In mid-19th-century Britain, strict social codes governed mourning dress, especially for women. Black fabrics, trims and dyes were central to these customs; some materials and pigments used in producing and finishing garments contained lead compounds. On February 11 (year uncertain within reports but associated with 1862 accounts), medical observers connected a woman’s fatal illness to prolonged exposure to lead in mourning dress, providing an early documented instance of occupational and domestic toxic exposure related to clothing. Background Victorian mourning practices required extended periods of wearing black and other subdued clothing, often including heavily treated fabrics and applied pigments for a deep, durable black. Lead acetate and other lead-containing substances were used in textile finishing, dyeing, and in some cases as mordants or colourants to darken fabrics and trims. The period’s limited understanding of chemical toxicity meant hazardous substances could be used widely in households and small workshops. The case and contemporaneous response Contemporary medical and journalistic accounts from the 1860s report at least one instance where a woman died after a protracted illness later attributed to lead poisoning tied to her mourning garments’ pigments and treatments. Physicians of the time noted symptoms consistent with chronic lead exposure—abdominal pain, weakness, and neurological signs—and linked them to repeated contact with the treated fabric. Such reports prompted some public discussion about the safety of certain dyes and finishing practices, though regulatory responses remained limited. Context and limitations Sources from the period vary in specificity. Medical understanding of lead toxicity was developing but incomplete; diagnostic methods were primitive by modern standards. Reports sometimes conflated different chemical agents used in textile work, and record-keeping could be imprecise about dates and exact formulations. While the connection between lead-treated mourning dress and poisoning in this case is supported by contemporary accounts, the exact year is reported inconsistently in secondary summaries, which is why the event is associated with February 11 and broadly placed in 1862 in many references. Wider significance The incident illustrates broader risks in 19th-century domestic and artisanal industries, where women frequently handled treated fabrics or worked in small-scale dyeing and trimming operations. It also underscores how social customs—here, prolonged mourning dress—could increase exposure to hazardous substances. Over subsequent decades, accumulating evidence about lead and other toxicants contributed to gradual changes in industrial practices and, eventually, public health reforms and safer chemical standards. What is certain and what is disputed It is well-established that some textile treatments of the Victorian era used lead compounds and that chronic lead exposure produces the symptoms reported. The direct causal link in any single historical death relies on contemporary clinical interpretation and retrospective analysis; some specifics, such as the precise year or the exact chemical agent, remain variably reported in surviving sources. Historians treat the case as indicative rather than definitive—an example that reveals wider practices and risks rather than a fully documented forensic conclusion. Concluding note The story of lead-treated mourning dress and the February 11 case associated with 1862 offers a window into how cultural practices, industrial chemistry and incomplete medical knowledge combined to create hidden hazards in Victorian life. It helped fuel later scrutiny of textile chemicals and contributed to the long-term movement toward safer manufacturing and public-health oversight.