James Joy age 19, was hanged for a wheat stack fire
Thomas Rammell was a land owner and farmer in Sturry Kent, which is about two and a half miles from Canterbury Kent. He had around 1600 acres of land employing over 60 local men and boys.
Edward Joy 29 Reculver Kent married 16-year-old Phoebe West from Herne Bay Kent on 13 June 1790
They settled in Herne Bay and they had 13 children Between 1792 - 1817 6 girls and 7 boys, although they lost their second-born son at age 4, the rest grew up into adults.
James Joy was their youngest born in 1817.
They then moved to Sturry Kent and Edward worked for Thomas Rammell, becoming his Bailiff around 1825
On Monday evening 7th September 1835, a fire was discovered in the stack-yard of Mr Rammall, at Sturry Court
A row of seven large wheat stacks stood at the end of the yard, the second and third of which, had been fired with the evident expectation that the flames would reach the others.
The engines from Canterbury, and also parties of the 4th Dragoons and 48th Regiment under Colonel Bell, were promptly on the spot. With their quick response, along with the able exertions of several citizens and agricultural labourers, they managed to extinguish the fire before it spread to the rest.
The culprit was arrested the next day, on suspicion of having committed the crime. This was James Joy, aged 19 and the youngest son of Edward and Phoebe Joy.
An examination of James Joy was taken before the Magistrates on Tuesday 8th, and he was charged on suspicion of wilfully setting fire to two wheat stacks on the farm at Sturry Court, the property of Mr Thomas Rammall. He was then remanded until Friday 11th, so additional evidence could be obtained.
On Friday 11th, the Magistrates present were Mr W. H. Baldock, Esq.; Mr T. Bell, Esq.; the Rev. C. H. Hailett; and the Rev. J. Hilton.
The prisoner was said to have appeared quite collected during the examination of the witnesses. There was nothing particularly remarkable in his features, which are plain and somewhat heavy, but bearing no indications to warrant a plea of idiocy in his favour. He was clothed as a labouring man, with a short gaberdine reaching down to his loins.
He listened to the proceedings with some degree of interest, but neither asked questions of the witnesses nor made observations upon the evidence.
The first witness called was Stephen Stead, the Schoolmaster of Sturry.—
''It was about eighteen or twenty minutes past seven o'clock on Monday evening and I was near thirty rods distant from Mr Rammell's stackyard when l heard an alarm of fire given by a person in the path, leading to Broad Oak. I hastened to the spot and saw nobody near. One of the stacks was lit at about four feet from the ground, and the flames ascended to the eaves. This was on the West side and between the two stacks which were burnt. On the ground immediately under the fire, a quantity of straw was blazing. Thinking that I might be required to name the exact time for someone afterwards, I looked at my watch and saw that by the Sturry clock, it was eighteen minutes past seven. I walked to the end of the row of stacks, and on my return, I found several people at the fire. I did not see the prisoner. A gate leading into Broad Oak Road from Mr. Glover's farm is about half a mile from the yard in which the stacks were standing, and about eight minutes walk to The second stack that caught fire about twelve minutes after I got there. I know the prisoner by sight only.
Mr. Robert Lake, of Milton Chapel (Brother in law to Mr Rammell), gave evidence to the following effect at the first examination: —
''On the day that the fire broke out at Sturry Court, Mr. Rammell was at Milton Chapel, on a visit to myself. A communication of the event was received and I accompanied Mr. Rammell home, and we found the stacks on fire. I was informed that Mr. Glover and Mr. Rathbone had seen the bailiff's son running from the spot. I went to the bailiff, who told him his son had not been out at all. Early the next morning I made inquiries to Mr. Glover, and from the information I received I apprehended the prisoner into the custody of PC Couch, to one of the county magistrates''.
On being asked if he had any additional evidence. Mr Lake said, that on Tuesday morning he took charge of the prisoner whilst the constable went into Mr Rammalls house, and a short time had elapsed before the prisoner said, in a low tone and of his own accord, " I don't know how I come to do it" Mr Lake asked, what good he thought he was doing when he set fire to his master's stacks. He replied he did not know; he did not think of doing it until just before he did it. He further said that did it with a Pipe which threw it away directly afterwards. Mr Lake said he held out neither threat nor promise to induce him to make this statement
In reply to a question by Mr. Hilton, the witness said' the prisoner had been in his charge about a quarter of an hour when he made this acknowledgment.
