Wisbech Community Forum

A WISBECH TRAGEDY

There was one very serious case before the jury at Cambridge Assizes in June 1905. It was a charge against John Day of murdering the woman with whom he was living, Frances Parlett. She was married about six years ago, but left her husband, and for two years she had lived with the accused at 18a Carpenter's Arms-yard. At one o’clock in the morning May 2nd they were in their living room, one of two rooms in which they lived. Day, having fallen asleep, was awakened by the woman, and it was said that either in sudden anger or with malice aforethought, he seized a lighted paraffin lamp which was on the table, and threw it at her. She was at once covered in flames, and screamed and rushed to the front door. A very worthy man who lived near, and who often heard screams, went out and saw the poor creature. With remarkable courage and pluck, this elderly man rushed hack into his house and secured some blankets, with which he put out the flames. Next day the woman died, fearfully burnt. The evidence was that the accused, about 11 o'clock that night, was heard to say to her that he would do something to her when he got home.

Nothing remains of Carpenter's Arms-yard today. It was a narrow lane running off what is now West Street, and it ended just short of Tillery Field, which in those days was a cemetery. Its position was more or less where St Paul's Close is now. By all accounts it was one of the meaner streets of the town. I have been unable to find any

image of Carpenter's Arms Yard, but it is safe to imagine that it would have been narrow, dirty and the tiny terraced houses would have been packed with residents  who were at the bottom end of society. The photo on the right is of an existing Wisbech alley which, due to its central position has survived more or less intact, and gives us an idea of what the Yard might have looked like Carpenter's Arms Yard was earmarked for slum clearance in the late 1920s along with its near neighbour Ashworth's Yard, and both were gone before the outbreak of World War II. What is now St Peter's Road was probably more prosperous than either of the Yards, and its terraced houses were spared the redevelopments of the 1930s. It is tempting to look back and wish that more of old Wisbech had been preserved, but we would do well to remember that conditions in these old houses would be awful, even by standards of the time. Damp, insanitary and built on the cheap, these grim places contributed to the general poor health and high death rate of the time. The cemetery at the bottom of the slight slope of Carpenter's Arms Yard was actually instituted as an overflow burial ground when a cholera epidemic struck the town earlier in the 19th century.

Back to the terrible events of May, 1905. Sadly, Frances Parlett died of her burns the next day, and the wheels of the law began to grind. The first step was a Coroner's Inquest.At the inquest, it was reported that:
"Deceased was suffering from extensive superficial burns, extending from the knees to the armpits, and the front part was worse than the back. If deceased had been sitting at a table and the lamp capsized one would have expected more severe burns at one particular spot. There were no marks on her face or chest to show that they had come in contact with a hard substance, and would have expected to have found some marks on the body if it had been struck by the lamp with much violence."

In answer to the Foreman, a witness said he thought the lamp could be thrown with sufficient force on the steel of the deceased’s corsets to break the lamp and not mark the body. The skin was discoloured too much to see any bruise. Herbert Brightwell, bootmaker, 19a, Carpenter’s Arms-yard, said heard the deceased and Day come home about 11 o’clock on the night in question. About one o’clock he was awakened by the shuffling of feet, but he heard no voices. Immediately afterwards he heard a woman scream, and saw a bright light flash across his window. The woman continued to scream, and he went downstairs. When he opened the door of Day’s house the deceased, who was in flames, fell into his arms. Witness attempted to put out the flames by wrapping blankets round her. 

Brightwell  asked Day to assist him, but he did not do so, and said nothing. Having put out the flames, witness ran to tell Deceased's sister, and Day ran after him, saying "What the **** are you exciting yourself about. If you don’t come back here I will jolly well put you through it as well.”

It was also alleged that after the woman was in this fearful condition, Day did nothing to help extinguish the fire except to pour some water on the woman from a small teapot. He was also said to have threatened do the same for a man who was trying put out the flames if he made fuss about it. There was no other possible conclusion at the inquest other than that Frances Parlett had met her painful end through the violent actions of John Day, and that Day must face trial for murder.

At Day's trial in June 1905, much was made of the fractious and often violent relationship between Frances Parlett and himself. The poor woman did not die until the next day, and in the immediate aftermath of the attack initially defended Day, but then the following exchange was relayed to the court. Sergeant Watson took the prisoner upstairs to see the deceased, and they had a conversation.
Day said, " Frances, did I do it ?”
She answered, "Yes, you bad boy, you know you did it,”
Day said, “It’s false.”
Frances repeated, "You did, you bad boy, you know you did.”
She was also heard to say, "You murderer, you have done it this time. You have had a good many tries, and you have done it this time.”

In the event, the defence barrister for Day made great play on the grave

responsibility that the jurors held. If they found Day guilty of murder, he would surely hang. In the words of the newspaper report, Mr Stewart, for the defence, remarked that the punishment for the crime with which the prisoner was charged was death, and it was not necessary to say more than that to bring home the jury the great and terrible responsibility that rested upon them. The onus of proof against the prisoner lay with the prosecution, and it was for them to satisfy the jury beyond the possibility of reasonable doubt that the prisoner was responsible for the deed. He contended that this had not been done. The statement of the woman was not in nature of dying declaration,and it ought not to regarded as more important, or have more credence attached to it than was attached to any of the evidence called before the Court during the day.

The jury baulked at finding Day guilty of murder, but found him guilty of manslaughter, for which he received the sentence of seven years Penal Servitude. It is pointless to speculating over a century later whether Frances Parlett received justice. If John Day had committed the offence in 2014 and had been found guilty of either manslaughter or murder, he would have been spared the hangman's noose. It is also fair to point out that women were not permitted to sit on criminal case juries until well after the Great War, a war which was to claim five more victims from Carpenter's Arms Yard.