A collection to help the widows and dependents was started by a solicitor, John Charles Rhodes (1844-1929) of Sherburn-in-Elmet at the Pit head on 1st May 1896, when he pinned a £5 note to a sheet of paper. A collection was taken up by the local press, with hundreds of clubs and individuals responding to the appeal within days. The collection was even augmented by Queen Victoria contributing £50. She also sent a telegram via Sir Matthew White Ridley, Home Secretary, who stated: “The Queen has heard with great sorrow of the terrible disaster and Micklefield. Her Majesty commands me to convey the expression of her deep sympathy with the widows and children and the near relatives of those whose lives have been lost. – Ridley.” Eventually £20,625 was raised, including £1,000 donated by the Colliery Owners.
The benevolence of the Cliff family though had its limits. They did not allow for any abatement of rent on the tied houses in which the widows of the deceased miners were living. It was reported in the ‘Labour Leader’ on 11th July 1896 that the widows had not received any financial relief from the Sick and Accident Fund until early June 1896, 5 weeks after the disaster, so the widows were paying either 4 shillings per week, or 3 shillings and 3 pence depending upon the property, from any savings they had. The Colliery owners wanted work to restart at Peckfield pit as soon as possible, and the widows were occupying houses which were intended for coal miners, so working miners were brought in to lodge with the widows. To overcome the objection that unmarried men living with widows could be considered immoral and lead to sin, the rules of the charity fund were designed to both encourage the widows to marry their lodgers, and to reduce future demand upon the charity. In October 1896, a meeting was finally held to establish a process for centralising and distributing the £20,625 which had been raised. Their discussions and decisions were reported in the local press, as follows:
Micklefield colliery disaster fund
The terms of the trust deed
Scale of relief to be given
A meeting of the general committee of the Micklefield colliery explosion central relief fund was held in the mayor’s rooms, Leeds Town hall, yesterday afternoon. The Mayor (Mr. W. L. Jackson, M.P.) was not able to attend as the commencement of the proceedings, but arrived shortly afterwards. In his absence the chair was taken by Mr. J. W. Oxley, and there were also present Mr. E Cowey (president of the Yorkshire Miners’ association), Mr. W. Warren, Mr. H. S. Childe (Wakefield), Mr. Houfton (manager of the Micklefield colliery), Mr. Thomas Fatkin, Mr. William Atack (Micklefield), Rev. C. D. Farrar (vicar of Micklefield), Rev E. B. Smith (vicar of Kippax), Rev. J. Hepher (vicar of Seacroft), Mr. Davis (Castleford), Mr. Robert Routledge, Mr. Rhodes, and Mr. Alfred Smith (representatives of the “Skyrack Courier” Fund), Mr. R. B. Hopkins (the hon. Secretary), and others. Several gentlemen sent letters of apology for non attendance, including the Mayor of Bradford, Mr. W. D Cliff, and Mr. H. J. Palmer.
Mr. Hopkins, at the outset, reported that he had been in communication with the secretaries of the various funds, and all the money received had been, or would shortly be, added to the central fund. The sums collected were approximately as follows:
“Yorkshire Post” Fund: £10,842 15 8
“Leeds mercury” Fund: £2,873 10 10
“Skyrack Courier” Fund: £536 1 10½
Batley Borough Fund: £387 0 0
Yorkshire Miners association fund: £1,192 4 0
Amount to credit of central fund: £4,631 6 2
Balance due from Selby fund (about): £70 0 0
Total: £20,532 18 6½
The chairman remarked that it was satisfactory to know the whole of the funds collected would now be merged in one central fund. For many reasons it would, he said, have been objectionable if the money had been distributed by different committees. It would be fairly evident to everyone that they had now exhausted the generosity of the public. They must now get to practical work. He therefore moved that the subscription lists be closed, and that requests be made for all money received to be paid into the central fund. The resolution was seconded by Mr. Routledge, and carried.
A printed draft of the suggested trust deed was next considered. This has been prepared by Mr. C. M. Atkinson, stipendiary magistrate of Leeds, on instructions supplied by Mr. Hopkins. The chairman expressed the opinion that it was very complete, and would be found to answer its purpose in every way. With the approval of the meeting, the Mayor of Batley (for the time being) and Mr. Joseph A. Rhodes (representing the “Skyrack Courier” fund) were added to the list of trustees, and the names of the town clerk of Leeds (Mr. J. Harrison), Mr. T. B. Smith, and Mr R. Routledge were placed on the relief committee.
