowling of Messrs Johnson and Burden was extremely good, Messrs Fordham and Burden obtaining upwards of 90 runs before they parted in the first innings. The match was eminently calculated to have been interesting, being played on the most delightful spot in England and immediately before the stately and antique mansion of the Marquess of Salisbury, whose liberality and condescension are constantly extended to the lovers of the old English and manly game of cricket; but the Finchley Club expressed their regret that on the part of their opponents there was an apparent want of that reciprocal and cordial good feeling which ought always to prevail in contests of this description. It is, however, 180

hoped that the Hatfield Club will not hesitate to avail themselves of the earliest opportunity of redeeming their lost laurels by playing the return match at Finchley. Bell's Life in London and Sporting Chronicle - 30 August 1835 On Tuesday last, the Hatfield Club assembled at the Finchley Ground to play the return match with the Finchley Club. It will be remembered that the first match was played at the seat of the Marquess of Salisbury in Hatfield Park, when the Hatfield obtained 75 in their first and 90 in the second innings, together 165. Finchley: first innings 161, second innings 3 (with ten wickets to go down), together 167 - Finchley thus beating in Hatfield in one hand wanting one run. A dispute, however, arose, the Finchley refusing to allow a Mr Green to play instead of another gentlemen, and the Hatfield would not, in consequence, commence the game. The Finchley ultimately consented to allow Mr Green to play, rather than that the match be called off, but the Hatfield would not then agree to play, and the Finchley handed over the money put down to bind the match to the landlord of their clubhouse, who was to suffer by the dispute. Bell's Life in London and Sporting Chronicle - 13 September 1835 HATFIELD AND WARE.– The return match between these Clubs was played in Ware Park on Thursday and Friday week. Score: Hatfield 125 and 126, total 251, William Stocks obtaining 25 and 4, Thomas Farr 9 and 16, George Hammond 0 and 13, Thomas Hammond 14 and 15, William Hart 14 and 4, Charles Sibley 5 and 17, Francis Archer 24 and 39, Rawley 8 and 2, Chapman 8 (not out) and 1, etc. Ware 42 and 104, total 146. S Brown scored 1 and 12, Jones 2 and 22, Wilkins 4 and 10, M Campkin 3 and 31, A Charville 10 and 7, G Charville 11 and 5, etc., Hatfield winning by 105 runs. Bell's Life in London and Sporting Chronicle - 09 September 1838 CRICKET MATCH.– This day (Tuesday), a grand match will be played in Hatfield Park between eleven gentlemen of Hatfield and eleven of Bishops Stortford, for 55 guineas a side. The wickets will be pitched at 10 o’clock this morning. Essex, Herts and Kent Mercury - 02 July 1839 HATFIELD AND BISHOP’S STORTFORDA match was decided in Hatfield Park on Tuesday last, between eleven players of Hatfield and eleven of Bishops Stortford, as it was previously stated for fiftyfive guineas a side, but as it afterwards turned out for a half-crown dinner, the Stortford eleven not have sufficient mettle, and even objecting then to include the scorer and umpire. The day, though not coming under the denomination of a ‘beautiful’ one, was exceedingly favourable to the players, being neither oppressively hot nor unseasonably cold. The stumps were pitched at ten o’clock. It will be seen that the Hatfield went in first, beat their opponents in one inning, with 29 runs to spare. The following is a correct statement of the score:– 181

HATFIELD John Hart b Cowell 2T Farr st Cowell 1W Stocks b Cowell 2T Hammond b C Scarr 44R Daniels leg before wicket 0C Sibley st Cowell 4F Archer b J Nash 4W Hart b Cowell 4R Sibley b J Nash 3J Rowley c Cowell 4J Chapman not out 2Byes 5, wide balls 5 10Total 801st Innings BISHOP’S STORTFORD 2nd innings W Cowell b Hammond 4 b Hammond 5R Slater run out 2 hit wicket 2W Hart st Hammond 1 b Stocks 1T Nash b Stocks 1 leg before wicket 0R Scarr b Stocks 0 hit wicket 0P Nash leg before wicket 2 b Stocks 3J Nash b Stocks 0 leg before wicket 5W Nash not out 6 b Stocks 1C Scarr b Stocks 1 b Hammond 5G Miller c Hammond 2 not out 2J Carnell b Stocks 0 b Hammond 0Byes 1 Byes 1Total 25 Total 25We understand the return match will be played at Stortford on the 16th inst. Essex, Herts and Kent Mercury - 09 July 1839 HATFIELD V. HAILEYBURY COLLEGEThe students of the Haileybury College have begun their season well by a match with the Hatfield players, which took place on Thursday last, in Hatfield Park, close to the north front of the fine old palace. The day being fine, a great many persons were present and were highly gratified at witnessing a pleasant game. The stumps were pitched at half-past eleven, and the match was not finished till near seven o’clock. The bowling of Messrs Goldfinch and Jenkins, though in different styles, was much admired by all, and proved too much for the Hatfield batters, who found it very difficult to get any runs off them. Mr Hillersdon was an excellent long stop, hardly suffering a ball to pass him, and delivering them again with much ease and celerity. The batting of Messrs Inglis and Stone was very good. In fielding, the whole eleven displayed much dexterity, and altogether the Haileybury College club gives promise of proving a formidable rival to the crack clubs of our county. The bowling of Messrs Bodger and Saunders, of Hatfield, was very good, and Halsey and Chapman batted admirably. 182

