Marsh Mills Chimney Disaster

Only two weeks after the official opening of the new Town Hall in Cleckheaton, when the excitement of such an important local event was still at the front of everyone's mind, a very dark cloud of horror and despair would fill the hearts of the population.

Shortly after 5pm on Wednesday 24th February 1892, just as many would have been preparing to leave work for the day, the most horrific disaster in the history of the Spen Valley occurred at Marsh Mills by the collapse of a chimney, some 180 feet high, onto the work premises of Wesley Barraclough, flannel manufacturer, in a complex owned by the reputable Thornton Brothers. Upwards of 80 employees, many young local girls, were engaged in their business at the time.

In a very short space of time, workers from all around the area were on the scene of the chaos and started a rescue mission which would take some considerable time to complete. The chimney had fallen onto the roof of a four storey mill and many hundreds of tons of rubble had to be removed in the search for victims and survivors. The local Police, St. John's Ambulance Corps, Fire Brigade and all the medical men of the district also rallied to the scene to assist. Workers from the nearby gasworks tied ladders together in order to reach the upper levels. The rescue operation would go well into the evening and night and by midnight eight bodies had been recovered.

In the grim light of the following morning, it soon became apparent the scale of the catastrophe that had been bestowed upon the locality. A total of fourteen victims (12 women and 2 men) had now been located and two of the survivors were in a very critical condition.

Speculation was rife as to the cause of the accident and recently experts had examined the chimney and declared it safe. No doubt further evidence of this would be heard in the coming inquest...

Opening of the Inquest and identification of the victims

At about 4pm on Thursday 26th Feb 1892 - The initial Inquest was opened by the Coroner, Mr Maitland, at the Marsh Hotel, more or less opposite the scene of the tragedy, but due to the absence of a Government Inspector and the solicitor for the owners of the property not being prepared to cross examine the witnesses, evidence of identification only was heard. The following list of victims were identified:

Sarah Ann Brooke, aged 62, worked many years for Mr Barraclough. Identified by her son Alfred Brooke.
Mary Alice Clough, aged 20, a flannel weaver for Mr Barraclough for over three years. Identified by her father Edwin Clough.
Elizabeth Collinson, aged 34, a flannel power loom weaver and unmarried. Identified by her mother Rose Collinson.
Rhoda Collinson, sister of the above, aged 26, a flannel weaver and unmarried. Identified by her mother Rose Collinson.
John Robert Lewis, aged 47, a mechanic employed by Messrs. Thornton. Identified by his son Sykes Lewis.
Albert Edward Milnes, aged 20, a self-acting mill minder for Mr Barraclough for 3 or 4 months. Identified by his father William Milnes.
Emma Pickles, aged 20, a flannel weaver and unmarried. Identified by her brother George William Pickles. Her body was the last to be extricated from the ruins.
Eliza Stead, aged 31, a flannel weaver. Identified by her husband Rawden Stead.
Mary Elizabeth Travis, aged 35, a power loom weaver. Worked at the mill for the last two years. Identified by her father John Travis.
Eliza Turner, aged 43, a weaver and unmarried. Identified by father Samuel Turner.
Harriet Turner, sister of the above, aged 46, a weaver and unmarried. Identified by father Samuel Turner.
Mary Varndell, aged 31, a flannel weaver for Mr Barraclough for 10 or 11 years. Identified by her father James Varndell.
Emily Louisa Walker, aged 33, a weaver. Identified by her sister Sarah Walker.
Victoria Whiteley, aged 40, a warper, unmarried. Worked for Mr Barraclough for about 11 years. Identified by her sister Emma Jane Whiteley.

At the conclusion of this evidence the requisite orders for removal were issued by the Coroner and during the evening the bodies were released to their relatives. The inquest was then adjourned until 11am the following Wednesday.

Funerals of the Victims

Over the weekend of 27/28 February 1892, the funerals took place of all the victims. Many of the local shops half-closed their shutters in respect and large crowds assembled at the various venues.

