Sunday, 16 June 2019


by Dave Roberts

This photo first appeared on Facebook, not as part of the regular 'Middlewich' series, but on Father's Day 2011 as a tribute to my Dad, Arthur Roberts, who was a foreman electrician at Cerebos Salt Ltd (later to become part of RHM Foods) from the late 30s until his retirement through ill health around 1969. Dad is pictured here in the generator room at Cerebos in (we think) the late 40s/early 50s. He had an encyclopaedic knowledge of the generator plant and its controls and, when he had to retire, was retained as a consultant and driven up to the works at weekends by Percy Wrench in the works van to check that everything was OK. The Cerebos generating plant was very efficient for its day, as the steam used to run the generators was not released into the atmosphere but recycled to provide heating and hot water for the whole factory, as well as for a very unusual salt pan which can best be described as a giant 'electric kettle'. The steam heated a giant element in the pan which, unlike the coal fired pans at Seddons and Murgatroyds, could be kept going for days and weeks on end, making it far more productive than most salt pans. A lot of the power produced, went to run the vacuum salt plant, fore-runner of the one now in use at British Salt which produces the greater part of the country's salt requirements.

Salt plants and electrical generators are, of course, run with the help of computers these days, but in Dad's day, all the knowledge was, literally, in his head. He taught himself electrical engineering in his spare time by correspondence course.

see also QUEEN MUM

First published on Facebook, Father's Day, July 11th 2011

Republished June 15th (Fathers Day) 2014

Republished June 19th (Fathers Day) 2016

Republished June 18th (Fathers Day) 2017

Also June 17th (Father's Day) 2018

June 16th (Father's Day) 2019

Friday, 14 June 2019


Middlewich & District Round Table
The Middlewich Folk & Boat Festival Quiz tradition continues, under the good offices of the Round Table!

First published Thursday June 13th 2019
Archived Friday June 14th 2019


by Dave Roberts

Looking rather like warlords at a medieval jousting tournament this group of civic dignitaries shelters from the sun, and the great unwashed, under their personal awning at the Middlewich Carnival in 1973, which was, as we've already learned, held at Manor Park, not far away from where I'm typing this.
They are (left to right) : Julie and Derek Millington, then (I think) Sandbach Councillor David Lloyd Griffiths(can anyone confirm this?) the then MUDC Chairman Frank Bailey, Mrs Bailey and another lady who may possibly be  Mrs Lloyd-Griffiths, separated from her husband so that Cllr and Mrs Bailey can take centre-stage and make a pleasingly symmetrical picture. Behind them is another tier of lesser dignitaries, consigned to the shadows.

Derek Millington was one of our livelier and most effective councillors and I spent long hours talking to him in various local hostelries. I'm sure he won't mind me passing on just one of his recollections of life as a councillor:

Derek was a member of the Middlewich Cemetery Committee (known, at that time as the Burial Joint Committee, or something similar) and it was the policy of members to make periodic inspections of the cemetery.
One evening, after a prolonged period of heavy rain, the committee was inspecting a newly-dug grave which was half-filled with water. 
'A very good, idea,' said Derek, 'what you might call a fail safe. If the poor bloke we're burying  isn't dead  we can make sure he doesn't cause any trouble by drowning him.'
A shocked and offended council issued a stern letter of rebuke to Derek.

I could sympathise, having once received such a letter of rebuke  myself  for the heinous crime of 'delivering rent books on a Sunday' - a clear case of  'if the Good Lord doesn't get you, the Council will'.

Nowadays Derek and Julie are leading lights in the Middlewich Rock & Roll Dancers, which are always well worth seeing in action. They all dance brilliantly and look fabulous.

Councillor Bailey was  the last Chairmen of the UDC and the first Mayor of Middlewich. He remains, to date, the only councillor ever to have chased me up the road after a long and heated argument in the Golden Lion. We were discussing the council's policy of attempting always to have 'the lowest rates in Cheshire' which, I said, was all very well as a policy, but had also led to the council having the lowest number of amenities in Cheshire.
The row got out of hand and culminated in Mr Roberts racing off up Chester Road with Councillor Bailey in hot pursuit. You couldn't make it up, could you?