It was a well-contested game, and from its closeness excited very considerable interest. The following is a copy of the score:– 1st Innings HATFIELD 2nd innings Liquorish c Bramly 2 b Goldfinch 4G Hammond b Jenkins 5 b Goldfinch 0Chapman b Goldfinch 7 not out 20Halsey run out 5 b Goldfinch 16Faircloth c Inglis 5 run out 3Bodger c Fane 0 c Travers 0Saunders b Goldfinch 0 b Jenkins 2W Wells run out 4 b Jenkins 3J Wells b Goldfinch 1 b Goldfinch 2Curtis not out 0 b Jenkins 0Slater b Goldfinch 0 b Jenkins 0Byes 1 Byes, etc 4Total 30 Total 541st Innings HAILEYBURY COLLEGE 2nd innings Hilderson b Bodger 5 b Bodger 0 Bramly b Bodger 2 b Saunders 5 Fane b Bodger 4 b Saunders 3 Travers c Bodger 3 b Bodger 3 Inglis b Bodger 2 not out 18 Goldfinch b Bodger 0 b Bodger 0 Jenkins run out 0 b Bodger 6 Carnac c Faircloth 2 b Bodger 1 Stone c Liquorish 0 b Bodger 20 Court not out 0 b Bodger 7 Money b Saunders 1 b Bodger 0 Byes 1, wide ball 1 2 Byes 2, wide ball 3 5 Total 21 Total 68Hertfordshire Mercury - 30 May 1840 Wednesday, 15 July 1840, GENTLEMEN V. PLAYERS. PLAYERS 155 (William Stocks 46); GENTLEMEN 135 (Valentine Faithfull 40, Roger Anderson 42, Stocks 5 wickets). Players won by 20 runs on the first innings. [For match report see chapter: Inter-club Matches.] THE HATFIELD AND WARE CLUBS played a match in Hatfield Park, Thursday last. Score: Hatfield, first innings, 141; William Stocks obtained 33, Francis Archer 48, Chapman 13, William Faircloth 15, E T Daniell 10, R Sibley 12, Hammond, Thomas Farr, and J Rowley 1 each, and Hart and James Faithfull 0; byes, etc 7. Ware, 31 and 36; Page scored 14 and 8, Wells 3 (not out) and 8, C Chavill 2 and 8, etc. The return match will be played on the 9th September, in Ware Park. A single wicket match took place after the above between William Wells and Charles Bradshaw. The former won in one innings, scoring 22, and Bradshaw 1 and 7. Essex & Herts Mercury - 01 September 1840 183

CRICKET.– The return match of cricket between the Hatfield and Ware Clubs came off in the Angel Mead, at Ware, on Wednesday and Thursday last. The Hatfield, whose superior play is so well known in the county, were considered as certain of being victors, and offers to bet of 5 and 6 to 1 were freely made, and no takers; but after two days of superior play, the Ware gentlemen won the match with seven wickets to spare. Hertfordshire Mercury - 12 September 1840 The Hatfield and Ware return match was played at Ware on Wednesday and Thursday last. Score: Hatfield 42 and 52 – total 94. Chapman obtained 15 and 5, Hammond 10 and 2 (not out), William Hart 8 and 2, Farr 4 and 7, etc. Ware 67 and 28 – total 95, with 8 wickets to go down. Jones scored 30 and 10 (not out), A Charvill 16 and 8 (not out), etc. Bell's Life in London and Sporting Chronicle - 13 September 1840 HAILEYBURY COLLEGE AND THE HATFIELD CLUBOn Tuesday, a match was played at Lord Salisbury’s Park at Hatfield between eleven of that club and the gentlemen of Haileybury College. Haileybury went in first and obtained 54, of which Mr Pigou scored nine by steady batting. The same gentleman also made two excellent catches at the point in the course of the day. The Hatfield then went in but were left in a minority of 16, scoring 40, of which Wells obtained 14. In their second innings, the college gentlemen made 85, of which Mr Ferrers scored 27 by very excellent play, and Mr Stone 18 by slashing hits. The Hatfield now went in against a score of 101 and had scored 42 with the loss of five wickets, when night put an end to the contest. It is due to Hatfield to state that one of their best bats was well-in at the end of the day. The bowling of Mr Tucker on the side of the College was all that could be wished, as was that of Faircloth, of Hatfield, during the first innings, but in the second, he rather fell off. The following is the score: 1st Innings HAILEYBURY COLLEGE 2nd innings Bramly b Faircloth 0 b Faircloth 0Ferrers run out 7 b Saunders 27Pigou b Saunders 9 b Saunders 5Seton Karr run out 1 run out 5Stone c Chapman b Faircloth 7 c Chapman b Saunders 18Fane b Faircloth 3 b C Halsey 0Jenkins c J Chapman b Liquorish 7 c Woolley b Saunders 4F Tucker b Liquorish 1 run out 6De Arbuthnot not out 5 stumped Faircloth 0Grant b Liquorish 1 not out 8Tweedie run out 2 stumped Faircloth 2Bye 1, wide balls 10 11 No Ball 1, byes & wides 9 10Total 54 Total 851st Innings HATFIELD 2nd innings W Wells run out 14 not out 4184