The first interment was at St. John's church, Cleckheaton. Mary Varndell, aged 31, a weaver of George Street. The procession was headed by 20 members of St. John's Guild, to which the deceased belonged. Eight other members acted as bearers. A second service at St. John's was for Mary Alice Clough, aged just 20 years, from Woodside at Hightown. She was attached to the Wesleyan Chapel at Cleckheaton, of which a number of representatives were present, along with numerous fellow workgirls, eight of whom acted as bearers.

At Christ Church, Liversedge a double service was held for John Lewis and Emily Louisa Walker. In the case of Mr Lewis, Mr Rawdon Thornton of Marsh Mills and twenty fellow workmen preceded the hearse and in the case of Miss Walker, a large contingent of female friends representing Hightown Wesleyan Chapel and Sunday School, with which the deceased was connected.

At St. Mary's church, Gomersal the funerals of Albert Edward Milnes, aged 25 and Mary Elizabeth Travis, also aged 25 took place.

At Whitechapel, Cleckheaton the funerals of Emma Pickles and the sisters Elizabeth & Rhoda Collinson took place.

Cleckheaton Old Cemetery was the scene of several interments. There were over a thousand people assembled to witness the burials. The first was that of Sarah Ann Brooke, the oldest victim. There were four generations of her family present ranging from her grand children to her mother, who was a frail 92 year old. Eliza Stead was the next to be interred. She was the wife of Rawden Stead. The procession was headed by eight members of the Village Pride Lodge, of which her husband is a member. The last one of the day was that of the Turner sisters, Eliza and Harriet, whose coffins had been made by a relative. Workpeople at Marsh Mills and Sunday School teachers of the Christian Brethren acted as bearers. On Sunday, the last of the burials took place with that of Victoria Whiteley, again with crowds of people witnessing the ceremony.

The image to the right is from the Illustrated News and the inset incorrectly records "Mrs Brooke" as being the mother of victim Sarah Ann Brooke. Her surname is in fact Lister and her maiden name was Thornton, related to the Thornton Brothers of Marsh Mills.

The Inquest resumes

On Wednesday 2nd Mar 1892, the inquest was resumed at the Liversedge Public Offices and was numerously attended by legal representatives for the victims, property and owners, as well as a factory Inspector and other officials.

Dr. Frederick Farrow, M.R.C.S., was the first witness who gave evidence regarding the examination of the bodies of the deceased. He described the injuries sustained by them, stating in some cases death was due to bodily injuries but in many cases there was evidence that fright had been the cause of death. There was no evidence to show that any of the victims suffered suffocation. The injuries caused were either by the person falling or by something falling upon them.

George Roberts, Victoria Villa, Cleckheaton, flannel manufacturer, stated he was the son-in-law of Mr Barraclough and assists him in the manufacturing department of Marsh Mills. He was at the premises on the day of the disaster and had last seen the deceased people at about 4pm. He then left to go to the office, so was not present when the chimney fell. Cross examination of this witness was then deferred.

Willie Taylor, Quarry Cottage, Littletown, a boy in the employ of Messrs. Thornton Brothers as a plug maker, stated he was at the mill when the chimney fell. He stated he had seen some lime and two or three bricks drop out near the bottom of the chimney. He was frightened and ran away. He added that he had seen two men working on the chimney where the bricks had dropped out. They were removing old bricks and putting new ones in. It was then agreed that this witness would be recalled.

At this point the Coroner was asked if the jury had visited the scene. This was done last week but the jury foreman pointed out that they had not been back since the removal of all the debris. The Coroner didn't think this was necessary.

Robert Isherwood, Spen Lane, Gomersal, a wood sawyer in the employ of Messrs. Thornton Brothers stated he had seen the chimney from day to day for the past nine years, but for the last six or seven weeks had kept an eye on it. His attention was drawn to it some seven or eight months ago, in consequence of a stone having dropped from the top during the night. Since Christmas there had been a strong wind now and then, which had given the chimney a "wrench." He said that at about five feet from ground, bricks were crushing and believed it was something to be looked at. He mentioned it to Mr Barraclough and thought no more of it, but did keep an eye on when passing. Last Tuesday he then noticed it was gradually bulging and the bricks were getting more cracked. He went on to say that he saw two men, on the day of the accident, working on the chimney and had taken a number of bricks out. He was also present in the complex when the chimney collapsed.