Mr George Glover, of Hackington Kent on examination, stated to the effect that he was walking with Mr Rathbone in the direction of Sturry on the evening of the fire, and when they had reached the gate leading into the Broad Oak Road when they observed the stacks in flames. Shortly afterwards they met the prisoner, walking at a very leisurely pace. They asked him what was on fire, and he turned round and looked, and said he had not seen it before. They said they thought it was Mr. Rammeli's stacks, to which the prisoner assented; and on questioning him, he said he was the son of Mr. Rammeli's bailiff. Mr Glover then told him he ought to hasten back to the spot and render every assistance to his master when he saw him in such trouble. The prisoner said his masters' troubles were not so great as his. Witness asked him if he was ill; the prisoner said yes, and he was going to Canterbury for some medicine, and that he intended to come back and help put out the fire. They then went on to the spot and mentioned the circumstance of their having met with Joy. Mr Lake called upon him the next morning, and he made a similar statement to him. Witness had nothing further to add to his deposition.
Mr. Edward Rathbone corroborated Mr. Glover's testimony.
William Crouch, the constable, said that on Tuesday morning, as he was conveying the prisoner to Canterbury, The prisoner had told him that on the previous evening, he had been very ill. Witness asked him if he had been to Canterbury. Prisoner said he had, for some physic, and that he had got it in the Borough. He recalled his words and said he had got it at the corner—and without finishing his sentence he said in North Lane. PC Crouch said he would go with him to the shop so that he might learn what time he had been there. The prisoner seemed much agitated, and PC Crouch thinking from his appearance that he was speaking falsely, said "If you are the young man, it would be better for you to acknowledge it, and we will return to Mr. Rammell's." He hesitated for a moment and then said he was the man who did it. They then turned back. PC Crouch asked how he did it. He replied that he smoked a pipe from his mother or father's house, and brought one match away with him. He went down past the stack yard into the lower gateway, returned within the yard, and went to the second stack. He got underneath and lit the match by the pipe. He came back again from the stack-yard, and instead of going into the road went along Mr. Rammell's field. This conversation was on their return from Canterbury, and on reaching Sturry Court PC Crouch left the prisoner in Mr. Lake's charge, whilst he went to communicate the information to Mr. Rammell.
By the Rev. Mr Hallett.—The prisoner did not say more respecting the fire, other than he got underneath the stack and lighted the match.
Mr Crouch replied ''No sir''
Phoebe Joy, wife of Edward Joy, stated that they lived a short distance from Mr Rammeli's. Her son James (the prisoner) left the house about a quarter past seven in the evening for a little walk. He had his lighted pipe with him. She saw him light it. He had nothing else to her knowledge. She had matches in the house.
By Mr Baldock.—The matches were not locked up?
She replied ''No but they were in a cupboard in the sitting room''.
Mrs Joy then resumed.—She left her house at about seven o'clock to go across to Sturry Court, and returned shortly before ten. Her son was then standing near the door waiting for her. He could not get into the house as she had locked the door and taken away the key. He had not come to her from Mr. Rammell's. He told her he had been to Canterbury to get some daffy, as his inside was disordered.
This closed the examination. The magistrates, after consulting a short time, fully committed the prisoner, and he was conveyed to St. Augustine's Gaol to await his trial at the Spring Assizes.
The examination excited considerable interest, the justice room being crowded during the whole of the investigation.