Liquorish run out 0 run out 0Bridgen c Karr b Tucker 3 run out 5G Chapman b Tucker 0 c Fane b Karr 4Faircloth c Pigou b Arbuthnot 3 not out 9Halsey b Tucker 0 b Tucker 2Lambert b Arbuthnot 0 Woolley b Tucker 0 J Chapman leg b w Karr 7 T Wells b Tucker 5 Saunders not out 5 c Pigou b Arbuthnot 1Byes 3, wide balls 5 8 Byes 3, wide balls 12 15Total 40 Total 42Essex, Herts and Kent Mercury - 06 October 1840 HATFIELD AND WARE.– A match for 20 sovereigns a side will be played in Hatfield Park tomorrow (Monday) between eleven gents of Hatfield and eleven of Ware. Bell's Life in London and Sporting Chronicle - 25 July 1841 HATFIELD V. WAREThis match came off on Monday and Tuesday week, in the Marquess of Salisbury’s Park, Hatfield. The following is the result:– 1st Innings HATFIELD 2nd innings V Faithfull b Jones 1 c Jones 0 John Chapman run out 6 c Pace 34 W Stocks c Brown 34 b Brown 22 W Faircloth c Reason 20 not out 67 T Hammond c Brown 12 b Reason 58 F Archer run out 1 b Brown 1 Rawley leg before wicket 2 b Jones 8 W Hart b Jones 9 b Brown 24 James Chapman b Jones 0 b Jones 19 J Saunders not out 1 b Jones 0 W Chapman b Jones 1 b Jones 0 Byes 4, wide balls 1 5 Byes 12, w b 7, n b 1 20 Total 92 Total 2531st Innings WARE 2nd innings S Brown b Stocks 0 not out 1 G Carvill c Stocks 0 c Rawley 0 C Wells b Stocks 0 absent N Page c Hart 5 b Stocks 0 J Jones b Stocks 26 c Hart 0 Campkin b Stocks 1 b Stocks 7 G Heasler run out 1 run out 0 H Clarvill not out 14 st Hammond 0 Reason c Faircloth 1 b Hammond 3 C Page c Archer 2 b Hammond 0 185

J Heard b Stocks 0 absent Wide balls 4 Wide balls 1 Total 54 Total 12Hertfordshire Mercury - 07 August 1841 THE GENTLEMEN AND PLAYERS OF THE HATFIELD AND WARE CLUBS played their return match in Ware Park on Wednesday last. The Hatfield won in one innings and 56 runs. Score: Ware 10 and 28 – total 38. A Charvill marked 0 an 9, C Thoroughood 4 and 6, G Charvill 0 and 8, M Campkin 3 and 0, J Reason 2 and 0, S Brown 0 and 2, etc; byes, etc 0 and 2. Hatfield 94; Thomas Hammond obtaining 40, William Hart 14, Valentine Faithfull, Esq. 9, A Daniells, Esq. 6, John Sanders 5, John Chapman 3, William Stocks 4, William Faircloth 2, etc; byes, etc, 9. Bell's Life in London and Sporting Chronicle - 22 August 1841 COUNTY OF HERTFORD AND THE HATFIELD CLUBThis match was played at No Man’s Land, Herts, on Monday and Tuesday last. The County commenced the batting, the Hon R Grimston and B Sullivan, Esq., going in first; the latter retired without a run, but the former scored 9 in excellent style. Lord Grimston also batted admirably, adding 14 to the score, in which there were three threes in succession; and Lines likewise handled the timber with effect, scoring a four and two single runs, the others were very unsuccessful, and the innings terminated with a score of 55. Mr Valentine Faithful and John Chapman began the innings for Hatfield, but only 4 were marked between them. Stocks commenced with a hit of four, but after adding two single runs to his score, was caught by Mr Anderson. Hammond having made a run, next time sent the ball away for 5, when his career was stopped by the Hon R Grimston who caught him out. The play of Mr Archer and Saunders was extremely good, but Messrs B Sullivan and Meetkirk succeeded in lowering all the wickets for 53. Hatfield thus being in a minority of two. In the second innings of the county, some beautiful play was exhibited. Lord Grimston, as will be seen by the score, obtained 40, in which there were an equal number of twos and threes, and one four. Mr B Sullivan, in his 32, scored two fours, five threes, and three twos. Hon. E H Grimston and Lines also made admirable scores, in which the twos and threes were numerous. The innings amounted to 151, leaving the Hatfield Club 154 runs to get to win. They put in Faircloth and Saunders, but the wicket of the latter was disturbed after he had scored two runs. The former played well and ran up a score of 11. Hammond having made a single run, marked a 5, as in his first innings, but he was not doomed to go out until he had obtained 20. Mr Archer scored 7 in three hits. Hart the same number in four, and James Chapman 4 in one hit. The bowling, however, was too much for them, and the innings terminated for 83. The County thus winning by 70 runs. The play in all its departments on both sides was greatly admired throughout the match by a numerous and fashionable company. We subjoin the score:– 1st Innings THE COUNTY 2nd innings Hon R Grimston c Archer b Hammond 9 c Archer b Hammond 3186

