Conflagration at Soham

Reported on the 6th July 1846
from the Cambridge Chronicle

About half-past 1 o'clock yesterday morning the town of Soham was again aroused by the dreadful cry of “Fire,” which commenced on the premises of Mrs. Peachey, widow, in Hall-street, and near the spot where two other fires have happened within the last fortnight.  We have not time to state full particulars, having only now left the spot where the fire is still raging, although somewhat abated.  The following will give a brief sketch of the extent of this awful calamity :--13 houses have been burnt to the ground, namely the Globe public-house; the house at the back, in the occupation of W. King, shoemaker; the shop etc of Mr. R. Collen, wheelwright; the house etc of Mr. E. Munns, blacksmith; the house, shop and goods of Mr. Harvey, grocer and draper; the house etc of Mr. Hicks, carpenter; the whole of the extensive farming premises of Mr. E. Staples, together with a newly-erected mill of five stories; the house etc of Job Myson, wheelwright; the house and shop of Mrs. Horsley, blacksmith; the house etc of Robert Ginn, shoemaker; all the extensive premises and farm buildings (with the exception of the dwelling-house) of Mrs. John Malden; house and premises of Mrs. Sarah Peachey, Mr. John Pettit, etc.
There can be no doubt but that this is a diabolical act of incendiarism, as it evidently broke out in various places at the same time. But for the active and persevering efforts of the inhabitants of the town generally, one end of the town must have been a complete ruin.
The part of the town in which this awful calamity has occurred is that nearest Ely, and the scene presented to the traveller from that city upon his entrance is deplorable in the extreme.  The first ruin he meets with is that of Mrs. Gawtrey’s premises.  It may be remembered that there was a fire here on Sunday week, which was arrested before it had made very destructive progress.  Many things that were saved were put into the barn; and on Sunday last a second fire occurred there, by which the barn and all that it contained were consumed, as well as the dwelling-house of Mr. Fenn, adjoining.
The principal destruction is witnessed upon the premises of Mr. Staples, a farmer and large miller.  Here stood one of the finest mills in the county; it was built ten years ago, and was five stories high.  After burning some time the sails got set agoing, and the effect they produced was most peculiar and beautiful; they had the appearance of a gigantic firework. A large quantity of flour etc., was destroyed in this mill.
The value of the whole of the household articles belonging to the 13 houses which were saved is less than £200, and of course many of these are materially injured by rough handling etc., as is invariably the case in fires.
Amongst the singular occurrences upon the occasion was the removal of an old woman named Stedman, who had been bedridden for three months.  She was carried out of harms way upon her bed by two surgeons.
The fire was arrested at the Globe public-house, occupied by Mr. Norman Kidd, who deals in hay; one large stack was put up close to a tree; and the tree and stack being kept wet was the means of staying the flames.  Beyond this there were many thatched houses, so that the destruction would in all likelihood have been much greater if there had caught fire.  On the opposite side of the way the house of Mr. Stedman caught fire three times; but it was got out by means of wet blankets.  And fortunate it was that this was so, for the chances are the destruction would otherwise have been double that which it now is. The supply of water was small, there was nothing but pumps, and these had been almost exhausted by the previous fires and the dry weather.
An area of at least five acres has been laid waste, the buildings burnt down, and even the trees in the gardens and all the hedges burnt up. Of course it is impossible to estimate accurately the amount of damage done by this shocking occurrence, but we apprehend it cannot be less than £5,000., nearly the whole of which is insured in the Suffolk, and some in the Norwich Union-office. The vicar (Mr. Tasker), the Rev. Mr. Bull, Mr. Dobede, and the principal inhabitants, were very active and useful in their endeavours to stay the progress of the flames; and, with honour be it said, many ladies, seeing the lack of hands, formed into lines, and did all they could in the way of passing along the buckets of water. A large quantity of new hay and corn has been burnt, but all the live stock was saved, except a sow and two small pigs. The number of persons rendered homeless by this calamity is 79, and the condition of some of them is very deplorable.  But they will be cared for by their neighbours in the best way that circumstances will allow.