William Elsey, 17 Thornton View (Thorntonville), Rawfolds, an iron grinder in the employ of Messrs. Thornton Brothers for five years stated that the first time his attention was called to the chimney was about nine months ago, when he was told that a stone, about 20lb in weight, had fallen out. The next time his attention was called was on the 9th of February, the day before the opening of Town Hall, when William Willerby, an engineman, pointed out two or three small cracks in the chimney. The witness stated he had previously done work on chimneys and did not feel any concern as to the safety of the chimney because of the cracks. Willerby then told him that a man from Bradford was coming. He arrived on the Monday and said there were some holes in the inside case of the chimney that needed filling, but said that the chimney was perfectly safe. He came to repair the holes the week after and then said the chimney was in a worse state than he had reported, as he had no scaffolding the week earlier and couldn't see properly.

The inquest was then adjourned until Saturday morning at 11 o'clock.

William Willoughby, the engine tenter at Thornton Brothers mill, stated he first noticed the chimney about eight months ago by a stone falling from the top. It didn't strike him at the time that the chimney was in a dangerous condition. It "tended" towards Barraclough's mill, but he had not noticed that leaning increased. On the 10th of February he was found one of Mr Barraclough's men, a mason, at the chimney. He said that the cracked bricks needed pulling out and fresh ones put in. He went inside the chimney, which seemed to be in good order. He again went to the chimney on Sunday afternoon when Mr Moulson's man came from Bradford to examine it. The man went into the chimney and remained inside for about an hour. He said that it had a good foundation and the chimney inside is good with the exception of a few holes. Mr Rawdon Thornton asked the man if the chimney was safe and he assured him that it was, adding that the damaged bricks should be replaced. The following Sunday the man came again to examine the chimney and he said that it was not in so good a condition as he had expected and that he believed it be better to have a new foundation and build another one. Mr Thornton was told that if the chimney was repaired as suggested, then it would last for a long time. Mr Thornton left it in his hands and on the Tuesday morning the man came back to repair the chimney and began taking out the bricks.

The inquest was then further adjourned to Wednesday 9th March at 11 o'clock.

William Willoughby resumed his evidence stating on two or three occasions he had tested the chimney with a hammer. He hadn't had instruction to do so and didn't let anyone know of the tests as he didn't think anything was defective. He showed a man called Sam Brooke that the sound of hammer was different from one side of the chimney to the other. His evidence closed by stating that Mr Harrison, Mr Moulson's man, was tired of Mr Barraclough going to him and asking questions. His attention was never called to any water running towards the bottom of the chimney. There was a lean-to roof near and when it rained the water might have run off down by side of the chimney, but he had not seen it.