B Sullivan b Stocks 0 c Faircloth b Hammond 32Hon E H Grimston b Hammond 1 b Stocks 18Lines c Stocks b Hammond 16 not out 29F Sullivan c Faircloth b Hammond 9 c Archer b Faircloth 7H Morgan b Stocks 0 run out 0Lord Grimston c Hart b Hammond 14 b Faircloth 40A Meetkirk c Horsey b Hammond 2 b Hammond 4H Anderson b Stocks 1 b Hammond 3Otway not out 0 b Hammond 0J Warden b Stocks 0 c Hart b Stocks 2Wide balls 3 Byes 5, wide balls 8 13Total 55 Total 1511st Innings HATFIELD 2nd innings John Chapman b Meetkirk 3 b Sullivan 5V Faithfull c Warden b Sullivan 1 run out 0W Stocks c Anderson b Sullivan 6 b Sullivan 5W Faircloth b Sullivan 0 b Sullivan 11T Hammond c R Grimston b Meetkirk 6 c E Grimston b Sullivan 20R Horsey b Meetkirk 2 not out 1F Archer b Sullivan 11 c Warden b Meetkirk 7Hart b Meetkirk 1 c Warden b Meetkirk 7James Chapman run out 4 c Otway b Sullivan 4Saunders not out 11 b Meetkirk 4A Rowley b Meetkirk 3 run out 3Wide balls 5 Bye 1, w b 12, n b 3 16Total 53 Total 83The return match is to be played on Monday and Tuesday next, in the Marquis of Salisbury’s park. Bell's Life in London and Sporting Chronicle - 29 August 1841 HATFIELD CLUB V. THE COUNTY OF HERTFORDThe match between the Hatfield Club and the gentlemen of the county of Hertford was played on Monday and Tuesday last in Hatfield Park, the seat of the Marquis of Salisbury, and was won by the former with nine wickets to go down, as will be seen by the following score:– 1st Innings COUNTY OF HERTFORD 2nd innings Hon R Grimston run out 7 b Stocks 27R Anderson b Stocks 0 b Faircloth 5B Sullivan b Stocks 2 run out 12Hon E H Grimston b Hammond 10 c and b Stocks 11A Meetkirk b Stocks 5 not out 5Hon F Grimston c Faircloth b Hammond 7 b Hammond 8G Cottrell b Stocks 14 b Stocks 2H Anderson run out 7 b Stocks 1W Franks c Faircloth b Hammond 2 c Faithfull b Faircloth 0Hon C Lyons not out 0 b Stocks 0187

Mr Otway absent 0 b Stocks 1Byes 2 Bye 1, wide balls 9 10Total 56 Total 821st Innings HATFIELD 2nd innings W Stocks c Otway b Sullivan 53 Mr Rowley b Sullivan 0 W Faircloth c Sullivan b Meetkirk 12 Saunders b Meetkirk 5 John Chapman b Sullivan 5 T Hammond leg b w b Meetkirk 0 c R Anderson b Meetkirk 5F Archer c R Anderson b Keetkirk 1 V Faithfull c E Grimston b Cottrell 7 not out 3Hart b Sullivan 16 R Horsey leg b w b Cotterell 0 James Chapman not out 1 Byes 2, wide balls 18, no balls 7 27 Byes, etc 4Total 127 Total 12Bell's Life in London and Sporting Chronicle - 05 September 1841 A match is in contemplation between St Alban’s, with Lord Grimston and his brothers, versus the Hatfield Club, which is to come off immediately. The Era - 07 August 1842 HATFIELD VS. WARE.– On Monday, the above match, which has excited considerable interest, in consequence of the well-known abilities of the players, was commenced in Hatfield Park, the seat of the Marquis of Salisbury, and finished on Tuesday in rather an unpleasant manner. We are sorry to have it to record that the game was stopped in the second innings of Hatfield, through the conduct of the Ware umpire, who acted in a most barefaced manner, in giving out one of the players, a Mr Archer; the affair was so palpably unjust and one-sided to the numberless spectators present, and to every one concerned (excepting those who wished it as it was), that the Hatfield gents, much to their credit, struck their stumps, and, though in a fair way winning the game, gave up the money, rather than play under such circumstances, at the same time registering their disgust at such a disgraceful proceeding. At this period of the game the score was as follows:– Ware, first innings, 157, out of which number Mr Jones scored 92 in a very masterly manner from his own bat; second innings 65. Hatfield, first innings, 109; second innings, 151, with 5 wickets down. The Era - 28 August 1842 HATFIELD V. WAREOn Monday the 21st instant a match was played between the Ware Club and the Hatfield Club. The following is the score:– 1st Innings WARE 2nd innings C Wells b Stocks 7 c Rawley 5188

