Cadeby Disaster Victim – John WilliamTarbrook

March 1913

Mexborough & Swinton Times – Saturday 15 March 1913

John WilliamTarbrook

His Honour Judge Allen, on Monday, at a special sitting at the Doncaster County Court, was asked to arbitrate on two very interesting cases arising out of the Cadeby disaster.

The applicants in the first case were two infants, John Frederick Tarbrook, and Irene Tarbrook, and the respondents were the Denaby and Cadeby Collieries Ltd. and William and Mary Tarbrook, of 216 Malin Bridge Road, Sheffield, who claimed partial dependency.

Mr. T.E. Ellison, instructed by Mr. J. Raley, explained that the two infants were two years and three months old respectively, and were the illegitimate children of a man named John Wm. Tarbrook, now deceased, who was a miner, earning an average wage of 28s per week, and was twenty three years of age.

On the 9 th of July last, when there was a disastrous explosion at the Cadeby Colliery, he volunteered for rescue work, and he lost his life being suffocated and burnt. The facts relating to the children were that in 1910 the deceased man became acquainted with a married woman, named Annie Rodgers, who had left her husband because of his ill-treatment. She went to live with the deceased, and in September 1910 they went to live at Denaby. According to the evidence from that time until his death they lived happily together under the name of Mr. and Mrs. Tarbrook, and were reputed to be man and wife. On the 11th March 1911, the eldest child John Frederick was born and was registered by the deceased woman. The other child was born three months after her father´s death.

On December 31 st the sum of £218 – 17s – 6d was paid into Court by the Colliery Company, that being accepted, and therefore the company now dis – claimed any interest in arbitration. On the 21st of February this year the evidence of Mrs. Rodgers was taken for the purpose of the case, but the doctor, for some reason best known to himself, refused to give a certificate to have her evidence taken on commission, and it was taken by a solicitor. The deceased woman then appointed her mother guardian of the two children. Two days later she died.

The two people, Tarbrook, had been joined as respondents because they put forward a claim that they were partial dependents.

He asked that the total amount paid into Court should be divided between the two children. The deceased´s mother had already received certain sums.

Mr. F.W. Scorah, who represented the respondents, submitted that they were dependents. The deceased had contributed certain sums, sometimes weekly, and sometimes once a month, as much as he could afford, perhaps on average between 3s. and 4s. per week, and it continued until Christmas 1911.

Mary Tarbrook, said the deceased, who was a carter up to July 1910, lived at home. He earned 22s. per week and gave her 15s. to 20s. He then went away with Mrs. Rodgers to Denaby. She had not received £30 from the Colliery Company. Mrs. Rodgers drew £14 – 14s. insurance money, signing for it as the widow of a dead man, and witness had to take out letters of administration. The company eventually paid £5 in settlement of the claim. She also received £6 from the Colliery Company. She expressed a wish to have the custody of the eldest child.

Mr. Ellison : It is not the money you want, but the child ? – Yes.

It made you very angry when your son went to live with this married woman ? – Yes.

He declined to tell you where he was living at Denaby ? – Yes.

Didn´t you write in August, or at the end of July to the Company to ask whether he worked at the pit ? – Yes, sir.

What was his object in giving you anything at all ?

Because he had so many clothes.

Proceeding she said he was `fit up´ with a lot before moving to Denaby.

Did you say to a solicitor you did not know where he was until September 1911 ?

If I did I meant to say I didn´t know where he lived in Denaby.

Did you say he had not contributed anything since he left home ?

No, sir. I don´t remember, but I don´t think I said it.

Proceeding she said she received £22 from the Denaby Main Permanent Relief Fund. She also got £5 from the Union.

A clerk from Messrs. Raley´s office said Mrs. Tarbrook came to the office and suggested she had a claim. He made notes of what she said. She did say that she had not received anything from her son since he left home.

His Honour made an order for the apportionment of the money between the two children, stating that the evidence given by the solicitors clerk very much discounted Mrs. Tarbrook´s evidence. He did not think she received any sums after September 1911. Even if she did, he did not think the reason they were given to her would make her dependent.

His Honour accepted the deceased woman´s mother, Mrs. Ann Astill, of Parkwood Springs, Sheffield, as guardians of the children, allowing £10 for immediate expenses and ordered the remainder of the money to be paid out at the rate of 4s. weekly.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________

John William Tarbrook lived with his wife of 6 years, Annie, aged 28.

John William came from Stannington and his wife from Bradley in Derbyshire.

John´s age at the 1911 Census is shown as 25.