Facebook Feedback:

Geraldine Williams Not sure it would be Mrs Lloyd-Griffiths - unless it's his mother!
Edna Bailey used to work at St Mary's, as did Betty Telfer so the school featured highly in the league table of consorts, or lady mayoresses, or whatever the term is. If I remember correctly, Frank Bailey died at home on the morning of Edna's funeral. What greater devotion could there be.

Dave Roberts The poor woman hasn't any discernible chain around her neck either. She should have been relegated to the back row, among all the other chainless wonders. But do we know if that is Mr Lloyd-Griffiths in the line-up? I can't find any images on the t'internet for comparison. Edna chased me up Chester Road, too, on that memorable occasion, exhorting her husband to 'hit him, Frank!' Such larks!

Geraldine Williams Hope he wasn't wearing his chain of office at the time.....!!

Jonathan Williams Looks like DLG with embryonic handlebar moustache and grandee beard to add. Yes Frank did die on the morning of Edna's funeral. He was indeed the last Chairman of the MUDC and the first Town Mayor of Middlewich; a unique accolade. Frank was a great help to this young pup when he started, and of course he, like several of the Councillors had known me since I was a boy. Nice tent though. And to think; only today we were wondering whether we could afford to put carpeting and banqueting furniture in the Civic Marquee at the Roman Middlewich Festival in September !! Plus ca change !

Dave Roberts I'm almost sure it is he. Who else would have looked like a young Gerald Nabarro at that time? Interesting to know that Frank bridged the gap between MUDC and MTC. I took another slide of Frank and Edna together on the same occasion, and the fact that he was the last UDC Chairman must have prompted this. Unfortunately the slide got slightly damaged in circumstances which may be revealed at a later date.

...and here is that slide showing  Frank and Edna Bailey and taken on the same occasion as our main photo. As pointed out, Frank was the last Chairman of the UDC, and the first Mayor of Middlewich

And, actually, now I have taken a closer look, I think I may be wrong about the lady on the right not possessing a chain. The old clicking and double-clicking trick shows that she may indeed have a very fine and delicate chain with small medallion attached, putting her firmly back in the civic dignitary category. It would be nice to know her name.

In fact, if you look even more closely, at the bunting-festooned guy rope on the right, there is a gentleman hidden among all the flags. What's the betting this is the Chairman of Sandbach, or Winsford, or Northwich UDC and our mystery lady is his consort, or whatever the correct term was? 

First published 17th August 2011
Updated, re-formatted and re-published 14th June 2019

Saturday, 8 June 2019


There will be all the usual stalls: Cakes, Fancy Goods, Toys, Tombola, White Elephant, Toiletries, Plants and a Bookstall. Refreshments will be served throughout the afternoon. There will be a raffle for adults and a children's Tombola. There will be Pluck the Chicken for the children and games to play. Adults 30p Children under 12 years free.

First published Monday 27th May 2019
Re-published Saturday 8th June 2019
Archived Saturday 8th June 2019

Wednesday, 15 May 2019


Courtesy of JOHN CURRIE

John Currie writes:

On Saturday the 18th May, St Michael and All Angels will be open between 11.00am and 3.00pm for the Heritage Trail.

Learn about the town horse and the Moston Dragon and lots more interesting history.

St Michael & All Angels website

First published 9th March 2019
Updated a re-published 15th May 2019


by Dave Roberts

In May 2019 'Harry Random' (a pseudonym) emailed The Middlewich Diary suggesting a 'Middlewich Riddle' which might intrigue people and generate a lot of interest. And it most certainly did...

Here's 'Harry's' original message:

This would make a fantastic (and completely non controversial) question for the Middlewich Diary, and I can promise you the answer will generate a huge amount of local interest.

Six inches can make a lot of difference, but it seems that since 1971 something in Middlewich seems to have officially reduced in size without some visitors and many residents even noticing.

Can you guess what the answer is?


'Harry' also provided a clue to the riddle:

'It's very important, very topical and everyone in Middlewich has seen it and knows what it is.'

I hadn't a clue, save for the fact that 'Harry's' mention of 'visitors' made me think that there might be a canal connection.

So we put the conundrum to the people of Middlewich via the Middlewich Diary and, as 'Harry' prophesied, created an awful lot of interest.

Here's the answer:

'Harry' writes:
I can't remember where online I found the black and white photograph below, but it was described as having been taken in 1971. The bit that I caught my eye was the height of the aqueduct is shown as 12'.0", yet the photograph that was taken in 2011 shows the height as 11' 6".