The Late Fire at Soham.—We have already published an account of the fire, which commenced on the premises of Mrs. Peachey, of Hall-street, on Friday morning last.  An active inquiry into the origin of the calamity was instituted.  It resulted in the apprehension of Cornelius Harvey and his nephew, James Harvey; the former is a man of independent property, and the latter a grocer and draper of the town.  The premises of the younger prisoner were burned, and the charge preferred against them was the ignition of the house of Mrs. Peachey with a view of the destruction of that of James Harvey.   The stock and premises of James are stated to have been over-insured, and he was indebted to his uncle £300., the desire for the realization of which, by defrauding the Suffolk Fire-office, would seem to have led them to the commission of the act with which they stand charged. The prisoners were examined before Mr. J. Dobede, resident magistrate, at the Crown Hotel, on Friday.  It appeared that although the whole of the younger prisoner’s stock was saved, he had claimed from the office the full amount of his insurance.  Such other evidence was adduced as warranted the remand of the prisoners.

The Incendiary Fire at Soham- In compliance with a previous arrangement, the magistrates of Soham, the Rev. Mr. Bennett, and Mr. Dobede, were engaged the whole of yesterday (Saturday) at the Crown Inn, in investigating certain charges preferred against Mr. Cornelius Harvey, a wealthy farmer, and his nephew, James Harvey, supposed to be feloniously concerned in the origin of the recent fire in that village.  It will be recollected that the prisoners underwent a brief examination on the day after the fire, and were remanded to the county gaol at Cambridge until yesterday, when they were brought up, in the custody of Mr. Orridge, the governor.
It was evident, from the crowded state of the room, and the anxiety evinced in behalf of the elder prisoner, that he was much respected in the district.  He is between 50 and 60 years of age, and had lived in the village the greater part of his life.  The nephew is a young unmarried man, and from appearances seemed to have passed an irregular career.
In reference to the inquiry it should be observed, that for the last two months the village and neighbourhood had been the scene of much excitement in consequence of the outbreak of a series of incendiary fires.  To such an extent had the alarm in the district arisen, that the farmers formed themselves into a body to guard their property at night.  Notwithstanding this protection fires appear to have happened, and even in the very street where the conflagration occurred on Friday morning ten previous attempts had been made evidently to cause the havoc that has at last been accomplished. The village, as entered by the road from Ely, presents a most desolate appearance.  About a third of it appears to be in ashes; nearly the whole of the eastern part of Hall-street—the principal thoroughfare—is consumed, the entire ruins covering a space of six or seven acres.  Up to yesterday fire and smoke were still issuing from various parts of the ruins.
The prisoner Cornelius Harvey occupied a neat farmhouse at the extreme end of Hall-street (the main road that passes through the village from Ely to New market), apart from the row of houses on that side of the street. His farming premises are on the opposite side of the road some 200 or 300 yards distant.  The nephew occupied a grocer’s and general provision shop about the centre of the row of houses already noticed, with a sort of warehouse at the back, which abutted on the premises of Mr. Pechey, farmer, where the flames were first seen to issue,  On each side of Mr. Pechey’s premises was a large number of farming buildings, comprising barns, stables, granaries, stacks etc., and a windmill, belonging to Messrs. Staples, Morden and others, the whole flanked in front by the houses in Hall-street. Some idea may be formed of the awful extent of the fire when it is stated that the whole of this property, back and front, together with orchards and hedges, was destroyed.  The most distressing circumstance is, that the chief part of the occupants of the houses in Hall-street were hardworking industrious families, who have lost all they possessed, and, not being insured, are reduced to much distress.  The buildings, 17 in number, however, were insured in the Suffolk Insurance office for £6,000.
The prosecution was instituted by that company, an agent of which attended to watch the proceedings; and Mr. Isaacson, solicitor, appeared on behalf of the accused. Shortly after the inquiry had commenced the chairman, the Rev. Mr. Bennett, perceiving the reporter taking notes of the evidence, addressed him and begged that he would refrain from taking any portion of the evidence. It was a private investigation, and with inquiries of that description it was highly necessary that the evidence should not be published until adduced at the trial.   He suggested that course with a view of preventing juries from being prejudiced, or the ends of justice being defeated.  He knew one or two instances where the publication of evidence had had that tendency. The reporter remarked that he should be happy to attend to any suggestion from the Bench; but, from the fact of the court being certainly an open one, according to appearances, he thought the same practice was adopted as at other judicial inquiries.  (The proceedings were held in the large room of the inn, and the door was open for the ingress and egress of the public, who crowded it almost to suffocation.)
