John Littleboy and Ann Fenn

 John Littleboy married Anne Fenn on 29th January 1803 at St John the Baptist Church, Hillingdon, Middlesex, England.  They are my 5 times great grandparents.

Hillingdon is a suburban area within the London Borough of Hillingdon, situated 14.2 miles (22.8 km) west of Charing Cross. It was an ancient parish in the county of Middlesex that originally included the market town of Uxbridge. The church of St John the Baptist stands at the top of Hillingdon Hill, at its junction with Royal Lane. It was built in 1629, replacing an earlier building deemed to have become unsafe. In 1846, the architect George Gilbert Scott was asked to design an extension, after the increasing population meant the church was becoming too cramped. This extension was completed between 1847 and 1848 by the Fassnidge builders from Uxbridge. The barrel roof of the chancel was renovated in 1953 to commemorate the coronation of Elizabeth II. In 1964, a vestry was built on the north-eastern side of the church.[8] On 8 November 1940, a bomb fell on the south side of the church, damaging many of the windows on the south and east sides of the church. The windows were repaired following the end of the Second World War.  Below are two photos, one a sketch of the church in the 1600's and one much more recent.

I found John and Anne on the records of my 4th great grandfather, William Littleboy who was christened at St Leonard's Church in Cranford, Middlesex, England in 1803 and the christening information contains the name of his parents.  Hillingdon and Cranford are only 5 miles from each other.

👆 HINT - Google maps is a very useful tool.  People did not move around that much in the past, so when I see two different towns listed (like above) I check to see how close they are.  It's not a certain way of determining a match, but it is a hint.

John Littleboy wa born in 1780 at Iver, Buckinghamshire, England.  The source of that information is in 3 census.  These are conflicting, and show jusy how often you need to analyse information and come to your best conclusion.  Here is what I mean:

1841 census - age 55 (b.1786 - 1782)  See hint below!

1851 census - age 71 (b 1780)  (amazing how he aged 16 years in just 10!)

1861 census - age 81 (b 1780)

👆 HINT - 1841 census ages were rounded down to the nearest 0 or 5 age.  So John's age is somewhere between 55 and 59 in this census if correct procedures were followed.   That could account for such a large age gap between the census.

So from that I assume that 1780 is probably closer to the mark - but it is not certain, and more information could be available at a later date, so his birthdate is marked "probably conclusion" and not "certain". 

Richard was an agricultural labourer in 1841, but by  1851 was a rope maker, then again in 1861 he is listed as an agricultural labourer.  

By 1861 he is in the District Uxbridge Union Workhouse at Hillingdon.  If you have family who were in a UK workhouse, this website is a great place to start (the workhouse.org.uk).  Here is what it tells me about the Uxbridge workhouse:

Up to 1834

In 1744, a meeting of the Vestry in the parish of Hillingdon resolved to 'pull down the Parish Houses adjoining to St. John's Churchyard and the material employed in the building of a Workhouse' (Wingfield, 2003). By 1747, the new building had been erected at a site near Colham Green. Its construction cost £457.1s.9d, and it comprised 9 rooms, a kitchen, dining-room, hospital room. brewhouse and other outbuildings. In 1758, the parish contracted the running of the workhouse out '97 a practice known as "farming" the poor. John Hill was the first person to "take" the workhouse, which he ran for ten years. For an annual payment of £300 he agreed to "keep and maintain" the poor of the parish. He could also keep any income derived from work done by the inmates. By 1768, room for spinning had been set up in the workhouse. In 1774, 58 paupers were recorded as being in the workhouse; in 1796, the number was 65. By 1810, a schoolroom had been added and also a workroom for cobblers. In 1830, the premises were enlarged to provide separate male and female accommodation.

A parliamentary report of 1777 recorded local workhouses in operation in Hillingdon (for up to 70 inmates), Hillingdon Parish (60), and Ruislip (30).

A house on the east side of Duck's Hill Road served as the Ruislip parish workhouse. A stone plaque above its door bears the date 1789 but the building may be older.

After 1834

Uxbridge Poor Law Union formally came into existence on 20th June 1836. Its operation was overseen by an elected Board of Guardians, 20 in number, representing its 10 constituent parishes as listed below (figures in brackets indicate number of Guardians where this was more than one):

Middlesex:Cowley, West Drayton, Harefield (2), Hayes (2), Hillingdon (3), Ickenham, Northolt, Norwood (2), Ruislip (2), Uxbridge (5).

Later addition (from 1896): Yiewsley.

The population falling in the Union in 1831 had been 12,663 with parishes ranging in size from Ickenham (297) to Uxbridge itself (3,842). The average poor-rate expenditure for 1833-5 had been £8,671 or 13s.8d. per head of the population.