The Norwich Union Fire Office, with whom the corn was insured, have declined to proceed against the prisoner, as it was understood that the prosecution would be instituted by the East Kent Society for the Prevention and Detection of Incendiarism
Date of Trial: 14 Mar 1836
Sir John Vaughn was presiding over the criminal court
Forman Lord Marsham
The following gentlemen were sworn on the Grand Jury Sir J K Shaw, Sir W R P Greary, Sir E W C Astley, Mr Joseph Berens Esq, Mr William Deedes Esq, Mr N J Knatchbull Esq, Mr P H Dyke Esq. Mr D Solomons Esq, Mr T Austen Esq, Mr W S D Tyssen Esq, Mr Isaac Minet Esq, Mr T Rider Esq, Mr JDS Douglas Esq Mr G Gipps Esq Mr MDD Dallison Esq, Mr James Best Esq, Mr James Chapmen Jun Esq, Mr R T Bingham Esq Mr Thomas Fairfax Best Esq, Mr C Miller Esq, Mr Arthur Pots Esq
Sir John Vaughn, in his charge, said, he could not help expressing his gratification at seeing so numerous an attendance of the first gentlemen of the County; and the pleasure he felt in re-visiting that beautiful hall, and renewing his acquaintance with those gentlemen, and offering his assistance to them in their ministration of justice. But he was constrained to acknowledge, that that satisfaction and pleasure were much abated by the appalling calendar of prisoners awaiting this trial. He had been a public servant for about ten years; and, in the whole course of his experience, he certainly did not remember a more dreadful catalogue of crime than that lying before him. It was extremely difficult for him to ascertain the causes to which those crimes were to be ascribed; for he was aware that, by the establishment of the Central Criminal Court, one important gaol delivery was withdrawn. But that Court extended its influence, comparatively speaking, to only some portion of the crimes committed in the County. And he could not but recollect that, since the criminal law had undergone revision, many capital offences had been changed, and the jurisdiction of the magistrates much increased, those alterations must, of necessity, most materially have relieved the Assizes. He was sorry to suspect that crime was more prevalent than it had been. The sanguine supporters of education certainly thought that ignorance was the great cause of crime; and that the diffusion of knowledge tended to prevent it. But he agreed in the observations made in an eloquent and admirable discourse by the Learned Divine (the Rev. Mr. Dering, the Sheriff's Chaplain), on his right hand—that, unless that knowledge was based on sound religious principles, it too frequently furnished motives to mischief and crime; and that nothing was more desirable than education founded on religious principles.
Mr Deedes stated the case for the prosecution, and called the following witnesses -
Thomas Rammell The farm owner - ''On the 7th of Sept, I was at the house of Mr Lake, at Chapel. About twenty minutes before eight o’clock, I received information of a fire, and on going home found two wheat stacks in flames. There was about 54-quarters of wheat in the two stacks''.
The plan of the premises was produced and Mr. Rammell’s examination resumed. -
''The Prisoner lived with his father who is the bailiff on my farm and has worked for me for ten years. The Prisoner also worked for me and has been a well-conducted young man, although frequently unwell. On enquiring the morning after the fire where the prisoner was, his father said that he was unwell, I had never seen him in any mischief and had reason to suspect that any offence had been committed by the prisoner''.
Stephen Stead The Schoolmaster was re-examined —He recollects the evening of the fire. ''I Saw the stacks on fire between seven and eight o'clock. I heard an alarm of fire and I ran to the stack yard of Mr. Rammell. I saw the second stack on the west side on fire about four feet from the ground. I saw no person there. Some loose straw was on fire under the rick. I went through the stack yard. Upon returning to the fire I saw two or three persons. I Saw another stack take fire from the one which I first saw on fire. There were eight or nine stacks in the yard, near the gate leading to the lower Oak Road from Mr. Clover's field. The gate is about half a mile from the stack. It is a public road, but not much frequented''.
George Glover was next. He resides at St. Stephens and went through his evening of the fire. ''I Saw light towards Sturry, about twenty minutes after seven o'clock, I was standing in one of my marshes. Then went towards my gate, Mr Rothwell was with me. We met the prisoner about ten rods from the footpath leading from the gate and waited until he came up. Mr Rothwell said to the prisoner, (pointing to the fire).''Is that a fire at Mr Rammells? The prisoner said ''is it a fire at Mr. Raimnells?, it is the first time I have seen it.” I then asked the prisoner which way he came, whether it was along the line of road from the slacks, and where from. Prisoner replied that his father and he worked for Mr. Rammell. I then asked the prisoner if he would not go back and assist in seeing his master’s property as it was on fire. He replied that his troubles were greater than Mr Rammells. I asked him what his troubles were if it was illness. Prisoner replied that he must go to Canterbury for a doctor, and nothing would stop him, and that he would return as quickly as could, and assist in putting out the fire. Mr Rothwell and I then went to the fire and found several people at the fire''
When Cross-examined— Mr Glover would not swear that the first question to the prisoner by Mr Rothwell was not 'Where is the fire' and he would not swear that the reply of the prisoner was ''it looks like one.” He did swear that the Prisoner did not say that he was ill. He would also swear that he did not ask him if any of the family were ill
Edward Rothwell examined—I Was with Mr Glover on the night of the fire, and we saw the prisoner. I asked him what that fire was. He said it was at Mr. Rammells. I asked him which way he came. He said that he came right by them. I asked him his name. replied that his name was Joy, and his father was a bailiff to Mr. Rainmell. Mr, Glover asked whether he would not go back, considering the trouble his master was in. He said that was in greater trouble than Mr Rammell. I asked him what what his trouble was, whether it was sickness He said Yes, and he was going to the doctor in Canterbury and would return as soon as he could, to assist in putting it out. I did not see the prisoner at the fire.''