The deed sets forth that, after the necessary expenses have been met out of the fund, the balance shall be applied “for the relief of the sufferers by the explosion in such manner and sums, and to such persons, and generally in such a way, as the trustees in their uncontrolled discretion, shall think fit, so long as in the opinion of the trustees any just claims thereon remain unsatisfied.” It is provided and “expressly declared that the trustees shall, in the event of any gross misconduct being proved against any recipient of the relief fund, or of any other reason or cause proved, have full power and authority, in their uncontrolled discretion, if they think fit so to do, to stop either for a specified period or absolutely the payment of any sum or sums payable to any person or persons under the trusts.” In the event of the death or resignation of any member of the relief committee, the surviving or continuing members must appoint another person in his place, subject to the approval of the trustees. The relief committee is called upon to lay before the trustees every year a statement showing in detail the application of moneys received by them, and an estimate in detail of the moneys likely to be required during the ensuing year. The trustees are to hold a meeting annually in January. Among the later clauses of the deed is the following:
“That whenever at any time hereafter it shall appear to the trustees, at a meeting duly convened for the purpose, that all just claims upon the said trust fund for the relief of the sufferers by the said Micklefield colliery explosion are satisfied, or that more than sufficient funds remain to the credit of the trust than will be sufficient for the relief of the sufferers by the said explosion, and all costs, charges, and expenses, as aforesaid, the trustees shall be, and are hereby fully authorized and empowered, in their absolute discretion, to apply the whole or any portion of the surplus fund as may by such meeting be deemed proper, for relieving or assisting to relieve any persons suffering by any accident hereafter occurring in any part of the United Kingdom, and of a similar or kindred character to that which occurred at the Micklefield colliery as aforesaid (the trustees being the sole judges as to whether any such accident hereafter occurring is of a similar or kindred character to that at Micklefield colliery as last mentioned), and to pay over the sum thereof to any local committee, association, society, all persons formed, or to be formed or appointed, for the purposes of affording relief in any such accident hereinafter occurring as aforesaid, and without being bound to see to the application thereof.”
With regard to this clause, Mr. Hopkins said it was thought desirable that it should be as wide as possible. The object of giving the trustees absolute discretion was not that they should have arbitrary powers, but in order to prevent any possible lawsuits. Mr. Warren suggested that the application of any surplus should be confined to Yorkshire. Mr. Hopkins pointed out that the subscriptions were not confined to Yorkshire, though they came mainly from Yorkshire people. Workers at collieries in Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire subscribed liberally, and that fact influenced the finance committee in deciding that the area should be widened. Whether it had been made too wide was for the committee to decide. The chairman said that if it ever came in to a distribution of the surplus, there would naturally be a strong preference for Yorkshire and the immediate neighbourhood.
Mr. Cowey thought the trustees should have the full power it was proposed to confer upon them. Yorkshire ought not to shut its heart up. Working men in Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire had subscribed liberally to this fund. Supposing an accident happened at a Derbyshire colliery close to the Yorkshire border, were the trustees to be prevented from rendering assistance if there were no further claim on their fund at Micklefield? Mr. Warren said that as a Derbyshire man he did not object to including that county, but he thought they should go no further south. Mr. Childe thought they should not limit the powers of the trustees, and the chairman said he attached great weight to Mr. Cowey’s views on this matter. Mr. Routledge mentioned that there was a fund of £43,000 in Northumberland lying doing nothing. Mr. Cowey said the same remark applied to the Oaks disaster fund, which could not be touched. On the other hand, the Hartley fund had been distributed all over the country. Mr. Fatkin did not think they need trouble much about the matter, for he was afraid that when the trustees had met all the calls upon them they would have no surplus to distribute.
Mr. Warren observed that although people in all parts of the country had had an opportunity of subscribing to the Micklefield fund they had not avail themselves of it, and his view was that they should dispose of any surplus in the district from which the money had come. For the purpose of testing the meeting, he would move as an amendment that the field be limited to Nottingham, Derbyshire, and the north of England. Mr. Routledge seconded the amendment, but it was lost on a vote being taken: and, on the motion of the chairman, seconded by Mr. Davis (Castleford), the deed as drafted was approved.
The scale of relief was then considered. Mr. Hopkins reported that in this matter the finance committee have been much assisted by the able honorary Services of Mr. Thomas Fatkin. It has been ascertained that there are 38 widows and 96 children needing relief, and there are also a few cases of aged persons who were dependent upon those who were dead, and also some cases of persons who were injured by the explosion. The finance committee recommended that the general basis of relief should be 5s. per week to each widow so long as she remains single, with a cash payment of £10 in case of her remarriage, and an allowance of 2s. 6d. per week for each child up to 13 years of age. With regard to the aged persons, who numbered about 16, and to the persons who have been injured, the needs of these cases vary, and the committee recommended that they should be individually considered, from time to time, by the relief committee, and the allowance apportioned according to actual needs.