So what has happened to the missing six inches? - Has the bridge sunk, the road surface risen, was the old height measurement just an estimate, or is there another explanation?

The Aqueduct in 1971 - Max. Headroom 12 feet.

The Aqueduct in 2011 - Max. Headroom 11ft 6 ins.
So what happened to the missing six inches? Surely the road cannot have been re-surfaced so many times in forty years that it's risen six inches? And surely the aqueduct, besieged and battered though it may be by errant truck drivers, can't have sunk six inches? Or, as 'Harry' also suggested, was the height of the aqueduct measured incorrectly at some point, and the figure corrected in 2011?
'Harry' of course, never stints on research, and copied his original email tp Paul Cassell, who's a retired transport manager and consultant.

Paul offers us an expert view of just why that vital six inches 'disappeared'. While he's at it Paul also gives us his considered view of just what is causing the current problems with HGVs striking our poor, beleaguered aqueduct:

Dear Harry,

Thank you for the enquiry from yourself and Dave Roberts, I think I have the answer for you both. Nothing as dramatic as the aqueduct sinking or the road surface rising sadly, just a legacy of Britain joining the European Economic Community as it was known back in the 70’s!
As part of EEC road transport harmonisation in the early 80’s we were allowed to increase vehicle gross weights in line with those of most European countries, the most notable being the increase from 32.5 tons to 38 tonnes for maximum weight articulated vehicles with five axles. To ensure safety on the UK roads every road bridge was re-assessed for both weight carrying capability and appropriate signage for weaker bridges. As a ‘belt and braces’ approach weights were actually assessed for up to 44 tonnes+ as this was always on the horizon and is of course today’s maximum weight threshold.
Bridge heights also came in for scrutiny as many had either never been properly marked or hadn’t been checked since resurfacing may have reduced the height clearance or just not very accurately measured in the first place! The EEC regulations demanded clearance heights be marked in metric to one decimal place for visiting European drivers who only understood metric measurements and who had metric height warning signs in their cabs. We insisted that our old feet and inches measurements also remained as vehicle travelling height signs in feet and inches were a legal requirement inside cabs for driver information in the UK. Hence why all UK bridges now have both a metric and imperial sign either on the bridge or on the approach to it.
Arch bridges are also marked with ‘goalpost’ signs whereby the stated height is at the upper corners of the goalpost although the centre line through the arch will of course be a little higher, as is the case with Nantwich Road bridge. This is obviously to accommodate square bodied trucks although I know of one vehicle operator who could creep under the canal aqueduct with a milk tanker as long as he kept to the middle of the road!
The checking and re-signage exercise involved an element of calculation ‘rounding down’ which knocked a few inches off the exact conversion calculation particularly at high risk bridges. Originally at 12 ft the Nantwich Road bridge would have been 3.6m, but presumably on checking the height and observing the score lines in the brickwork, a decision was probably taken to round down to 3.5m which is 11 ft 6 inches.
Once all bridges had been assessed for load bearing and height clearance, computerised routing systems, truck-specific satellite navigation systems and good old trucker’s atlases provided by the Freight Transport Association and Road Haulage Association to their members were updated to (hopefully) prevent bridge strikes and collapses!
The problems now experienced at the Nantwich Road aqueduct, in my opinion, are because truck drivers are relying on ‘car’ sat nav systems, not helped by the fact that some mapping software used shows the road going over the canal at that point!!
Well you did ask……………………!!!!!!!!


Many thanks to Paul for taking the trouble to give us this highly professional reply to 'Harry's' question, and to 'Harry' for posing the riddle in the first place.

Congratulations to everyone who got the answer right, and especially to RUTH DUCK who seemingly came up with the answer within minutes of  the riddle being posted.

Thanks to the many people who 'had a go'. There were hundreds of highly original and ingenious answers, and quite a few people were 'on the right track' right from the beginning, even if they didn't quite get there!

Dave Roberts

Tuesday, 14 May 2019


Here's an intriguing Middlewich riddle from Harry Random (a pseudonym). It's one of those questions which might be answered almost immediately, or, then again, it might keep everyone guessing for a while. For what it's worth, I didn't get it. I didn't even come close. We've decided that if no one gets it in the near future, we'll give you the answer at the end of this month.

