gave him one slightly to the off, which he promptly cracked to the boundary at long-on. In the next he pulled a good-length straight one to the same spot; and Morley lost his head and did not know where to bowl to him. Afterwards, Moberly and E. M. put on runs at a great pace, and eventually we beat them by an innings.
Gloucestershire v. Lancashire, in 1889, at Liverpool, was another illustration of it. Lancashire scored 73 and 102; Gloucestershire 80 first, and had lost five wickets for 42 second, the wicket unplayable. E. M. was our last resource, and he justified it. Very early in his innings Briggs favoured him with a ball about a foot to the off, which was sent to leg. Two or three extra fieldsmen were placed on that side for him, and Briggs tried him again. He gave him a good-length ball, a little outside the off stump, which E. M. hit between cover-point and mid-off and scored four by it; and then, to show it was no fluke, repeated it an over or two later. Briggs was all at sea, and E. M. had the measure of him afterwards, and, with the help of A. C. M. Croome, won for us a splendid and unexpected victory by three wickets.
It was hitting and nerve of that kind which made E. M. the terror of local clubs when he played for West Gloucestershire, between 1860 and 1867; and it was more than once seriously proposed that he should not be allowed to play. And he was just as successful with the ball. I give some of his exceptional performances, to show the quality of his play at that time:
Aug., 1861.—For Berkeley v. Knole Park, he scored 100 not out in a total of 119, and took every wicket 2nd innings.
Aug., 1861.—For Lansdown v. Clifton, 119 not out, and took every wicket 2nd innings.