Mr Rawdon Thornton, member of the firm Thornton Brothers, machine makers and ironfounders was the next witness. He was warned by the Coroner that he was not bound to answer any questions that might tend to incriminate himself. He stated that he and his brother, Randall, were the owners of the premises and of the chimney, which he had known for about 20 years. He believed the chimney was built in 1859. His attention was drawn to the condition on Monday 8th February by Mr Barraclough who thought it was his duty to report seeing a crack. Prior to this time he had not heard anything about the instability of the chimney. He saw a bulge and three cracks. The bulge was some 6 or 7 feet from the ground and he had not seen this before. Two of the three cracks appeared old but the third seemed new. He didn't think the bulge and cracks were of any danger, but decided it would be best to get practical advice upon it. He was advised that a firm in Huddersfield (Anderson & Co.) were specialist builders of chimneys, so he wrote to them asking to send an experienced man. The firm had apparently left Huddersfield. On Wednesday the 10th he went to the office and Mr Robinson, builder of Cleckheaton was there on the request of Randall Thornton. He took him to see the chimney and Mr Robinson said he did not see any cause for uneasiness, providing the inside was all right. He wouldn't give any advice as he did not have much experience with chimneys, however it was arranged later that same day that one of Mr Robinson's men would attend to go inside the chimney and examine it. Mr Robinson later came to my house and said that the man had not been able to get inside the chimney due to the heat and sulphur and that we could not put the matter into better hands than those of Messrs. Moulson & Son of Bradford. It was then arranged that a man from Moulsons at Bradford would attend the mill on Sunday afternoon to examine the chimney. Witness and his brother were present on Sunday when the man arrived. He spent three quarters of an hour inside the chimney and found it to be very good condition. There were only a few holes in the inner shell which ought to have been built up when the chimney was originally constructed. He said the bulge was probably caused by the heat escaping through the holes in the inner shell acting upon the bricks in the outer shell. He recommended the filling of the holes inside and the replacing of bricks on the outside and that if were done the chimney would be sound. The man returned a week later. I did not see him but was told he had walled up the holes on the inside. Mr Moulson came on the Monday and examined the defective places on the outside. He said his man mentioned a flow of water in the flue and recommended that this should be got rid of as soon as possible. He also stated that he would take out the defective brickwork and replace it with new and also recommended putting three iron bands round the chimney. He further added that so far as he could see, the chimney was a very good one and if we carried out his suggestion we should find the chimney all right. We told Mr Moulson that we would leave the matter entirely in his hands and the following morning (Tuesday) the same man who had been on the Sunday, came with a labourer. I saw him at work several times during the day. On the Wednesday I found that the man had got a considerable quantity of defective brickwork out and there was a hole through the outer shell so that I could see into the cavity between the two shells. He told me that whilst walling up the holes in the interior, he had found a good deal of soot had got into the cavity and he would get as much out as he could. On seeing the hole, I thought he was taking rather too much brickwork out at once and I asked him to be careful. Willoughby has never told me anything about any running water towards the foundation of the chimney. The boilers had been periodically inspected by officials of the Boiler Insurance Company. In answer to questions, he stated that the falling of a stone from the chimney some time ago was not reported to him; He did not have a conversation about the stability of the chimney with Mr Neville, gasworks manager, two years ago; Since the accident he has been told that the plans for the chimney were prepared by a person named Joseph Brooke, joiner and architect, Hightown and that he has not known of any repairs having been done to the chimney before Mr Moulson was called in.

Further adjourned to Friday 11th March

Alderman Moulson had been called at the previous hearing but the day was adjourned before anything material was given. He stated that he saw his man Harrison on Monday morning (the 22nd February). He said he had found the chimney in worse condition that on the Sunday before and that he found a strong stream of water running into the chimney bottom; there was a foot deep of soot in the bottom of the flue and couldn't see where the water was running in. After putting up scaffolding, Harrison had looked through the inner shell and couldn't see any ties and the whole of the bottom between the inner and outer shells was filled up with soot and ashes. Harrison reported seeing Willoughby and as a result of what was said to him, he went to Cleckheaton and saw Willoughby, the engine-man and Mr Rawdon Thornton.

Mr Thornton told him the chimney had been built about 30 years ago and that he knew it had a very good foundation, but that is all he knew. Harrison had told him about the stream of water and he advised that this should be got away at once. He did not consider at the time, that the water was an issue of the chimney falling. His attention was then drawn to the bulge and cracks and stated that the bulge had been caused by two iron girders that had been let into the chimney to support the cistern. There should have been set on an independent pillar. He pointed out a crack above the bulge and Mr Thornton told him that was a very old one and had been there several years. A "spider web" crack nearby had been caused by sounding the chimney with a hammer. There was also a wedge that Willoughby had put in and he told him in certain circumstances that might be dangerous. He advised Mr Thornton to put some iron hoops round the chimney, about three or four of them. Mr Thornton wished that our firm replace bricks and that the hoops could go on afterwards. He described Mr Harrison as a very reliable man and knew a lot about chimneys and had built many himself. He did not consider Mr Harrison in his employ and sent him to accommodate Thorntons. There was no question of expenses mentioned. He considered the chimney as safe as any around the district. He did not tell Mr Thornton that the chimney was dangerous. He looked upon the water as a source of danger to the stability and thought that the water had got into the bricks and moistened them and that they were crushed down which caused the collapse of the chimney. Several questions were then asked of him about the making of a hole in the chimney and if that had any effect on the collapse. It was not propped but he thought it was not dangerous to leave it so however when further pressed he refused to answer such questions.