C Thorogood b Hammond 7 b Stocks 3J Jones b Hammond 92 b Stocks 24Campkin b Hammond 2 c W Chapman 1N Page b Stocks 18 c Archer 9A Charvill c Faircloth 4 b Hammond 3Heasler leg before wicket 9 b Stocks 0G Charvill c Faircloth 0 b Hammond 1T Jones b Hammond 6 c Faircloth 9G Hitch b Stocks 3 not out 0E Page not out 0 c Sibley 0Byes 4, wide balls 5 9 Byes 1, wide balls 2 3Total 157 Total 581st Innings HATFIELD 2nd innings F Chapman c Jones 23 c N Page 17W Chapman c Thorogood 0 W Stocks b Campkin 26 c Jones 7C Sibley run out 4 leg before wicket 8Faircloth c G Charvill 9 not out 10Hammond not out 26 b Campkin 4Archer b J Jones 0 run out 3Saunders c T Jones 1 James Chapman c Campkin 6 R Sibley b Campkin 0 Rawley b Campkin 0 Byes 12, wide balls 214 Byes 1Total 109 Total 50Several of the Hatfield players expressed themselves dissatisfied with the decision of the umpire, Mr Beecroft, in declaring Archer run out, and to the astonishment and disappointment of the great number of persons, from both Hatfield and Ware, they refused to play the game out. The difference was afterwards amicably arranged, and the return match will be played in Ware Marsh on Monday next. Hertfordshire Mercury - 27 August 1842 HATFIELD AND WARE.– On Monday the above match, which has excited considerable interest, commenced in Hatfield Park, the seat of the Marquis of Salisbury, and finished on Tuesday in rather an unpleasant manner. The game was stopped in the second innings of Hatfield, through the conduct of the Ware umpire, who acted (says our correspondent) in so barefaced a manner in giving out one of the players, a Mr Archer, that the Hatfield gents struck their stumps and gave up the money, rather than play under such circumstances. At this period of the game the score was as follows: Ware first innings 157; out of which number Mr Jones scored 92 in a very masterly manner; Second innings 65. Hatfield first innings 108. Second innings 51, with five wickets down. Bell's Life in London and Sporting Chronicle - 28 August 1842 HATFIELD V. WARE.– Mr Charles Wells, secretary to the Ware Club, has written 189

us a very long and a very angry letter, touching on the report in our paper of last week, of their match at cricket with the Hatfield Club. It was stated that Mr Archer, on the latter side, was given out unfairly by the Ware umpire, when the Hatfield gentlemen “struck their stumps in disgust.” The account was transmitted to us by our regular reporter, and by no “anonymous correspondent,” nor have we any reason to doubt the accuracy of his statement. We are happy, however, to find that the dispute was subsequently amicably arranged, and that a return match was played at Ware, when the Hatfieldites, with but 35 runs to get, saved their bacon only by one wicket. The Era - 04 September 1842 WARE V. HATFIELDMonday the 28th ult., being the day fixed for the return match between the Hatfield and Ware Cricket Clubs in Ware Marsh, a great number of persons assembled at an early hour to witness the game, which, from the celebrity of the clubs, excited great interest. Several marquees and booths were erected on the ground for the accommodation of the players and the dispensation of creature comforts to the visitors. Betting at commencement even; Ware for choice as they were playing on their own ground. The Ware players went in first and scored 53 off very sharp bowling by Stocks and Hammond, who cut up the stumps of several of the best batters for literally nothing. Amongst others who scored nil was J Jones, who it will be remembered scored 92 at Hatfield last week. The Hatfield players went in and scored steadily but by no means rapidly until – 7 wickets being down and a heavy thunderstorm threatening to come down – the wickets were struck and the hundreds on the ground rushed pele-mele for shelter. The rain soon after fell in torrents, accompanied by large hailstones and vivid flashes of lightning, and the loud peeling thunder seemed to shake the ground. Many sought the marquees and booths, and stood on the forms and tables until the storm passed over, and then had the pleasure of wading across the Marsh, which was soon covered with water, in some parts a foot deep. Others, more wisely, ran for the town, and many an old cricketer proved himself good for a run yet, in a race to the wicket of mine host of the Oak, himself a staunch old cricketer. An excellent spread was provided by Mr Worpell at the Clarendon Inn, and all the players and many of their friends, did ample justice to his catering and their own appetites. The evening was spent in the utmost harmony, and it was agreed the match should be played out on the following day, weather permitting. Mr Archer, and indeed all the Hatfield gentlemen, expressed their regrets that they did not finish the match last week. On Tuesday morning, the Hatfield players arrived at Ware, and although the morning promised a fine day, it was found impossible to play in the Marsh. William Parker, Esq., most handsomely offered Ware Park, to which ground they went to finish the game. At the end of the first innings, the Hatfield players headed Ware by 28. These were cut out by Ware, who set up 35 for Hatfield, and the latter won the game by 1 wicket. When the Hatfield players wanted only 4 runs, a catch, which would have given the game to Ware, was missed by cover point owing to the slippery state of the ground. A more closely contested game was perhaps never played. The batting and 190