 UPDATE: We've decided that it would be a bit unfair to make everyone wait so long, so we're giving you the answer on Wednesday (15th May). You can give us your answers on any of our Facebook groups, or any of the groups we post links to, or you can answer in the form of a comment here on the Middlewich Diary -Ed.

Here's the riddle, in 'Harry's' own words:

Six inches can make a lot of difference, but it seems that since 1971 something in Middlewich seems to have officially reduced in size without some visitors and many residents even noticing.

UPDATE (14th May). Here's the clue which 'Harry' sent. It enabled your editor to get somewhere near, but by no means there...

'It's very important, very topical and everyone in Middlewich has seen it and knows what it is'.

Can you guess what the answer is?


First published 13th May 2019
Updated 14th May 2019

Thursday, 9 May 2019


by Dave Roberts

The name Tannery Alley probably won't mean very much to those who haven't been Middlewichians for very long, but when we substitute Southway and mention Tesco things may start to become a little clearer.
Tannery Alley is, or was, the public footpath which runs from St Ann's Road and joins Wheelock Street alongside the former Bargain Booze off-licence (now blessed with the not much more dignified name The Booze Centre). 
Tannery Alley was long ago re-christened Southway.
Slightly confusingly the row of shops behind Drinks & Bites at 35 is also called Southway, as is the pathway running from Wheelock Street and up the steps to the strange 'pagoda-like' structure which advertises the presence of Tesco's supermarket to people approaching from that direction.
As Malcolm Hough, who sent us this photo, reminds us the alley did,  at one time, have a third, unofficial, name. 
When the Alhambra was in business as a cinema the locals christened it 'Picture Alley', as it formed a short-cut to that popular establishment for those coming from St Ann's Road and 'Newtonia'.
Of course many who were young at the time will remember that the rear door of the Alhambra was (and still is) down a little alleyway off what became Southway, and it was a relatively easy job to sneak through this door behind the cinema's screen, risking the wrath of 'Torchy', who, we think, was named after Torchy The Battery Boy, a popular puppet TV star of the 1950s. Or did his nickname pre-date this early Granada star?
Malcolm suggests, rightly, that this photo is just begging for a 'Now & Then' comparison and we'll be doing this just as soon as we have time to take a shot of that 'pagoda' which is approximately where these houses once stood.
Unless one of our many photographer friends would like to oblige?
To make our modern day bearings even clearer, the much-admired Barclay House is out of shot to the left. The prospects for this lovely old building are looking brighter now that Tesco has decided to dispose of all the property it bought up for its aborted Middlewich mega-store plan.
We have seen the old buildings in the photo before, again courtesy of Malcolm Hough, when we published this picture:

We first published this picture  here in 2011 under the title 'Mystery Picture' as we weren't entirely sure of the location at that time, although the 'mystery' was soon solved. That's one end of the former Orchard Works to the right and Barclay House is immediately to the left of what is obviously the building in the picture above. We can now see that there appear to be three houses here - two cottages and a fairly substantial house, the main entrance to which was probably at the front facing Wheelock Street.
Were these, perhaps, a couple of workmen's houses and a 'manager's house', relating to the vanished tannery which gave the alley its original name?
The other obvious question is, where did the name 'Southway' originate?
Incidentally, the resemblance between this little section of Tannery Alley and
White Horse Alley is quite striking.

We'll be returning to the scene with some 'Now & Then' shots soon.

Note: We've dated this photo provisionally as '1950s' due to the quality of the photography, although we're open to argument and correction on this. Was that building still standing in the 1960s?

With thanks to Malcolm Hough

UPDATE (9th May 2019):
In the four years since this diary entry was written, there have been changes in the area, the principal one being that 'Big Tesco' has gone, to be replaced by Jack's and that little 'pagoda' now has a 'Jack's' logo on it. The Booze Centre which replaced Bargain Booze has also closed to be replaced by an 'International Food Store'. Various other changes have happened in Wheelock Street. Soon this area will be completely transformed as plans to redevelop the area between Southway and Daerlington Street go ahead. When that happens 'Tannery Alley' will be an even more distant memory.