William Rhodes, foreman mule spinner in the employ of Messrs. Thornton for 24 years, was next called. He stated that he had never noticed the chimney was unsafe until the 8th of February when WIlloughby told him. One the day the chimney fell, he met Mr. Wesley Barraclough about half-past two. He told him that he did not like the way in which the men were going about their work and he was afraid there would be a calamity. The reason for this, is that the men made a hole in the chimney about four feet deep and two feet wide. Mr Barraclough told him that the men had had told him there was no occasion to fear and they would make it right. The chimney fell between half-past four and twenty minutes to five. He saw a hole right through the chimney about nine or ten inches square and it was two course of bricks. Cross examination of this witness was not allowed by the Coroner as it was a repetition of evidence already heard.

John Brooke, mason of Cleckheaton was next called and he stated that his father built the chimney about 33 years ago. During the building, there was a strong wind and the chimney leaned about 10 inches.

Thomas Robinson Harrison of 6 Stowell Mill Street, Bradford, a bricklayer in the employ of Messrs Moulson & Sons was the next witness called. He said he received instruction from Mr Rufus Moulson to inspect the chimney. He added that he has 27 years experience in chimney building, but not in repairing. On the Sunday before the chimney fell, he met Mr Thornton and his engine-man. He examined the flue and found a lot of dust and muck in the bottom of the chimney. He saw six holes in the inner shell, one was near to the bulge and thought that they had been left for ventilation. He described the main flues in a very bad condition and the side walls were in a decayed condition which indicated a lot of water. He told Mr Thornton the inside of the chimney was very good except for the crack and holes which wanted making up. He was then shown the bulge and saw several cracks which were not in the joints but through the bricks. He examined the outside of the chimney and told the engineman to tap the bulge gently to see if there was any hollow...and there was. He thought that it was only the outer shell which had broken away from the other brickwork. He later told Mr Thornton that he thought the bulge could be replaced very easily and that the holes on the inside of the chimney should be walled up. There was no question of any danger of the chimney falling.

The inquest at this point was adjourned to next Wednesday.

16 March 1892 - The Inquest resumes

John Armitage, mason of Gomersal, was the first witness called. He assisted in the building of the chimney about 33 years ago. He stated when some 43 feet had been built, it was found that the chimney was crooked and it had consequently to be sawn. He did not consider the coping stones too heavy for the structure and he never saw a plan of the chimney.

Thomas Robinson Harrison was then recalled. He stated that he told Elsey about the condition of the cavity and also about the crack at the bottom that Willoughby noticed. He examined the outside of the chimney to see if the crack inside and the bulge on the outside corresponded and found that they did not. He told Elsey and Willoughby that it looked like a lot of water runs into the flue and the main flue walls are completely rotten and just for falling in. He said the best thing to do would to be get a new foundation and a new chimney built. He had condemned it on account of it's weak construction and that he (Elsey) could tell his master that the sooner you get a new chimney the better. The next day he told Mr Moulson of his findings and views and he told him that he would visit Cleckheaton that afternoon and have a look at it. Witness then describes returning to chimney on Wednesday when he started to renew the brickwork. He was about a yard from the bulge and when he had put in the last brick, it started to rain and he saw the rain come off the roof right into the bulge. He got some props and a board and put them up against the bulge. It was at this point he felt the chimney break out and he shouted out "look out, the chimney is coming". He ran away and saw the the chimney come down quite straight. He was knocked down and buried beneath some timber and became unconscious. When he came round, he saw a hole and scrambled out of it.