When Cross-examined —'' I left the fire about ten o'clock, I saw the fire ten minutes before I saw the prisoner. I asked the prisoner what is that was on fire?-, and he turned round and said it is at Mr Rammells, it is the first time I have seen it. ” He did not say Is that not a fire!” He swore that the prisoner did not say ''It looks like a fire at Mr Rammells. He also said he did not hear the previous witness evidence.
The next witness to give evidence was Constable William Crouch — I am a constable of Sturry, I was standing at Church-lane in Sturry-street. and gave the alarm of fire. I saw several people to the west and I left the fire between ten and eleven o'clock
I went on the next morning to Mr Rammells and took the prisoner into custody. I took him part of the road to Canterbury and brought him back again to Mr-Rammells On the way to Canterbury I had some conversation with the prisoner about some physic, I did not say or do anything to make him say anything about the physic but did afterwards, when he told me he had gone to Canterbury for some physic, I asked him where he got it from, He said at first he got it from the Borough, then afterwards he said he obtained it in North Lane. I then told the prisoner that I would go with him and see what time he was there. The Prisoner said nothing but appeared much agitated.
Robert Lake who lived at Milton Chapel was then examined on his evidence. He went with Mr. Rammell to Sturry the night of the fire. He remained at the fire all night until the danger was over. He went to bed about twenty minutes, before one o'clock. He did not see the prisoner there.
He was with Mr Rammell the following morning at the stable, and the prisoner was sent for. He stated he had not said anything to the prisoner to induce him to make any statement.
The Prisoner and the constable left the house and returned around seven o'clock, and the officer left the prisoner in my charge and went into the house. After a short time, the prisoner said he could not think how he had come to do it
His Lordship stopped the witness and stated that he considered that the promise, which was made by the constable to the prisoner was an inducement for him to make a statement, which he did to Mr Lake and that he therefore thought it was inadmissible.
A great deal of deal discussion then took place, after which the Rev. Hilton, who committed the prisoner, was called, and Stated that when the prisoner was before the magistrates, he was repeatedly cautioned that anything he said would be taken down in writing and would not make it better or worse for him, and might be used against him in his trial. The Prisoner did not confess to the magistrates.
His Lordship at length decided to admit the evidence.
Joseph Bone was then examined, He was the Governor of St. Augustine’s gaol, Canterbury. The Prisoner was in his custody and came the day after the fire. He stated he did not say anything to induce him to make any disclosure. Whatever was said was the result of free will -
''I asked him if he worked for Mr. Rammell, and he said that he did. I then asked why he was suspected of setting fire to the stack. The prisoner said '' I did it.” I then asked if he had told anybody else. The prisoner said that he told Crouch, the constable because he said it would be better for him. I said I have not told you so, so why do you tell me.” He said no use to tell lie, lies would sure to be found out.” I then asked him how came to do it. He said it was done by the light of his pipe, and he had not thought of doing it twenty minutes before he did it. I then asked him if he had any quarrel with his master. He said no but had left his employment several times, as he did not receive as much wages, as the other labourers, who were not better men than himself, and it had been long on his mind''.