Sunday, 28 April 2019


by Dave Roberts

Back in the early part of 2012 this postcard from the Paul Hough Collection had us puzzled and intrigued for many a long hour. Many people had a go at reconciling the view above with what most people thought must be the modern-day 'waterfall' or weir. 
The theorizing and speculation went on for a long time and spawned no less than three diary entries with new photographs, diagrams, maps and theories galore to explain what looked like drastic changes to the river and the land and buildings on its banks.

My first thought was that the photo had something of the look of Chester Road about it. This was based on nothing more than a feeling, as there is certainly nothing even slightly resembling a waterfall on the River Wheelock near Chester Road.

Most people's thoughts turned to the River Dane near Croxton Lane where there is a weir (which the fanciful might describe, at a pinch, as a 'waterfall'). But try as we might we couldn't get the modern day weir or its surroundings to fit the old postcard. Not, that is, without surmising that something truly catastrophic must have happened to the area between the date of the postcard and the present day. 

Here's a link to part one of our collective musings. There are links to parts two and three in the text.


As in the case of  most of our Middlewich Diary 'mysteries' the answer was actually quite straightforward, if unexpected. 

It took a lateral thinker like 'Harry Random' to come up with the answer. And here it is. Read it and weep!

Hi Dave,

The 'mystery' surrounding the Croxton waterfall and the differences in the two pictures (the old postcard and a more recent picture of the waterfall) has led to numerous theories to explain the anomaly. In some ways the person that came closest to solving the mystery was the person who wrote "Now and Then: Can this really be the same place?". (that was me! - Ed)

The explanation for the differences in the appearance of the waterfall can be traced back to the original photographer mislabelling the photograph. As a result a photograph that was taken of the waterfall which is next to St Leonard's Church, School Lane, Warmingham Cheshire was later used for the postcard showing "Croxton Water Fall, Middlewich".

Therefore the answer to the mystery is that they are not actually of the same place, and the house that is in the background of the postcard can still be seen from the bridge which is opposite the Bears Paw in Warmingham.


Harry Random

So, in conclusion, there was, and is, a Croxton Water Fall (or weir)  in all likelihood in the spot we were looking at, not far from the Croxton Lane Bridge. It's just that that 'water fall' is not the one shown in the picture!

Photo: Cheshire Image Bank (courtesy of Chris Koons)

Only the day after this was published, another view of the house in the photo came to light on the Cheshire Image Bank site. Here's what we said on Facebook:

Well that's torn it! You know when you think you've solved a mystery....? Chris Koons (Christine Sant as was) who now lives in the USA, tracked down this old postcard in the Cheshire Image Bank. It's clearly the house in our 'Croxton Water Fall' photo and it's titled 'Croxton Hall'. You can even see a bit of the weir in the bottom right hand corner. So is this another mis-labelled postcard? What's needed is a modern day photo of the house which, according to 'Harry Random', can be seen from the bridge over the River Wheelock next to Warmingham Church and opposite 'the Bear's Paw. Curioser and curioser...
First published 27th April 2019

Updated and re-published 28th April 2019

Saturday, 27 April 2019


We believe this image to be out of copyright. If you own the copyright, or know who does, please let us know
by Dave Roberts

UPDATE: Below is the original text of this Diary entry, full of surmise, conjecture and theory, which I have, as is usual on these occasions, left intact to illustrate once more how the Middlewich Diary works, drawing in further theories, conjecture, surmise and, ultimately, information.
It appears that  Croxton Flint Mill  was the reason for the existence of 'Croxton Water Fall' in the first place, 

 The 'water fall' is still there, but in a ruined state - was it damaged by flooding, or just allowed to fall into rack and ruin?
And is the building in the background of our photo the original Croxton Hall Farm? What happened to that? Why was it demolished?
There appears to be no trace whatsoever of this building left in the present day.
All contributions, as ever, gratefully received.

UPDATE (27th April 2019):
We found out a lot about Croxton Waterfall and why it was created but,  try as we might, we couldn't reconcile the scene shown in the old postcard with the modern day 'water fall'. Now, seven years on years on from our original post, and after much conjecture and head scratching, the answer to this interesting conundrum has finally been supplied by no less a person than 'Harry Random' (a pseudonym). The answer, now that we finally have it, is actually quite obvious, but it's one that never occurred to us. If you've never read these articles before, you'll find the links to all three of them below. If you're new to this 'mystery' you might like to take some time reading through them.