George Jarman of Bottomley Street, Bradford, a labourer in the employ of Messrs. Moulson & Sons, next gave evidence corroborating that of Harrison.

Henry Weldrick of Gomersal, a stoker in the employ of Messrs. Thornton said his attention was first called to the chimney by the falling of a stone some little time ago. He spoke of the work he saw being carried out by previous witnesses. He said there was a lot of talk about it on the day it fell and that the witness Harrison told him to make less of his noise or he will frighten everybody about the place.

Alfred Robinson, a labourer of Cleckheaton, was next called. He stated that on the afternoon of the day the chimney fell, he saw an opening in the chimney without any props and when the structure fell the fire bricks fell from the top of the hole.

George Hepworth of Quaker Lane, Hightown was a scribbling overlooker in the employ of Mr Barraclough. He had never heard that the chimney was unsafe, though anybody could see it was faulty.

George Boothroyd, a foreman in the loom department of Messrs. Thornton, gave evidence of a similar nature.

Joseph Pickles, a mechanic of Parkside Road, Bradford, said he was formerly in the employ of Messrs. Thornton, but had only once seen water running on the boiler house floor.

Israel Umpleby, master boiler maker of Cleckheaton gave evidence as to visits to the premises and described how the water from the boiler was "blown off" and said he thought there was a strong chance, from what he saw, of the water getting into the foundations of the chimney, however that the water had nothing to do with the calamity. This view was confirmed by what he had seen of the foundations since.

25 March 1892 - Conclusion of the Inquest

John Waugh, civil engineer of Bradford, sketched first the history of the chimney, and the defects found in the chimney on the Sunday before it fell by Messrs. Moulson & Sons' man, Harrison and quoting Harrison's observation that he thought a new foundation should be got out and a new chimney built. In the building of a chimney, it was customary to select bricks from the very best kilns and to carefully inspect them when delivered. Had this latter course been adopted in regard to this chimney, a great proportion of the bricks used would have been rejected. They were of various sizes, various material and differed very much in the degree of burning. He was strongly of opinion that, bad as the bricks were in the first instance, they, along with the lime, had undergone deterioration which could only attribute to moisture extending over a long period. He had never seen sucj a crushing to powder of the material of a structure as in this instance. Alongside the chimney, ten feet from the ground, was a cast iron water tank to supply water to the grinders in the mill. When filled with water this tank would weigh about three and half tons, and was partly supported by an iron beam inserted in the chimney just above the bulge. The total weight of the structure was about 500 tons. Given this crushing weight above (apart from any lateral strains due to vibration) and a solid brick base and foundation below, with the weak place - bulge and crack - in between, remembering the quality and condition of the brick and the nature of the structure, the result should have been anything but a surprise. The chimney fell on the calmest day in the whole month from a combination of causes, and in the following order as regarded importance: 1st, bad bricks; 2nd, weak construction; 3rd, deterioration by moisture; 4th, the attempted repairs. Sooner or later, however, it would have fallen, apart altogether from the fourth head. The repairs were too late, the chimney was a doomed structure before either Mr Moulson or his men saw it.

Summing up and the verdict

The Coroner then summed up, exonerating Mr Barraclough from all blame and said with regard to Messrs. Thornton, there was an important discrepancy in the evidence as to the time at which their attention was first called to the defective condition of the chimney, but at any rate, when Mr Barraclough complained to them, they proceeded to obtain advice which they no doubt thought was skilled advice. There had been what he might call a sort of attempt on the part of Mr Moulson and his men to make out that they were not experienced, but he should say himself that the man who builds chimneys must have some knowledge as to what should be done in repairing chimneys, and therefore Mr Moulson was not an ignorant man. If the jury were of opinion that Harrison had proceeded about his work in a careless or reckless manner, they could not do otherwise than return a verdict of manslaughter against him, but if they considered that he was working possibly rather carelessly but not with gross neglect, they might say his conduct was improper, but not criminal.

