| 1. | James NUNN was born in 1829 in Depden, Suffolk, England; died on 2 May 1876 in Hargrave, Suffolk, England, UK; was buried on 8 May 1876 in Hargrave, Suffolk, England, UK. Other Events and Attributes:
- Census: 1841, Hargrave, Suffolk, England, UK
- Census: 1851, Wash, Hargrave, Suffolk, England, UK
- Census: 1861, Carpenters Shop, Hargrave, Suffolk, England, UK
- Census: 1871, Hargrave, Suffolk, England, UK
Notes:
On 1871 census, eldest daughter Mary Ann has the surname Murkin. This could mean that she was Sarah's base child before she married James Nunn. To complicate matters there is also a Mary Ann Murkin aged 3 as a visitor and nearby neighbours with the Murkin surname.
Birth:
Derrick Plummer's research
Census:
1851 census for The Wash, Hargrave:
http://tinyurl.com/c9gpjm
Class: HO107; Piece: 1791; Folio: 235; Page: 20; GSU roll: 207440.
John NUNN, head, mar, aged 54, farm labourer, born Hargrave (born Depden on other census)
Sarah NUNN, wife, mar, aged 51, born Rede
James NUNN, son, unm, aged 22, born Depden
Mary NUNN, dau, aged 14, born Hargrave
Harriett NUNN, dau, aged 11, born Hargrave
Abraham NUNN, son, aged 7, born Hargrave
Sarah Ann NUNN, dau, aged 4, born Hargrave
Census:
1861 census for Carpenters Shop, Hargrave:
James Nunn, head, married, aged 32, ag lab, born Depden
Sarah Nunn, wife, aged 28, factory hand, born Ousden
Mary Ann Nunn, dau, unm, aged 9, born Newmarket
Hannah Nunn, dau, aged 7, born Hargrave
Robert Nunn, son, aged 5, born Hargrave
Agnes Nunn, dau, aged 1 month, born Hargrave
Census:
1871 census for Hargrave Green, Hargrave:
James Nunn, head, aged 42, ag lab, born Depden
Sarah Nunn, wife, aged 37, ag lab's wife, domestic, born Ousden
Mary Ann Murkin, dau, unm, aged 18, sewing machine worker at clothes factory, Newmarket, Cambs
Honor (Hannah on 1861 census) Nunn, dau, aged, 17, sewing machine worker at clothes factory, born Hargrave
Robert Nunn, son, aged 14, carpenter, born Hargrave
Mary Ann Murkin, visitor, aged 3, born Dalham
1871 census for Hargrave Green, Hargrave:
James Nunn, head, aged 42, ag lab, born Depden
Sarah Nunn, wife, aged 37, ag lab's wife, domestic, born Ousden
Mary Ann Murkin, dau, unm, aged 18, sewing machine worker at clothes factory, Newmarket, Cambs
Honor Nunn, dau,sewing machine worker at clothes factory, born Hargrave
Robert Nunn, son, aged 14, carpenter, born Hargrave
Mary Ann Murkin, visitor, aged 3, born Dalham
Died:
On pages 6 and 7 of The Bury and Norwich Post, and Suffolk Herald of May 23, 1876 there is a report of the local government board inquiry at the Thingoe Union under the heading charges of neglect on the part of a parish surgeon, Mt Watson.
James Nunn of Hargrave was one of the patients on whom the inquiry focused.
Part of the report reads:
The Rev. Samuel Chamberlain deposed: I am Rector of Hargrave, and the deceased James Nunn was a parishioner of mine. About two months ago I heard he was ill and called to see him. Mr. Watson was his private doctor, and acted as much in the first instance; after a time Nunn obtained an order from the Relieving-officer, and Mr. Watson still continued to attend him. Nunn complained to me very much about Mr. Watson's neglect - that he seldom saw him, and that he never examined him. According to Mr. Watson, Nunn was suffering from asthma. I felt his pulse and asked him to show me his tongue, and he then said I had examined him more than Mr. Watson had done. He then added, "Mr. Watson is the strangest man I have ever seen. I went to him for a bottle of medicine, and when he gave it to me he said, 'Take this, and slip it unto you: you will soon be all right'." I found that Nunn continued to get worse. From time to time I ascertained that Mr. Watson had not been to the man's house, and I learnt from Nunn's wife that Mr. Watson had said would be a good thing for him to get into the Hospital. I then wrote to Mr. Watson, and asked him whether he recommended that course. The date of that letter I do not remember. I afterwards consulted Mr. Tricker, the Guardian, and he strongly advised that the man should go to the Hospital. On the 24th April I called at Nunn's, and whilst I was there Mr. Watson came in. He spoke to Nunn as follows - "Mr. Chamberlain takes a great interest in your case: I will do all I can for you." Mr. Watson then came out with with, and I again asked him about Nunn being removed to the Hospital, and he said, "Wait a week : I will see him every day, and report to you his condition in two or three days." I went to Nunn's house nearly every day, but was informed that Mr. Watson had not attended at all. I asked Nunn whether he was still anxious to go to the Hospital, and he replied, "I only regret that I did not go before." So on Tuesday, the 2nd of May, I removed Nunn in my own carriage to the Hospital, where he died the same afternoon. I have no reason to think that Nunn was injured by the removal : he was well wrapped up in a great coat. - To the Inspector : My carriage is an open one. - To Mr. Watson (through the Inspector): You told me on the 24th of April that you did not think they would admit Nunn into the Hospital, as he was suffering from chronic asthma. As far as my judgment went I did not think he was suffering from asthma at all.
