Shocking Burning Fatality at Rushden

A Baby Succumbs to Its Injuries

Last (Thursday) evening a shocking affair took place in a home on the Wellingborough-road. Mr. and Mrs. O. Ireson, who live in one of the last houses on the road to Wellingborough, were the proud possessors of a fine little boy a year and seven months old named Reginald Oakley Ireson. Last night at about 7.30 the mother put the child in the cradle in the living room and left it apparently dozing. There was no thought of danger in her mind, and even if there had been there seemed to be nothing in the room likely to injure the little one, for even the fire was protected by a guard and the lamp had not been lit. Mrs. Ireson had occasion to speak to a neighbour in the yard, and she was absent for about four or five minutes. That brief time, however, was long enough, the sad sequel proved, for the little fellow to sustain fatal injuries. Before the mother returned, Mr. Ireson entered the room and was horror-struck to see the baby running round the table with his clothes on fire. The father at once took steps to extinguish the flames, and sent for Dr. Baker immediately. Medical skill, however, was of no avail to save the child’s life, the lower part of the body and the neck being shockingly burnt, and, after all had been done that was possible to mitigate the little one’s suffering, death mercifully put an end to the pain at about half-past seven o’clock this morning. How the child came to set fire to itself is a mystery, but it uttered no cry while on fire or the mother must have heard it and the baby’s life would have been saved. The circumstances have been communicated to the Coroner.


21st April 1899

Burning Fatality at Rushden

A Mysterious Affair

The circumstances attending the death of the child Reginald Oakley Ireson, reported in last week’s Rushden Echo formed the subject of an inquiry held at the Oakley Inn on Saturday morning before Mr. J. T. Parker, Coroner. Mr. J. Litchfield was foreman of the jury.

In opening the inquiry, the Coroner said the circumstances were rather peculiar. He understood that the child was left in a cot by itself for a few minutes and on going into the room the father found the child out of the cot in the room with its clothes on fire. It was rather an extraordinary thing, because he was told that no sparks could get to the cot, and how the child got on fire was a mystery. Dr. Baker said he was called to see the child on Thursday night at about eight o’clock by the father. He found the deceased suffering from extensive superficial burns on the front of the body. Witness dressed the burns, but the child died next morning from

Convulsions Due To Burns

The deceased was conscious, but was too young to answer questions as to how the injuries were sustained.

Mrs. Ireson, the mother of the deceased, said the child was a year and five months old. He could walk about well. Witness put him to bed in a cradle at seven o’clock on Thursday evening in the back living room. At about a quarter past seven witness went outside the back door to empty the teapot and stood talking to the next door neighbour, Mr. Cox. Mr. Ireson was in the workshop adjoining the house at work. Witness stood talking to Mr. Cox five or ten minutes. Her husband came out of the shop and said “I’ll go and see if the boy’s all right.” He went into the house and witness heard him call out “Oh, my God.” Witness ran in, and saw the baby on the floor with its clothes on fire. Dr. Baker was sent for directly and witness nursed the baby while the doctor came. The cradle stood in a recess by the side of the fireplace, and there was

An Upright Fireguard

in front of the fire. There was hardly any fire in the grate. Witness had two other children, one four years old and the other five years, in bed upstairs. There were no matches in the house and there was no paper on the table or the floor. She had no idea how the child got on fire. When witness went out she left the child asleep. No one went into the room before her husband. If the deceased had screamed witness must have heard him. Witness had never known him to play with the fire.

Oak Henry Ireson, the father of the child, said he went into the house about twenty-five minutes past seven to see whether the child was asleep or awake. When he got in he saw the child on the far side of the table with his clothes on fire. The child did not call out, but was trying to put the fire out with its hands. Witness put the fire out and his wife came in. Witness could not account for the child’s getting on fire. It would be as much as it could do to reach the through the guard. The child was not insured. He had

Never Been Seen to Play With the Fire

though the other children had. The other two did not come downstairs; they were fast asleep. Witness could give no explanation as to how the child got on fire.

The Coroner said he did not know whether the jury were satisfied as to the cause of death. The parents seemed very respectable people and were not far away when the child got on fire. They did not hear the deceased scream out, and it looked as though the child must have got out of the cradle and stood in front of the fire where it either played with the fire or a spark flew out. The parents could not even be blamed for not having a fire-guard for there was one. It was one of the most extraordinary cases of burning he had known.

The jury found that death was the result of burns, caused accidentally.