When Cross-examined he replied -'' Constable Crouch was not there. It was after the first examination. I wrote it down and laid it before the magistrates. They did not call on me to make any statement on oath. I Heard the prisoner cautioned by the magistrates on the second examination. The Prisoner did not hear what I said to the magistrates. I Did not know that they had refused to receive the statement made by Mr Crouch. I have been governor of the gaol for fourteen years and consider it part of his duty to see every prisoner who comes into the gaol. I did not ask Joy any more questions, that was usual to ask of other prisoners''.
Phoebe Joy the mother to the prisoner was examined -
I remember the fire. I went home about ten o’clock, and found James at the door, who said that he had been to Canterbury. He had a pipe when he went out, which was about seven o’clock.
She was Cross-examined —He had a pipe when he went out, He is not in good health and is subject to complaints in his head, and it had been worse lately. He was ill all the harvest. He was not in the habit of going to Canterbury for medicine but was in the habit of taking physics. I Do not know where he got it. When he was ill he was strange and flighty and did not know what he was about. Has almost always lived at home, and kept strict to church or chapel. He was frequently laid aside with illness.
The prisoner, being called on for his defence, said that he was quite innocent of the charge made against him, and the reason he did not go to the fire was. that he was not able to assist. As to making the oration, he never did, and therefore should not profess to do it.
Mr Rammell was called on the part of the prisoner and said that he had never heard anything against the prisoner's moral character or honesty.
The learned Judge then summed up the evidence very quickly, and the Jury, after only a few minutes, returned a verdict of Guilty.
The prosecutor recommended the prisoner to mercy. but his Lordship in most solemn address passed the sentence of Death on the prisoner, informing him that he could not hold out hope of mercy to him.
The prisoner appeared quite unmoved during the address of the Judge, gazing about the court the whole time.
Day of his execution, 31st March 1836. It was a joint hanging with Thomas Pryer, 18 who was convicted of highway robbery and attempted murder ( another blog to come. The execution was said to have attracted between 6000 - 7000 people, with a considerable many being females
It was reported that when Joy ascended the scaffold he exhibited an absolute callousness to his awful situation, and watched very attentively to the executioner whilst he was preparing Pryer for execution. On the fatal cord being adjusted around his neck he expressed a wish to address the people, which he did for nearly a quarter of an hour. He made no allusion whatever to his crime, of which he had a short time before acknowledged his guilt, but called upon the crowd to take warning by his fate and keep the sabbath day holy, and spurn vicious company. This exhortation he repeated several times.
Having finished, the cap was replaced over his face. Pryer said nothing, he had previously confessed to the commission of the offence. They were in a moment afterwards hurried into eternity. Joy did not move after he fell. The bodies having hung an hour were cut down and his body was given to the constable who took him to prison and taken for burial at his place of residence the same evening. His body was buried at Sturry on 2nd April
Life After
His Father Edward died on 7th November 1842 age 80 at his home in Sturry, cause of death was given as old age, His Occupation was a Labourer, so he may have lost his bailiff job, due to his son's crime. He was buried in the Parish church at Chislet Kent on 13th November
His Mother Phoebe died at Herne Street in Herne Kent on 20th November 1856 at age 82. Her cause of death was given as diarrhoea. Her body was taken to Chislet and was buried with her husband on 27th November
Sources
(1836, April 5). Execution. Kentish Gazette, p 3-3
(1836, March 19). Thursday. Dover Telegraph and Cinque Ports General Advertiser, p 8-8
(1836, March 22). Arson at sturry. South Eastern Gazette, p 2-3.
(1835, September 15). INCENDIARISM. Kentish Gazette, p3-3
(1835, September 12). Local intelligence. Dover Telegraph and Cinque Ports General Advertiser, pg 8-8
(1836, April 13). Execution. Hereford Journal, p 4-4
(n.d.). James Joy. Ancestry. Retrieved April 11, 2024, from https://www.ancestry.co.uk
Archive, T.B.N. (no date) History’s colourful stories in black and white, Home | Search the archive | British Newspaper Archive. Available at: https://www.britishnewspaperarchive.co.uk/
General Register Office (no date) General Register Office - Online Ordering Service - Login. Available at: https://www.gro.gov.uk/gro/content/certificates/ (Accessed: 16 MAY 2024).
Pictures and historical info from Wikipedia https://www.wikipedia.org/
Comments