The chairman said that there might be a difference of opinion on this point. The committee had, of course, been ruled by the amount of money in hand. Mr. Fatkin had gone carefully into each individual case on strictly actuarial lines, and the committee decided that it was desirable to fix the relief at a rate that could be maintained, rather than to adopt a higher scale, and then find it necessary to curtail it. He would remind the committee that the trust deed enabled the general committee to alter the scale of relief when the circumstances permitted a change. Mr. Fatkin said he believed it would be possible to maintain the scale of relief proposed by the finance committee. He, however, thought it would be advisable that the finances should be overhauled every four or five years. In 12 or 13 years’ time, when the children were off the funds, it would be found about something like 60 per cent of the money had gone. They would then have a good idea as to what they could do for the widows. To do more than the finance committee suggested to begin with would be to start on a dangerous footing. There would be a great demand on the fund during the next twelve years, owing to the number of young children to be provided for. It was, of course, very much more difficult to work a fund of this sort now then it was 30 years since, when they could depend on receiving four or five per cent interest for their money.
Mr. Smith mentioned the case of George Hicks, who was injured in the explosion, and would not, in the opinion of the doctors, be able to work again. Hicks had not, he said, yet received any relief, but his was certainly a deserving case. He had a family of seven. Mr. Hopkins said this case had been considered by the committee, and it was intended that it should be effectually dealt with.
Mr. Rhodes moved the adoption of the scale of relief proposed by the finance committee. Mr. Routledge asked if Mr. Cowey had anything to say on this point. Mr. Cowey: We had something to say, but after Mr. Fatkin’s statement we are rather inclined to be quiet. We thought sixpence more should be given to each child. Mr. Fatkin said he was in favour of that himself, but found it could not be done with safety. Mr. Cowey: Had you all the ages of the children when making the valuation? Mr. Fatkin: yes, of every child. Mr. Cowey: then I am perfectly satisfied.
The Rev. C.D. Farrar referred to two cases in which women were living with, but not married to, miners who were killed by the explosion. The local committee were, he said, of opinion that they should not be treated as widows. If they were, it would simply be encouraging vice. The Mayor said that was a matter which the committee ought to deal with. Mr. Cowey: But you would pay for the children? It is no fault of theirs. Mr. Hepher: The children; but not the women. Mr. Cowey: I should not object to the women not having their 5s.
Mr. Hopkins explained that this matter had been considered by the central committee, and they came to the conclusion that under all the circumstances it would be the truest charity to treat the women as widows. The sin committed was past and done with. The adoption of the scale of relief suggested by the finance committee was then seconded and agreed to.
Mr. Hopkins, with reference to the investment of the trust funds, reported that the finance committee have been able to obtain what they consider to be a liberal offer from the Leeds Corporation, made owing to the special circumstances of the fund, to accept a sum of £15,000 pounds at 2¾ per cent interest, repayable by half yearly instalments of principal and interest extending over a period of 10 years. The finance committee recommended that this offer should be excepted, and that they should be empowered to arrange for the investment of the balance of the fund on shorter terms, as they might consider best adapted to render it available for the calls of relief. The chairman moved, Mr. Cowey seconded, and the meeting agreed to this adoption of the committee’s proposals.
Mr. Hopkins stated that the finance committee had gone into the question as to how the relief should be distributed, and recommended the adoption of the following scheme:- That a sheet should be prepared each week showing the requirements for relief for that week, and that this should be signed by at least two members of the relief committee, and forwarded to the Secretary. The Secretary to submit this sheet to at least two of the trustees, and procure their signature to a cheque for the amount of relief required for that week. In accordance with a wish expressed by the work people of the colliery, Messrs. Joseph Cliff and Sons, the owners of the colliery, have kindly consented that the relief should be paid each week at the office, at the same time as the wages of the colliery, without any expense to the central fund. It is proposed that a receipt should be signed by each recipient to whom relief is paid, and that these receipts should be submitted to the auditors along with the weekly relief sheets and cheques, in due course. It is also suggested that at least twice in each year definite reports should be submitted by the relief committee, that from their personal enquiries and knowledge they can certify as to the fact that all persons in respect of whom relief is being paid are living and duly entitled to relief. This scheme was approved, on a motion of the Mayor, seconded by Mr. Atack. Mr. C. H. Wilson was appointed auditor.
Mr. Hopkins announced that Ald. Harding had resigned his position on the central committee owing to his not being able to find time to attend to the duties of the position. This concluded the business of the meeting. The Mayor, in moving a vote of thanks to the chairman for presiding, said that that meeting concluded the main portion of the work of the general committee. The vote of thanks was seconded by Mr. Hepher, and carried.”