bowling was on both sides excellent, and the fielding everything that a cricketer could wish for. We understand an early appointment will be made to play off the tie. We subjoin the score: 1st Innings WARE 2nd innings T Waller c Hart 9 b Stocks 4M Campkin b Stocks 8 c Sibley 5J Jones b Hammond 0 b Stocks 2C Thorogood b Stocks 0 b Hammond 3N Page run out 10 b Hammond 1G Charvill b Stocks 12 b Hammond 28W Chapman b Stocks 5 b Stocks 0C Wells b Stocks 0 b Stocks 10G Heasler b Hammond 0 not out 5T Jones b Stocks 4 b Stocks 0G Hitch not out 2 b Stocks 0Byes 2, wide ball 1 3 Byes 3, wide balls 2 5Total 53 Total 631st Innings HATFIELD 2nd innings W Stocks b Waller 25 c Heasler 0W Faircloth b Waller 5 b Jones 7J Chapman c J Jones 0 b Jones 0T Hammond c J Jones 6 b Waller 2C Sibley c Heasler 1 b Jones 0F Archer b Heasler 6 b Waller 0W Chapman b Waller 13 c Page 0W Hart c Campkin 12 b Jones 8Sanders b Waller 1 b Waller 0J Chapman b Heasler 2 not out 10R Sibley not out 0 not out 1Byes 3, wide balls 6, no balls 1 10 Byes 5, wide balls 3 8Total 81 Total 36Hertfordshire Mercury - 10 September 1842 The report failed to differentiate between John and James Chapman. HATFIELD AND WARE.– On Monday last a very interesting match was played between the above in the Ware Marsh, Ware going in first and scoring 53: Hatfield followed, and with 8 wickets scored 73 runs, when time being called, headquarters was the order of the day. Tuesday was appointed to finish the match, but in consequence of the excessive rain the night previous, was obliged to move the stakes, and finish the match in Ware Park, the last two wickets adding runs to the score, making a total of 81 runs in the first innings. Ware, in their second innings, scored 63 runs, leaving Hatfield 36 to win. At this time bets were 10 and 15 to 1 on Hatfield, but fortune frowned on them, and four of the best wickets fell for four runs – eight wickets for 23 runs, and 9 wickets for 31 runs, leaving the last wicket five runs to win. Three were scored, when up she went, but Fortune turned her wheel, for instead of the ball going into the fieldsman’s hands, it fell in his mouth, adding 191

one more to the score, and ultimately the Hatfield came off conquerors, with one wicket to go down. Bell's Life in London and Sporting Chronicle - 04 September 1842 HATFIELD V. BALL’S PARKOn Monday last, a match was played at Hatfield, between the Ball’s Park and Hatfield Clubs, which was decided in one innings, as follows:– BALL’S PARK HATFIELD T Webster b Stocks 13 Saunders b Longmore 10T Fontain run out 10 W Chapman b Longmore 1W Longmore b Chapman 9 Stocks run out 0J Newman b Chapman 0 John Chapman c Brown 0J Farrow b Stocks 2 Faircloth b Farrow 52W Chapman run out 4 C Sibley c Newman 47H Adkins c R Sibley 9 W Hart c Longmore 16J Rayment b Stocks 0 Dunham c Longmore 12J Brown c Dunham 27 James Chapman c Gardener 0J Staples b Chapman 9 R Sibley not out 5J Gardener not out 4 Wilson b Adkins 3Byes and wide balls 16 Byes and wide 8Total 103 Total 154Hertfordshire Mercury - 09 September 1843 CRICKET.– A match of cricket was played in Hatfield Park on Tuesday last, between the under-eleven of the Hatfield Club and the under-eleven of the Hertford Club. The following is the score: 1st Innings HATFIELD 2nd innings J Powell b Hughes 19 st Draper 0 F Wingrave b Crouch 16 c Hughes 0J Saunders b Crouch 6 b Crouch 25W Chapman b Crouch 6 c Tisoe 12J Dunham not out 40 st Draper 21C Hardum b Crouch 18 b Crouch 0J Willson b Newman 5 b Hughes 2T Saunders c Row 5 b Hughes 1T Rodger b Adkins 0 b Adkins 25C Paul b Newman 11 b Newman 9J Fairbrother run out 0 not out 0Byes and wide balls 5 Byes 2Total 131 Total 971st Innings HERTFORD 2nd innings H Adkins b Dunham 7 b Dunham 59J Hughes c Fairbrother 0 c T Saunders 36R Newman b J Saunders 14 b J Saunders 4W Crouch run out 2 run out 3J Draper b Dunham 0 st Chapman 6192