Shortly before midday, the jury retired to consider the evidence and after an hour and forty minutes, the following verdict, with rider, was announced:

"That the deceased persons have been accidentally killed by the fall of the chimney, while under repairs."

The following rider was added:

"We consider that Messrs. Thornton Brothers are to blame, but not criminally so, for not having attended to the the repair of the chimney at an earlier date; and further, that Mr W. Moulson is also to blame, but not criminally so, for not having more thoroughly considered the state of the chimney when he was consulted by the Messrs. Thornton."

Victim No. 15

At the time of the chimney collapse there were two ladies who were rescued from the wreckage and who both sustained very serious injuries. One of them was Elizabeth "Lizzie" Wood, aged 23, the daughter of John & Hannah from Marsh. She was a flannel weaver and it is believed she had jumped from the third storey of the mill receiving serious internal injuries. Doctors were extremely concerned about her condition from the outset. Lizzie eventually underwent surgery of a very major nature from which she never recovered and succumbed to her injuries on 5th April 1892. She was buried at Cleckheaton Old Cemetery on 8th April. An inquest held on her death returned a verdict of "accidentally killed by the fall of the chimney."

More Victims?

The second lady who was pulled from the wreckage of the fallen chimney was 5o year old Mary Burnhill. Like Lizzie, she received very serious injuries which caused her problems for a long time. She would often cry out in pain, believing she was still trapped in the wreckage. Although quite some time after the event, Mary died at North Bierley Hospital, Oakenshaw on 1 Sep 1893 and was buried at Whitechapel church. Although some 17 months after the event, can Mary's death be attributed to the disaster? It certainly must have played a major part in her decease.

We then jump more than two years after the event when an article in a local newspaper reports on the death of Annie Stead, aged 30, the daughter of Herbert Stead of Valley Road. The article states that Annie was one of the sufferers in the chimney disaster. She didn't suffer any physical injury, but had been carried by debris from an upper room into the room below and remained suspended from some machinery for a considerable time. The nervous shock sustained was so severe that she never regained her health. She was buried at Cleckheaton Old Cemetery on 20 Mar 1894.

The aftermath - what happened next?

Not long after the disaster, many chimneys in the district were examined. Not only from advice of Local Boards, but by concerned mill owners themselves. The Cleckheaton Local Board served notice on Messrs. W Crowther & Son of Gomersal to take down 20 yards of the chimney located at Upper Lane Mills, Cleckheaton, which was believed a danger to dwelling house in the surrounding area. The Board also issued a recommendation not to turn "exhaust steam" into chimneys.

At the time of the incident, the nearest fire escape ladder was located at Heckmondwike and rescuers at the scene had to tie ordinary ladders together in order to reach the upper floors. To address this issue the Cleckheaton Board purchased a fire escape ladder for the use of the Cleckheaton fire brigade.

George Anderton & Son, Victoria Mills, Cleckheaton decided to take down two chimneys, one which had been built when the mill was first erected and another which had never been perpendicular. Neither of the chimneys had been any cause for concern but it was decided to build a new one in their place. Work was to be suspended at the premises until the dangerous parts of the work were complete.

On Monday 13th March 1893, a case which would last for several days, was heard at the Leeds Assizes, where Mr Wesley Barraclough, occupier of premises at Marsh Mills, sought to recover damages that he suffered as a result of the chimney disaster from Messrs. Rawdon and Randall Thornton. The claim being based on allegations of gross negligence on the part of the defendants. Evidence was heard from some of the witnesses from the original inquest, along with other expert witnesses and lengthy legal arguments. On Friday 17th March, the judgement in favour of Mr Barraclough was entered. The amount of damages was to be fixed by arbitration. Unfortunately the details of this arbitration cannot be found, so the outcome, at this time, remains unknown.