Effectively, the fund was set up to pay out equivalent sums to that which the miners would have earned if they had still been working, but the fact that any widows who re-married would be entitled to receive a final payment of £10, meant that the relief payments were broadly in line with the interest receipts, so the capital only decreased slightly. It also encouraged the widows to marry miners who were brought in to lodge with them. On 24th September 1897, the following First Yearly report was summarised:
The generosity of the donations was such that, despite Mr Fatkin’s arguments, by 1912 the fund still had a balance of £19k, and the interest payments into the fund of £631 p.a. were outweighing the dwindling expenditure of £393 p.a. Consequently, the Relief fund was increasingly used, as per the authorisation outlined in the October 1896 meeting, to help the bereaved dependents from similar colliery disasters, such as £1,000 donated to the Cadeby appeal in 1912. This was reported on 12th July 1912, along with the reflection that the structure of the payments had hardly been sufficiently distributed to the people for whom they had been intended:
“Micklefield’s surplus
Money that may be no longer required
Donation to Cadeby relief fund
Twenty-three widows who have married again
Today the trustees of the Micklefield explosion relief fund decided to send £1,000 to the relief fund which has been opened for the dependents of those lost in the Cadeby disaster.
Whether this contribution is sufficient considering the swollen state of the Micklefield fund’s finances is a question open to debate. The history of the Micklefield fund is interesting. It is the story, often repeated in the history of charitable endeavour, and the public sympathy being touched by a great disaster, and of the danger of accumulated money afterwards remaining stationary in the hands of trustees.
The trustees of the Micklefield fund have, of course, zealously safeguarded the money put into their hands; there is now a capital fund over £19,000 and a yearly income that, for the last four years has averaged over £600. The expenditure is dwindling. For 1910 the income was £625 and the expenditure £452; for 1911 the income was £631 and expenditure £393.
Out of the 132 persons originally on the fund in 1896, there now remain only 17, composed of twelve widows, one child, and four dependents, the number who have ceased to benefit being 116. The widows each received 10s. a week.
Marriage of widows
One interesting feature, which has led to a large reduction in the amount of payments, is the fact that for many years there was a shortage of houses at Micklefield. The result was that the men who came to take the places of those who had perished, lodged with the widows.
After a short time they commenced to marry them, and as each widow married she was given a bonus of £10 and cleared off the fund. Since 1896, £230 has been dispersed in this manner; 23 out of the 38 widows have married. The children, too, have gone off the fund automatically as they grew up and became able to earn their own livings.
The fund growing
The result of all this is, that 18 years after the accident, and in spite of the fact that such widows as remain on the fund have had the payments made to them doubled, the weekly disbursements amount to only £7 8s and the amount at the disposal of the trustees is steadily growing.
The trustees, who include the Archbishop of York, the Lord Mayor of Leeds, the Lord Mayor of York, the Mayors of Dewsbury and Wakefield, Mr. John Gordon, and Mr J. Rhodes, would appear to be quite within their rights in making this grant, or even a much larger one to the Cadeby relief fund.
Hulton’s example
Only the day before yesterday, the sum of 1,000 guineas was voted, subject to the approval of the Court of Chancery, by the committee of the Hulton colliery disaster fund, for that purpose: but, if the deed of trust is all that need be relied upon, the trustees of the Micklefield fund can so act even without obtaining the formal section of the Court of Chancery.”
A further £500 to the Senghenydd relief fund was paid in 1913. The following photos from the Senghenydd pit disaster would have borne a striking resemblance to the Peckfield Colliery Disaster:
As the accounts were read annually, the local press continued to monitor the spending and numbers subscribed to the fund, as in this example from 30th January 1940:
Micklefield fund
14 persons still benefiting from the 1896 subscriptions
There are still 14 in persons receiving payments from the fund subscribed in 1896 for the victims of the Micklefield colliery disaster, and the annual meeting of the trustees and committee was held at the Leeds Civic hall today.
During the year nearly £700 was paid out to these persons, some of whom are widows of men killed in the disaster, and some survivors. The money is mainly dispersed in weekly payments of up to 25s. The original number of persons on the fund was 132. Most of the present beneficiaries are in their seventies, and some are 80.
The amount originally subscribed was £20,625 and £23,255 has accrued from interest. In relief about £33,000 has been expended, and there have been gifts to other colliery disaster funds.
Samuel Cheesbrough (1896-1986), of Kippax, who had been present at the disaster as a baby, also enquired in 1942 how many people were still subscribed to the fund, and received the following response:
Samuel’s interest in establishing this was to suggest the remaining balance be paid out to the people still affected by the disaster. He later wrote: “A few years back, and at a time when a handful of rescue workers and survivors were still with us, I suggested that the remaining funds – or part of them – be used to ease a few burdens, but it was not to be. Which means that there came a time when the remaining funds passed into a movement for which they were never intended.” He refers to the remaining balance of £6,000 being donated to the Micklefield District Accidents Trust, which occurred in 1963 shortly before the death of the final subscriber, Lucy Shillito, née Smith, who was the widow of Fred Shillito, who was injured in the disaster.
30th April 1896. The Peckfield Colliery Disaster at Micklefield 