W Farrow c Willson 6 b Dunham 0R Row b Dunham 1 run out 3J Brinat st Chapman 4 b Dunham 0W Tisoe b Dunham 0 c Fairbrother 1G Smith not out 0 run out 5W Starr run out 1 not out 0Byes 1 Byes and wide balls 13Total 36 Total 130Hertfordshire Mercury - 03 August 1844 HERTFORD v. HATFIELDThe return match between the Hertford and Hatfield Clubs was played on Tuesday last, in Ball’s Park, which terminated in favour of the Hertford, with five wickets to go down, as will be seen from the following score:– 1st Innings HATFIELD 2nd innings J Powell b Adkins 8 run out 5F Wingrave c Crouch 3 b Brown 8J Saunders b Adkins 0 c Hutcherson 0W Chapman b Adkins 0 not out 18J Dunham b Crouch 5 b Newman 19C Hardum b Crouch 0 b Adkins 1J Wilson c Brown 0 b Brown 0T Rodgers c Crouch 1 b Adkins 14C Paul c Newman 3 b Adkins 5J Fairbrother b Crouch 5 b Crouch 0W Archer not out 0 b Adkins 3Byes, etc 5 Byes, etc 6Total 30 Total 791st Innings HERTFORD 2nd innings J Hughes c Wingrave 24 b Wilson 6E Hutcherson b Dunham 4 J Brown b Dunham 3 b Paul 14R Newman b Dunham 0 not out 22H Adkins b Dunham 7 b Wilson 4J Draper b Wilson 0 W Crouch run out 4 not out 2W Farrow c Wilson 2 b Wilson 1J Briant b Paul 0 W Tisoe b Dunham 7 run out 0W Starr not out 2 Byes, etc 5 Byes, etc 3Total 58 Total 52Hertfordshire Mercury - 17 August 1844 KING’S WALDEN V. HATFIELD193

This match was played on Monday last at Hatfield Park, the seat of the Marquis of Salisbury, and it being only one day’s play, it was decided in favour of Hatfield by 59 runs. Score: HATFIELD KING’S WALDEN J Dunham c Warden 30 Rev Bailirt leg b w b Hammond 1J Wilson run out 8 J Moss b Hammond 0W Stocks hit wicket 11 V Barker c C Sibley 16W Faircloth b Clisby 8 J Warden b Hammond 4C Sibley st Coleman 3 W Clisby b Hammond 0T Hammond c Warden 10 J Ivory b H Crawley 16J Chapman hit wicket 18 W Rose b Stocks 8E Daniell b Smith 5 T Smith b H Crawley 8H Crawley b Rose 6 W Coleman b Hammond 2W Hart not out 2 E Smith b H Crawley 0R Sibley b Smith 1 Hampton not out 0Byes 5, no balls 2, wide balls 13 22 Byes 2, wide balls 8 10Total 124 Total 65Bell's Life in London and Sporting Chronicle - 05 October 1845 WARE V. HATFIELDA match was played between these clubs on August 11, 12, and 13. The following is the score:– 1st Innings HATFIELD 2nd innings C Hardum b Heasler 12 b Chapman 7J Dunham b Heasler 6 c Waller 2W Stocks b Chapman 62 run out 3W Faircloth b Chapman 3 c N Page 11C Sibley c N Page 25 run out 2J Chapman c T Waller 8 b Chapman 3W Chapman b Chapman 5 b Chapman 0J Wilson b Jones 9 b Chapman 3J Fairbrother b Heasler 0 c Heasler 9R Sibley not out 3 c Heasler 0J Powell b Jones 0 not out 5Byes 8, wide 19 27 Byes 7, wide 3 10Total 163 Total 551st Innings WARE 2nd innings C Wells c J Chapman 2 G Smith run out 9 c J Chapman 0J Jones c C Hardum 74 c Powell 7W Chapman b J Chapman 5 c J Chapman 15T Waller leg before wicket 0 not out 8J Grout b Stocks 0 C Thorogood c C Sibley 10 run out 7H Greggs c C Sibley 20 b C Sibley 9C Booth b Stocks 2 c Stocks 2G Heasler not out 4 c Wilson 0194

