John Smith's Family Tree Website

Tippett family

* * *

Part 4: Mary Ann Tippett (c1810 - 1892)

Mary Ann Tippett (c1810 - 1892) was the eldest child of John Tippett (c1870 - 1858) and Elizabeth Pope (c1779 - 1863). She was baptised 20 May 1810 in Modbury. It is not known if she had any education or if she worked prior to her marriage. She married mason Samuel Wyatt (1808 - 1886) 05 October 1832 in St George’s Church, Modbury. Mary Ann’s sister and brother were two of the three witnesses at the wedding. Mary Ann and Samuel had seven children: Mary Jane, John, Samuel, Elizabeth Tippett, William and twins Francis and James. (More information about Samuel Wyatt and their children appears in the Wyatt section.)

There were complications after the twins were born and Mary Ann suffered in pain for years, which was recounted in a letter written to the editor of ‘The Western Courier’ 08 August 1853 by Frederick W Pulling, Assistant Curate of Modbury. The letter and a statement were published two days later on p8 of the same newspaper:

STATEMENT:

Mary Ann Wyatt, wife of Samuel Wyatt, mason, of Modbury, was for more than three years suffering from tumor [sic] in the uterine regions. She has not felt entirely well since the birth of her last children (twins) some five years ago, and thinks there were then certain obstetric circumstances beyond the skill of her female attendant. In August, 1850, the pain that she had occasionally felt increased, and a flux sanguineous and purulent commenced which continued with scarcely any intermission up to the time of her cure. These symptoms she neglected until the April of the following year, when she was persuaded to consult an eminent physician in Plymouth. She did so: he examined her, and on feeling the swelling, which was then apparent, broke it internally, telling her that had not this been done mortification must have ensued, and her life have been speedily terminated. She then returned to Modbury in a miserable condition and took to her bed which she scarcely left for two years. About four months after this the physician whom she had consulted chancing to pass through the town was induced to look upon her in her state of suffering. Her disease he then pronounced to be cancer, and her case a hopeless one: an operation was, he said, impossible, for she would die during its performance.

For twelve months from this time she lingered on constantly in much pain, at times most severe and spasmodic; her strength gradually diminished, and her frame became more and more emaciated; fainting fits followed the least exertion, and death appeared the only probable termination of her sufferings.

In July, 1852, she rallied a little, and was enable with great care to reach Plymouth again in order to consult some of the “head surgeons.” This she did, and at the lodgings which she occupied was examined by two eminent medical men who pronounced hers to be a hospital case.

Upon their recommendation she was admitted, and a few days after was again fully examined by three principal surgeons of the Institution. After a consultation her disease was declared to be tumor; she was, however, set down as incurable, and on the subsiding of the agony attending the examination was some few days subsequently discharged.

In a nearly dying state she returned home; the disease progressed with aggravated symptoms.

But a brighter tale now follows. It was some seven or eight months after this that she providentally [sic] heard of a cure having been effected on a person similarly afflicted by Dr. Edward Roe, of Princess’s Square, Plymouth [1]. The intelligence gave her, to use her own expression, a new life, and she felt a strange and uncontrollable desire to consult the gentleman whose name had been repeated to her. This desire was strongly opposed by her friends; she had, they said, tried so many doctors, and besides it was impossible she could survive another journey. Her mind was, however, so singularly bent on this our last trial that she was at last taken to Plymouth. On seeing her, Dr. Roe immediately said, “I can cure you, but it will be by an operation; that operation will form the advanced stage of your disease but it a serious one, and you are now far too weak to dream of undergoing it. You must go home, take a tonic which I will give you, procure from your richer neighbours as much meat and wine as you can, and let me see you again, if possible, in three weeks.”

She returned at the appointed time, and after ten days of most solicitous attendance, Dr. Roe pronounced her fit for the operation. It was performed most successfully, and a polypus weighing three and a half pounds [1.5 kg] was removed. For six weeks from this time she was watched by this gentleman most anxiously, and all her wants ministered to by himself and certain excellent ladies (two Sisters of Mercy, though not assuming the title) to whom her case was made known.

On the third of June last she came back to her home a cured woman; needing care, of course, for some time, but able to do her general daily work and superintend the concerns of her household. She is full of gratitude to Almighty God for His unexpected mercies, as well as to him who was made instrumental to her recovery. Of Dr. E. Roe’s skill, tenderness, and delicacy, she cannot speak too highly, and would beg to be allowed thus publicly to express her grateful thanks to one that has with so much patient toil gratuitously rendered her such inestimable services.

Mary Ann lived another 40 years after her cure. She outlived Samuel who died in 1886, most likely the result of a previous stroke. She died from bronchitis 07 March 1892, aged 82.

Footnotes

[1] The doctor involved, Dr Edward Roe, had been accused of medical malpractice in July 1852 but the jury had found for the defendant (the one-day trial was reported in great detail and comprised almost the whole of p6 in ‘The Western Times’ 31 July 1852).