Mr. Watson said he attended Nunn once during the week.
The Inspector, upon looked at the medical sheet kept by Mr. Watson, on which is, or ought to be, recorded the different persons, times, and places relating to his visits, pointed out that there was no attendance at all entered for that week.
The Inspector : What about the disease Nunn was suffering from?
Mr Chamberlain: Mr. Watson certainly pronounced it to be one of asthma.
The Inspector: It appears from Mr. Watson's medical sheet that he was suffering from congestion of the liver.
Mr Chamberlain continued: After I had the conversation with Mr. Watson about Nunn going into the Hospital, he wrote a letter to me which ran as follows: - "Of course, to a man in Nunn's position it is a great advantage to get him into the Hospital; but I fancy you will meet with other cases during the year, which will be likely to receive greater benefit." I remember the words, though I have destroyed the letter, which I received on the 23rd of April. I am quite certain that Mr. Watson told me on the 24th of April he would see Nunn every day. Mrs. Nunn heard part of the conversation which took place between me and Mr. Watson on the 24th of April.
Mr. Tricker said he was very sorry to say that the poor man was only visited three times by Mr. Watson during seven weeks.
Mr. Chamberlain, to Mr. Watson : I don't know when you received an order to attend Nunn. Nunn told me he had two bottles of medicine from you, for which he paid you. You verbally asked me to wait a week before I removed Nunn to the Hospital: that was all the caution you gave me about removing him. It was on Monday, the 24th of April, that you told me to wait a week, and you would report how Nunn was going on. There was no arrangement entered into by the parishioners to keep Nunn's removal secret. I am able to state that you did not see Nunn that week: I had it from the poor man's own lips.
Mr Watson: That is not evidence: the man is dead now.
The Inspector, on again refering to Mr. Watson's sheets of medical attendances, complained that they were very irregularly kept, and said he should withhold them, and present them with his report to the Local Government Board.
Mr. Watson: Who received Nunn from you at the Hospital?-Mr. Chamberlain: Mr. Fuller, the house-surgeon.
Sarah Nunn deposed: I am the wife of James Nunn, deceased. On the 2nd of March my husb and went to Mr. Watson: he was then a pauper, but had not medical order. On the 11th of March he obtained an order from Mr. Calver, the Relieving-fficer, and I then applied to Mr. Watson to attend my husband: but he did not come. My husband subsequently went himself, and Mr. Watson came to him. Mr. Watson told me in my husband's presence that he was suffering from asthma. He complained to me of pain in his inside, and of shortness of breath; his eyes swelled a good deal; the pain was in his left side. About three weeks after I carried the order to Mr. Watson, he came and attended my husband. He did not examine him, he only looked at him: he was hardly in the house time enough to enable himself to turn round and go out again. I went for him about a week after this visit, and he afterwards called in and wrote me out an order for a piece of meat: he called again at the end of the week, and wrote out a similar order for meat. Mr. Watson also supplied my husband with medicine. Mr. Watson only visited my husband three times in nine weeks. I am certain he pronounced the diseased my husband was suffering from to be asthma. My husband called twice on Mr. Watson at his surgery. Mr. Chamberlain often visited my husband - once or twice a week. I asked Mr. Chamberlain whether he did not think the Hospital would be the best place for him, and he advised me to speak to Mr. Watson about it. I did so, and he said, "Good living and good attendance will do your husband a great deal of good." I acquantainted Mr. Chamberlain with that, and he promised to get me an order for the Hospital. On the Monday week before my husband died Mr. Watson and Mr. Chamberlain were together at my house. Mr. Watson then felt my husband's hand, which was the only time he had touched him. He promised Mr. Chamberlain he would see my husband every day during the week, but did not come till the Monday in the following week. I was present on all occasions when Mr. Watson visited my husband. He never looked at his tongue, tapped his chest, or asked him any questions as to the condition he was in. The last time he called he looked at my husband's legs. I have made a slight mistake - altogether Mr. Watson attended him four time. My husband was anxious to go to the Hospital, but was not removed on April 26th because Mr. Watson promised to do all he could to do him good. He was removed to the Hospital on Tuesday, the 2nd inst., and before starting he ate a hearty breakfast, drank some whisky and water, and smoked his pipe. The house-surgeon at the Hospital did no say anything to me about him. - By Mr. Watson: My husband first of all saw you at your surgery: He went there twice altogether. - Mr Watson: Then, how do you know that I didn't examine him there: - Witness: Because my husbane told me you never did.
