more work than ever; and he is still to-day, as he has been any time in the last twelve years, the finest wicket-keeper who ever donned gloves. Gregory, in the field, was conspicuous for quickness, certainty, and a wonderful return, and is worthy of a very high place amongst brilliant cover-points. Two or three batsmen who were ignorant of his powers had to pay the penalty of a run-out in attempting a short run.
First-class county cricket and representative matches suffered very little by the Australian visit. In the former, Surrey, as was expected, took a very decided lead in the early part of the season, and came out well ahead of the others. Ably led by Mr. J. Shuter, it scored victory after victory, and it was only at the end of the year that it suffered defeat. It had a very strong batting team, nearly every member of the eleven being good for runs; while in bowling, Lohmann and Sharpe were up to the form of any bowler in England. Lohmann's performance of taking over 200 wickets in first-class cricket for the third year in succession had never before been accomplished. Turner and Ferris reached that figure in 1888 and 1890, Southerton in 1870, Peate in 1882, and Spofforth in 1884; but these are the only names I can recall.
Lancashire did very well, and took second place; and both Kent and Yorkshire came out better than in the previous year. Greater things were expected of Nottinghamshire; but, with the exception of Shrewsbury and Gunn with the bat, and Attewell with the ball, hardly a member of the team played up to his 1889 form. Gloucestershire went through rather a peculiar experience: until the latter part of July it never won a match, but after it began its Northern tour it never suffered defeat. In batting, J. Cranston, my brother E.M., Painter, and myself were most successful; and Woof bowled very well on the slow wickets. Sussex