But here, with many thanks to 'Harry' is the answer to the Croxton Water Fall enigma.


Original text:
Here's an intriguing one. Where is, or was, Croxton Water Fall?
Our usual first resort, Google, reveals nothing (although it does reveal just how many places there are called 'Croxton' all over the world) and I have to confess to never having heard of Croxton Water Fall before.
Neither do I recall ever having seen this picture, until it turned up as part of the Paul Hough Collection recently (It does, in fact, appear in Middlewich by Brian Curzon and Paul Hurley - see Update, below - so must be a reasonably well-known Middlewich photo)
The fact that we are looking at a commercial post card seems to suggest that the area was quite well known as a local beauty spot.
Croxton itself, by which we mean the area around Croxton Lane, is an area where waters meet.
The Rivers Dane, Wheelock and Croco all come together close to where the narrow Croxton Aqueduct on the Trent & Mersey Canal stands.
So which of them was able to boast such an impressive water fall?
We can, of course, rule out the poor old River Croco. We're well acquainted with its course through the town, certainly from Brooks Lane down to its meeting with the Dane at the edge of Harbutt's Field.
It's a narrow and shallow river and, though it does have quite abrupt changes in level in its journey through town, can boast nothing on this scale.
The Wheelock too, which meanders into Middlewich near Nantwich Road and takes a leisurely course along the outskirts of the town heading for Chester Road and its own meeting with the Dane, is rather a small scale river, nothing like as wide as the river (if it is a river) shown here.
That rather grand house in the background, though, is rather suggestive of Chester Road, somehow.
Could Croxton Water Fall be somewhere along that stretch of the River between the Shropshire Union aqueduct and Chester Road, hidden by all those trees which Mr Boosey planted before the First World War and which have been growing wild ever since (see this entry)?
Is the River Wheelock wide enough at any point along that stretch for this water fall to be a part of it?
And could that part of Middlewich be legitimately described as 'Croxton', anyway?
Which leaves us with the River Dane itself.
That river, within the town boundary (in fact, to the north of Middlewich, the course of the river actually is the town boundary), flows mostly through low-lying pasture land and the only large house I know of anywhere near its banks is Ravenscroft Hall, which is not the house seen here.
The weir certainly looks very much as if it could be man made, particularly with that retaining wall on the left.
Maybe Croxton Water Fall is another one of those mysterious gaps in my Middlewich education (like the aptly named 'Mystery Wood') and everyone will be amazed at my lack of knowledge of it.
I have a feeling that the house in the background is the key to this one.
Is it the original Croxton Hall Farm?

Facebook feedback:

Andy Kendrick On the River Dane to your right as you go over the bridge on Croxton Lane. Years ago, when we swam there, the water had a salty taste. We weren't drinking it though...

Dave Roberts What's the big house in the background?

Geraldine Williams Croxton Hall Farm

Dave Roberts Wow! There you go - another gap in my education. I must get down there (when the weather improves, of course) to get a modern day shot for comparison.

Liza Cornall  Not sure it is there. The height of the water is nowhere near...even when I was a kid swimming in the river, it wasn't that steep, I'm sure. Unless the river is now much higher than in the pic?

Dave Roberts I'm not sure either, Liza. The picture was taken a very long time ago (probably early 20th century) and so the area must have changed considerably. As I said before, I think a trip down to Croxton Lane with the camera is a must.

Geraldine Williams Zoom in on the satellite map of Croxton Lane and the waterfall shows up well.

Dave Roberts  Extraordinary. The waterfall's there (on Google Earth - Ed), but very much in a state of dereliction, compared to the way it looks in the old photograph. And the farm looks a lot further away from the river than it would appear to be in the photo. In actual fact the buildings shown in the photograph can't possibly be the present day farm buildings. They're completely different. The photograph must be very old indeed, and the buildings in it long gone. And the retaining wall on the left of the photograph has disappeared, along with anything else which might show that this was once a neat and tidy structure. I wonder if it was all swept away in the 1930s, in the floods which also put paid to the original Croxton aqueduct? This would explain the difference in the steepness of the waterfall which Liza mentioned. Possibly the farm buildings and a lot of the river bank were washed away by flood waters. After all, if they were powerful enough to demolish an aqueduct...