I never heard him say that you promised him you would call and see him.
Mr. Harry Fuller deposed: I am house surgeon at the Hospital. I remember Nunn being brought to the Hospital on the 2nd inst. He was almost in a dying state: he had effusion on the chest, arising from pleurisy and emphysema of the lungs; he had also an effusion in the pericardium. There was nothing to lead me to enquire into the state of his liver : I had quite sufficient evidence to account for death. I made a post mortem examination, and found the chest on both sides full of fluid, the result of pleurisy: the pericardium was also filled with fluid. He did not speak to me. I did not consider that he was in a proper condition to be removed: I could not say at the time whether he had been under medical treatment. When I say that he was not in a condition to be removed, I don't mean that the removal actually caused death: he must have died under any circumstances, as he was so badly diseased. The symptoms were not those where the disease would have come on suddenly. Judging from what I saw, he was likely to have been in a dangerous condition on the previous day. I cannot understand his eating a hearty breakfast on the morning of his removal, and was very surprised to hear it was so. Drinking and smoking a pipe would tend to relieve him somewhat. - To Mr. Watson: I did not say that the removal to the Hospital accelerated his death.
In answer to the Inspector, as to whether he had any explanation to offer, Mr. Watson said he was perfectly ignorant of the removal of Nunn to the Hospital : it was a course he should have objected to, knowing that he was suffering from some bronchial affection. He did not think it was a case that required constant attention. He had every reason to believe that his removal on such a cold morning of the 2nd Inst. brought on congestion of the lungs.
The Inspector: That is not the point you have to answer: the complaint against you is that on the 24th of April you promised to attend Nunn during the week, and you never did so.
Mr. Watson: I did go to see him in the middle of the week, on the Wednesday.
Mr. Tricker, the Guardian for Hargrave: You did not, and it has been proved by two witnesses, and therefore what is the use of your telling such a falsehood?
The Inspector (to Mr. Watson): Have you anything to show to prove to us that you really did go in the middle of the week:
Mr. Watson: No; I never kept my memorandum. I never dreamt that anything was going to made of this case.
The Inspector: Well, then, we have had two witnesses who have distinctly sworn that you did not go.
A Guardian: Why did you promise you would attend, and never perform it?
Mr Watson: That promise of mine has been very much enlarged upon since I made it: I merely promised to pay attention to the man.
Mr. Tricker: You did not even visit him once during the seven days. The poor man's residence was in the centre of your practice, too, and you would not have had to go a yard our of your way. There might have been somewhat of an excuse for you to offer if you had lived a few miles away from him. I must inform my brother Guardians that there is now a pauper lying very ill in the parish, whom Mr. Watson has not visited for 14 days.
In answer to Mr. Tricker, who asked Mr. Watson whether the entries on an attendance sheet were in his own handwriting, replied that half of them were and the other half were not.
Mr. Tricker observed that it was a most improper thing to allow other persons to make these entries.
Mr. Watson said, all he went by was, that when he first undertook the duties of the Union, the attendance-sheets were not filled up, and that was the reason he never completely filled his own up.
Mr. Sparke (the Clerk) here handed to the Inspector certain sheets which were in use at the time Mr. Watson was appointed to the office, and which were, he said, all properly filled up.
The Inspector again expressed his entire disapproval of the manner in which Mr. Watson had kept his sheets, and said it was his intention to lay them before the Local Government Board.
The Inspector, in closing the enquiry, pointed out that in the first case there had been very conflicting and contradictory evidence given on the part of Paske and Smith, whiles the statements of Ashman and Smith seems to confirm each other, so it would have to depend on the credibility of the evidence whether there was really any neglect on the part of Mr. Watson in this case. With reference to the case of Nunn, they had had evidence to show that Mr. Watson promised to attend him regularly, or all all events he made some promise of that sort, but according to the witnesses he failed to act up to it. Mr. Watson had said that he attended twice during that week, but he had not brought forward any proof to susbstantiate that assertion, and so disprove the evidence of Mr. Chamberlain and Mrs. Nunn.
The Inspector then notified to the Board that the report of this enquiry would be laid before the Local Government Board for their consideration at the earliest opportunity, and the enquiry, which lasted five hours, was brought to a close.
Buried:
Hargrave burials:
8 May 1876 James Nunn 47
Family/Spouse: Sarah --?--. Sarah was born about 1833 in Ousden, Suffolk, England, UK; died in UNKNOWN. [Group Sheet] [Family Chart]
Children:
- 2. Mary Ann NUNN
 was born about 1852 in Newmarket, Cambridgeshire, England, UK; died in UNKNOWN.
- 3. Hannah NUNN was born about 1854 in Hargrave, Suffolk, England, UK; died in UNKNOWN.
- 4. Robert NUNN was born about 1856 in Hargrave, Suffolk, England, UK; died in UNKNOWN.
- 5. Agnes NUNN was born in 1861 in Hargrave, Suffolk, England, UK; died in UNKNOWN.
|
|
Search | Advanced Search | Search Families | Search Site
1829 - 1876 (47 years)