N Page b C Sibley 4 not out 4Byes 13, wide 16 20 Byes 2, wide 3 5Total 159 Total 57Hertfordshire Mercury - 22 August 1846 HATFIELD V. HERTFORDA well-contested match was played on Tuesday and Wednesday last, in Hatfield Park, between the Hertford Thistle Club and the Hatfield Club, which terminated in favour of the latter with one wicket to go down. The batting on both sides was very good, and the round bowling of the Hertford was much admired. The following is the score:– Hertford, first innings, 107; 2nd innings, 49; Hatfield, 1st innings, 69; 2nd innings, 89. The return match, we understand, will be played in Ball’s Park on Monday next. Hertfordshire Mercury - 12 September 1846 HERTFORD AND HATFIELD.– The match was played on Tuesday and Wednesday last, in Hatfield Park, when the latter came off victorious. Score:– Hertford 107 and 49 – total 156; of which W Crouch obtained 9 and 0, C Taylor 6 and 0, J Hughes 17 and 7, W Clark, 9 and 0, H Adkins 22 and 1, J Johnson 5 and 0, J Devonshire 0 and 9, W Huff (not out) 6 and 4, J Draper 5 and 13, J Pearson 3 and 0, T Lancaster 6 and (not out) 3; byes etc 19 and12. Hatfield 69 and 89 – total 158; of which John Sanders obtained 4 and 2, J Powell 0 and (not out) 4, W Chapman 1 and 11, J Willson 15 and 0, Charles Hardum 10 and 16, T Landers 10 and (not out) 10, J Cain 13 and 13, T Bodjer 1 and 2, James Hart 8 and 8, W Archer (not out) 0 and 12, etc; byes etc 7 and 11. Bell’s Bell's Life in London and Sporting Chronicle - 13 September 1846 HERTFORD V. HATFIELDThe return match between the Hertford Thistle Club and the Hatfield Club was played on Monday last in Balls Park. The batting of Messrs Hughes and Adkins was much admired, the former obtaining 40, and the latter 21 runs; their steady play completely baffled the bowling of the Hatfield; they were eventually got out by the former being caught, and the latter run out. The batting of the Hatfield was very good, especially that of Mr Hardum, who obtained 34 runs ere his ‘timber’ was levelled; the fielding of the Hatfield was much admired. In the first innings the Hatfield obtained 84 runs; the Hertford followed and got 105, consequently heading their opponents 21 runs. The Hatfield then again went to the wickets, and succeeded in obtaining 65 runs, leaving the Hertford 44 runs to get. The Hertford immediately went in, and obtained 17 runs with only 2 wickets down, when the clock struck 6, the time agreed upon for drawing the stumps, and thus terminated the day’s proceedings; the Hatfield declined to play the game out, and the match was given in favour of the Hertford. We understand that the Hatfield have declined to play the conquering match. Hertfordshire Mercury - 19 September 1846 195

HATFIELD V. HERTFORDA match was played on Tuesday and Wednesday last, in Hatfield Park, between eleven players of Hertford and eleven of the Hatfield Club. The following is the score: 1st Innings HATFIELD 2nd innings J Cain c Hughes 0 b Hughes 16J Wilson leg bef. wicket 3 b Cattling 4W Stocks b Cattling 8 c Cattling 19W Faircloth run out 7 c R Newman 53C Sibley c Darton 10 b Darton 4J Chapman b Hughes 18 c Webster 3C Hardum b Hughes 2 b Hughes 2W Hart b Hughes 1 run out 1W Chapman not out 13 c Hughes 23J Hart c Adkins 5 not out 0J Fairbrother b Cattling 3 b Devonshire 0Byes 5, wide balls 5 10 byes 2, wide balls 3 5Total 80 Total 1301st Innings HERTFORD 2nd innings T Webster b Stocks 12 not out 50J Newman b Stocks 25 b Stocks 2H Adkins b Stocks 4 not out 33J Farrow c W Hart 12 c Wilson 0R Newman b Stocks 0 c Hardum 0J Hughes b J Chapman 23 b J Chapman 16G Cattling b J Chapman 1 T Fountain b Stocks 0 W Dartou c J Chapman 6 W Clarke not out 7 run out 7T Devonshire 3 Byes 3, wide balls 3 6 byes 2, wide balls 2 4Total 90 Total 112We understand that the return match will be played in Ball’s Park on Wednesday next, when some good play is expected. Refreshments will be provided on the ground by Mr J Farrow. Hertfordshire Mercury - 28 August 1847 HERTFORD V. HATFIELDOn Wednesday last, the return match between the above clubs was played in Balls Park, in the presence of a large number of spectators. The play of the Hertford side was first rate, particularly the bowling of Messrs Hughes and Devonshire, which made great havoc among “the timber” of the Hatfield. The batting of Messrs Webster, Farrow, and J Newman, was very much admired. The play of the Hatfield was very good, but they could not stand against the superior bowling of the Hertford, they having only obtained 47 runs in the 1st innings. The Hertford then went 196