Geraldine Williams What would be the purpose of an artificial waterfall like that one? Not for water power presumably.

Dave Roberts Possibly just for the sheer joy of having a waterfall next to your property?  
(Not so - as we now know, the waterfall was there for a very definite, industrial, purpose - see below -Ed)
It was certainly very picturesque in its day. I wonder if the 1930s floods also swept away the original farmhouse and  altered the level of the riverbank?

Geraldine Williams Yes, the waterfall certainly is an enhancement and the placement of the trees looks more landscaped and ordered than random. I can see why you thought about Boosey's. I'm a bit uneasy about the actual building. The farmhouse is currently at the top of the hill and Croxton Hall is on the King Street side of the farm and if the house shown in the photograph had been demolished because of flooding in the '30s I'm sure it would have been a major, recorded event. But if this is not Croxton Waterfall then where else could it be?!!

Dave Roberts You're right. That's what I was thinking. In Middlewich such an event would still be talked about to the present day. Mind you, not a lot has ever been said about the destruction of an entire canal aqueduct by flood water, which we know definitely did happen. And yes, the picture still reminds me in some way of Chester Road. That's just me. In the same way, the 'Awkward Turn To The Lompon' photo still looks, to me, like Kinderton Street, even though I now know it was taken in Lower Street.

Chris Koons Are we talking about the spot just off Croxton Lane? There appears to be another similar, but narrower and more complete, 'waterfall' structure a bit further round the river, close to the reservoir thing.

Dave Roberts That's the place. I take it we're looking at the area on Google Earth? Actually there are a lot of these waterfalls along the Dane (and our other rivers too, of course). But I never knew that this particular one had been dignified with the name of 'Croxton Water Fall'. The one you're talking about, further towards the King Street road and railway bridges, is close to the spot we were looking at here.

UPDATE: We've received the following in the form of a comment from 'Cliffhanger 41' which sheds a lot of light on this subject:

'Dave,the waterfall shown is certainly the one off Croxton Lane. I believe it was built to use the retained water to drive the Flint Mill that was used some long time ago to grind down flint to a powder. This was then transported to the S.O.T. area by the canal to be used to glaze pottery (I think)
A Middlewich Heritage plaque, on the canalside, at the junction of the canal and the river Dane will tell you more.'

The plaque in question is actually one of the information boards (no 10) for the 'Tales of Wych & Water' trail which is just one of eight trails featured in the Middlewich Trails Brochure.
According to the information in the brochure the flint mill operated for about a hundred years, between 1810 and 1910.
There is also information on the original aqueduct which was built in 1777 by Thomas Brindley, replaced in the late nineteenth century and replaced again following disastrous flooding by the present structure around 1930.
The blue brick structures on either side of the present aqueduct are likely to be part of the second aqueduct.
There are also traces, near the site of the mill, of the millrace which ran all the way from the weir (or 'Croxton Water Fall'), and underneath Croxton Lane to power the mill (see below).

UPDATE 11/2/2012:

This diagram was drawn by Frank Smith of Ravenscroft in 1993 to illustrate an article he wrote for the Heritage Society Newsletter in that year.
The weir (or waterfall) is shown here to the right of Croxton Lane and Frank has drawn the course of the millrace which ran from there to the Flint Mill which was, as can be seen, actually on the other side of Croxton Lane and close to the Trent & Mersey Canal (the Flint Mill was not the subject of Frank's article, and so the entire millrace is not shown. It must have been very long indeed).
To the right of the diagram is Croxton Hall, which Frank describes as a 'cheese farm' and has marked as 'demolished'.
Is it the large building seen in the 'Croxton Water Fall' photo?


UPDATE: 5/03/2012: Page 75 of Middlewich (Images of England - Tempus Publishing 2005) by Brian Curzon and Paul Hurley includes the image of the 'water fall' together with a closer view of  the hall.

This is what the book has to say about the hall and the 'water fall':

Croxton Hall is a rambling, romantic brick-and-timber framed house of the mid-nineteenth century, built on a picturesque site on the banks of the River Croco
'Croxton waterfalls' was actually a weir constructed to control the flow of the river and prevent flooding nearer the town. There was a pool behind which not only made a romantic aspect from the house but could also be used for boating, fishing and other genteel Victorian outdoor pastimes


First published 4th February 2012
Revised and updated 27th April 2019