THOMAS AND STEPHEN FARR
By Robert Charles Anderson
1) PASSENGER
LISTS
Attempts have been made to
find Thomas or Stephen Farr in passenger lists, but the only Farr entries mentioned
in the research files are Edward Farr and Barnabas Farr. Edward is listed on a
1635 ship to St. Kitt’s. There is no evidence that this man ever came to New
England, and examples of passengers on these ships bound for the Caribbean
later coming to New England are vanishingly few. Barnabas Farr, who sailed on
the James in 1635 with Rev. Richard Mather, is in all
New England records Barnabas Fawer, a different surname.
Thomas and Stephen Farr do not
appear in surviving passenger lists, and the prospects of finding more lists
for the appropriate period are quite slim. Further research in this class of
records at this time should not be conducted.
2) THOMAS
FARR
The existence of Thomas Farr
depends on the existence of records which show that such a man was in New
England in the middle of the seventeenth century. The next thing to do is
examine each of the records supposed to apply to this man.
a) The
Holmes-Corey researchers stated that a record of Thomas Farr had been found in
Boston in 1645, but did not provide a citation for this record. A Thomas Farrar
of Boston, husbandman, son of Thomas Farrar of Burnley, Lancashire, in 1645
gave a power of attorney to his brother Henry Farrar. If this is the record
referred to by Holmes-Corey, then it has nothing to do with a supposed Thomas
Farr. The Farr and Farrar names are quite distinct, although, as we shall see,
they can be confused by misunderstandings of written versions of the name.
b) In
1654 Daniel King of Lynn sold to “Thomas Farr” of Lynn several sizeable parcels
of land in Lynn [Essex Deeds 1:30]. This record is certainly the basis for much
of the belief in the existence of Thomas Farr, and of his possible connection
with George Farr of Lynn. I believe, however, that the grantee in this deed was
Thomas Farrar of Lynn, a person who certainly did exist. The version of these
deeds, which we now consult, is a nineteenth-century transcript, the original
of which is no longer available. Many seventeenth-century scribes would write
“Farrar” by converting the last two letters into a flourish, so it might look
to a person unfamiliar with the older scripts as “Farr” with a fancy
termination. It should be possible to resolve this point by examining the later
land transactions of Thomas Farrar of Lynn, to see if any of the parcels
purchased from Daniel King appear in his hands.
c) Suffolk
Court Files Case ft24440 involves Thomas Powers and Thomas Farr-who are both of
age, but the deposition is not dated. However, two of the principal players in
the deposition are Ebenezer Parkhurst and his wife Mary, a couple who were not
known to have married before 1695, and so the deposition must have been made no
earlier than this date, and probably some years later. The deponent would
therefore be the Thomas Farr born about 1688, son of Stephen Farr.
d) The
supposed Thomas Farr- is given sons John, Thomas and Jonathan, in addition to
Stephen. John is said to be of Lynn, but this must be John, son of George
Farr-of Lynn, as evidenced by John’s probate of 1672. I find no evidence for
the existence of Thomas and Jonathan Farr, supposed sons of the supposed
Thomas.
On this evidence I see no
reason to believe that Thomas Farr ever existed. If I have overlooked any records
thought to prove the presence of a Thomas Farr in early New England, I would be
glad to examine them.
3) STEPHEN
FARR
Stephen Farr first appears in New England
records in 1674 when he married in Concord. Since we have eliminated Thomas
Farr as his possible father, we are left with little else in New England. The
only earlier Farr family is that of George Farr of Lynn. From the probate
records relating to George Farr and his son John, it is clear that Stephen was
not a son of George. Given his marriage date and his participation in King
Philip’s War, Stephen cannot have been born much later than 1650; but, inasmuch
as those sons of George Farr who did marry were married much later than 1650,
Stephen Farr also cannot have been a grandson of George Farr.
The conclusion from all this is that Stephen
Farr was born in England, of unknown parents, probably in the l640s.
4) RECOMMENDATIONS
From the above arguments, we conclude that
Stephen Farr came to New England as a single man, which will not make finding
him in England an easy prospect. Only two lines of research suggest themselves:
a) Since
we first find Stephen Farr in Concord, he may have been related in some manner
to a Concord family, or possibly came with a Concord family as a servant. All
records for Stephen Farr should be examined to determine if he had any frequent
associations with families in Concord.
b) Search
English records systematically for any Stephen Farr born in England in the
right time period, without any preconceptions about the names of his parents.
This approach can be combined with the first suggested avenue of research,
should anything suggestive appear from those efforts.
In this regard I would note that previous
research has turned up one possibility that is at least worth pursuing - the
Stephen Farr baptized at Lidlington, Bedfordshire, on 29 December 1640, son of
William Farr. The baptismal date is a little early, but not terribly so, and
many early Concord residents were from Bedfordshire. This may turn out to be a
false lead, but I believe that your search for the origin of Stephen Farr will
run along these lines - searching English records for a likely
Stephen Farr, and then examining each candidate to see whether he can be
eliminated, or whether any supporting evidence can be found.
I would be willing to make myself available
to the Farr Family Organization, at no further charge, in two specific areas.
First, if I have failed to address any record which purports to prove the
existence of a Thomas Farr in New England prior to the appearance of Stephen
Farr, I would be glad to study it and give an opinion on its evidentiary value.
Second, if some other researcher finds in England a Stephen Farr who appears to
be a strong candidate for identification as the immigrant, I would be glad to
examine the records and express an opinion.
5) APPENDIX
Nearly twenty years ago I was involved in a
study of early examples of familial amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS or Lou
Gehrig’s disease). One of the earliest cases described was that of a Farr
family of Vermont. Enclosed are two articles in medical journals which describe
the disease as it appeared in this branch of the Farr family, and also a few
Farr vital records which I extracted from the Vermont vital records which apply
to this branch of the family. ALS usually strikes a person in the fifth decade
of life, and in more than eighty percent of cases leads to death within five
years. Nineteenth-century medicine had not yet classified neurological
degenerative diseases in the way we do now, so when one sees records in which a
person is dying in his or her forties or fifties, with the cause of death
listed as paralysis or palsy or some similar designation, a diagnosis of ALS or
something similar may be in order. I hope this information is of some use and
interest to the members of the Farr family organization. CLICK HERE TO SEE THE ENCLOSED ARTICLES ON ALS
Robert Charles Anderson
27 March 1996