The rev. Chairman then consulted his clerk, and observed that magistrates, investigations were certainly private, at least in his district (he is the chairman of the Newmarket bench), and, on all grave charges, he excluded reporters.  As the reporter was present, however, he would allow him to remain, and would leave it to his discretion not to publish any portion of the evidence that was likely to have the evil tendency he had alluded to. As nothing transpired in the evidence that would have the effect anticipated by the rev. chairman, we subjoin a brief narrative of the testimony adduced.  It was extremely voluminous, 15 or 16 witnesses being examined.  The elder prisoner’s apprehension appeared to have resulted from a voluntary statement made by him.  Having been noticed by a private watchman, a few minutes before the outbreak, walking from the spot where the flames were first seen to rise, viz., Mr. Pechey’s farm, he was interrogated on the subject.  He admitted being the individual, and said that he had been watching about the neighbourhood the greater part of the night, and that when he went home he went to bed, but did not pull off his clothes.  The reason he gave was, that he was fearful something would happen, and on being further questioned why he watched that particular spot, he replied, that “he expected a fire would break out, “ but gave no satisfactory account why he entertained such a supposition.  These and other suspicious circumstances being reported to the magistrates, his apprehension was ordered, and, in addition to the watchman’s statement, other witnesses spoke positively to having seen him walking up and down a by-lane at the back of Mr. Pechey’s farm, and every now and then peeping through the hedge in the direction of the spot where the fire broke out.  It was attempted to be shown for the defence that the prisoner had been watching his own property,--that it had been his practice to be on the watch for several weeks past, but, on the night in question, the witnesses declared that he had been watching some distance from his farm; he was viewing the premises of Messrs. Pechey and Staples.
As regards the younger prisoner, he had insured his stock in trade in the Suffolk Fire Insurance-office for the sum of £350.  The fire did not originate in his premises, but in one of the barns of Mr. Pechey that stood within a few feet of his warehouse, which subsequently caught.  When broken open by the inhabitants very little property was found in the place.  The day after the fire he was met by an assistant agent of the company he was insured in, who, seeing the he had hurt his hand, asked him how it happened. He answered that it was done during the fire in attempting to save his goods.  The agent inquired of him if any had been saved, to which he made answer, “Nothing whatever; and he had lost twice as much as he was insured for.”  In the latter part of the day the prisoner made his claim of the amount of his loss to the agent, upon which he was given into custody on a charge of attempting to defraud the company, proof having been adduced showing that he had, prior to the fire, removed the chief bulk of his stock etc., to various parts of the town.  Witness spoke of the prisoner having frequently alluded to the danger that that part of the village was exposed to in the event of Mr. Pechey’s premises taking fire.  He had pointed to a barn, observing, “If that goes, my shop must go,” and it was in this barn that the fire was first perceived.  He had been heard to say that he did not care for his neighbours who were not insured.  He did not care for a fire, as he was fully insured.  “He should like to see all those (alluding to his neighbours’ dwellings) in flames that were not insured,  This conversation
arose after the second attempt to fire the street..  With a view of showing that the prisoners acted in concert, it was proved that the elder prisoner had advanced his nephew £300. to set him up on business, and attempts were made to show that the uncle urged its payment, and had connived to obtain the amount of insurance on his nephew’s goods, but a witness swore positively that the sum was advanced as a gift to start the nephew in business.  Another witness was called, who had valued the salvage of the nephew’s property, and in the course of his surveys the prisoner begged that he would do all he could for him; for it he could not get the money for his insurance he could not pay his uncle the £300. he had lent him. The nephew lived in the uncle’s house, but it did not appear in evidence that he was seen in the neighbourhood of the fire at its outbreak, although on the alarm being raised he was immediately on the spot dressed.
At the close of the evidence the magistrates retired to a private room, and after nearly an hour’s consultation returned, when the Chairman, addressing the prisoner, said they considered the evidence fully warranted them in committing them both for trial at the ensuing assizes. Mr. Isaacson trusted that the bench would liberate the elder prisoner on bail.  He was a highly respectable man, as the crowded court could testify.
The Chairman replied that the charge was of so grave a character as to prevent the bench complying with the application.  He was aware of the respectability of the elder prisoner, but justice made no difference in the conditions of men.
The prisoners were then conveyed to the county gaol at Cambridge.  The amount of bail tendered was upwards of £5,000.
The assizes commence next week.