The new union bought existing Hillingdon parish workhouse site for £300, together with a further four acres of land costing £600. The new workhouse building was designed by William Thorold and was built by Mr Henry Morton of Uxbridge at a cost of £4,460. Part of the old parish workhouse was converted into an infirmary block for the new establishment. A workhouse chapel was added in 1875 and other buildings including a female infirmary in 1907. The location and layout of the workhouse are shown on the 1895 map below.

In January 1867, the workhouse was visited by Poor Law Inspector Mr. Edward Smith. He found it generally clean apart from the boys' schoolroom and the men's vagrant ward. His report also noted that:

1. There is not a padded room. I found a violent lunatic confined in a bed in the receiving ward, and he has now been in the workhouse since Saturday last, and I do not learn that an order has been obtained for his admission into an asylum. A padded room should be provided for cases of emergency, and no violent case should be retained more than 48 hours; time enough to obtain the magistrate's order of removal. This case should be removed at once.

2. The receiving wards should be devoted to their proper use exclusively.

3. The small-pox ward is ill-ventilated, and, in my opinion, unfit for the reception of such cases. I find that an innate has recently taken this disease whilst attending upon such cases. A new and proper ward should be built, and the cases kept quite separate. I am surprised to find a case not of small-pox placed with three small-pox cases. The room is too small for even three cases. It is most unfair to place other cases where the risk of contagion is so imminent.

4. There are no fever wards kept exclusively for fever cases, neither are there itch wards; at present itch cases are nixed with ordinary cases. I do not think that fever cases should be introduced into the so-called fever wards, and am of opinion that proper infectious wards for itch, fever, and small-pox respectively, should be built for the two sexes.

5. The paid nurse is, in my opinion, unable to take efficient charge of all the sick cases. She does not give each dose of stimulants on the men's side. I think that there should be a paid nurse, and a paid assistant nurse, and that they should give each dose of medicines and stimulants. The present nurse has no separate bed-room or sitting room, but sleeps in one of the wards. I have pointed out a little room, on the upper floor, which might be appropriated to her use, and certainly it is most unusual that a nurse should not have a private room. The salary is only 10l. per year, a sum which is surely most inadequate if she is capable of properly discharging her duties.

6. The present fever ward should be restored to its old use as a day-room for the sick, and be properly fitted up with chairs, and benches with backs.

7. The position of the water-closets in the wards is very objectionable. It would cost little to build a projection on each side of the infirmary in which they could be placed, and have cross draughts.

8. Not more than four beds should be in the lying-ill wards.

9. There is not sufficient room on the men's side, neither in the body of the workhouse, nor in the infirmary. And the beds in many of the wards are too close together. If proper infectious wards were built, it would relieve the infirmary.

10. The women should not sleep two in a bed, and there are plenty of beds to allow them to sleep single. The flock is lumpy, and should be carded.

11. I find the sick children in various wards in the infirmary. It would be better to appropriate one ward as a sick nursery.

12. The boys' school-room is too small, and a day-room should be provided for each sex.

13. None should wash in troughs. Iron-enamelled basins should be provided.

14. Hannah Henley, aged 71, complains that she has not enough to eat, and an old man states that he has not sufficient clothing at night; the latter had only two old blankets. I suggest the desirability of purchasing good blankets, such as the matron showed to me, and rugs like horse-rugs, which would be warmer, and retain their good appearance for many years. It would be better to supply the girls with woollen dresses in winter.

15. The vagrant wards are damp, and there is not a stove in them. Hot-water pipes, or stoves, should be provided.

16. The room adjoining the chapel is much too full. If by any means a separate chapel could be built, it would give a good room where it is much wanted. 

 

In 1930, control of the workhouse passed to Middlesex County Council who began to develop it as Hillingdon County Hospital and Infirmary. In 1963, construction began of a new Hillingdon Hospital on the south side of Heath Road. The original workhouse buildings have now been demolished but a late nineteenth century administrative block, nurses' home and laundry still survived in 2001. 

So why did John end up in the workhouse?  In those days people went to the workhouse if they were very ill and did not have family at home.  His wife ann had died 2 years before.  John died just a few days after discharging himself from the home, probably aged 85 years of age.  

Ann Fenn is even more of a mystery.  I have only found her in one census (as Ann Littleboy) in 1841 and a possible death in 1863 at Islington, Middlesex, England.  There is a likely 1861 census where she is at Islington workhouse, where she is listed as 85 yrs of age, making here birth 1776.

So this couple requires quite a lot more investigation - Here is my research plan for them.

1. Search for 1851 and 1861 census information on ANN FENN AND ANN LITTLEBOY
2. Search for any other deaths for ANN LITTLEBOY 
3. Research where their children were living - is it possible Ann or John were living with one of their children?
4. Search for any births or baptisms for Ann FEN, FENN, FENE in the London  and Iver (Buckinghamhire) and the Hertforshire areas. - where are the parish records for these two shires?

This family is quite typical of the lack of record from the 1700's, as most were kept in parish records, and families lived in the same neighbourhood for many years, and named their children the same names as others in the family!  So they can be very hard to track down with any accuracy.