Ancestors of Tim Farr and The Descendants of Stephen Farr


Benjamin FARR [Parents] was born 1 on 15 Feb 1799 in Corinth, Orange, Vermont, United States. Benjamin married 2 Mary STEVENS on 10 Nov 1824 in Corinth, Orange, Vermont, United States.

Mary STEVENS was born about 1806 in Vermont, United States. She died on 18 Mar 1866 in Lunenburg, Essex, Vermont, United States. Mary married 1 Benjamin FARR on 10 Nov 1824 in Corinth, Orange, Vermont, United States.

They had the following children.

  M i Horatio Nelson FARR was born on 24 Feb 1833. He died on 29 Jun 1911.

Roswell FARR [Parents] [scrapbook] was born in 1805 in Corinth, Orange, Vermont, United States. He died 1, 2 on 14 Jan 1864 in Cabot, Washington, Vermont, United States from of consumption. Roswell married 3, 4 Fanny M HARVEY on 18 Jun 1842 in Woodbury, Washington, Vermont, United States.

Fanny M HARVEY [scrapbook] was born on 18 Sep 1818 in Woodbury, Washington, Vermont, United States. She died on 23 Apr 1901. She was buried in Harvey Cemetery, Woodbury, Washington, Vermont, United States. Fanny married 1, 2 Roswell FARR on 18 Jun 1842 in Woodbury, Washington, Vermont, United States.

Fanny was also known 3 as Fannie Hardy.

They had the following children.

  F i
Minnie Augusta FARR was born 1 on 12 Dec 1860 in Cabot, Washington, Vermont, United States. She died on 23 Jul 1872 in Cabot, Washington, Vermont, United States. She was buried in Harvey Cemetery, Woodbury, Washington, Vermont, United States.

Hyrcanus FARR [Parents] [scrapbook] was born on 18 Aug 1808 in Corinth, Orange, Vermont, United States. He died 1 on 17 Aug 1878 in Cabot, Washington, Vermont, United States. He was buried in Woodbury, Washington, Vermont, United States. Hyrcanus married Dorothy Paige SMITH "Dollie" on 13 Dec 1827 in Vermont, United States.

Hyrcanus was also known as Artemas Farr.

Other marriages:
RUSCOE, Sarah B.

New England reporter: all cases determined in the courts of last resort, as follows : Maine, Supreme judicial court; New Hampshire, Supreme court; Vermont, Supreme court; Massachusetts, Supreme judicial court; Rhode Island, Supreme court; Connecticut, Supreme court of errors, Volume 5 (Google eBook)

Oliver W. FARR
v.
Hiram PUTNAM et at.

1. On the death of an insane ward, his administrator took possession of his estate, with the consent of the guardian. The whole conduct of the guardian showed that be did not intend to retain a lien on the corpus of the property for what was due him, until after the sale of the property, when it appeared that the estate was insolvent; but he expected to be first paid out of the avails of what was sold. Held:

(a) That, if the guardian ever had an equitable lien, he had lost it.

(b) That he had no lien on the homestead; for that also went into the possession of the administrator, with the guardian's consent.

2. On a bill brought in such case to procure a foreclosure of the lien, the court declined to decide whether the guardian had a superior right to the avails of the property after its sale; or whether, on a bill properly drawn, he had such right.

(Orleans Decided February 2, 1888.)

BILL to foreclose an equitable lien. Heard on the pleadings and the report of a special master, February Term, 1887, Veazey, Chancellor. Decree that the bill be dismissed. Affirmed.

The defendants were Hiram Putnam, Sarah B. Farr, J. P. Lamson, and Mrs. J. P. Lamson.

On January 9, 1877, the orator, being a son of Hyrcanus Farr, was appointed his guardian by the probate court; and he remained such until the death of said Hyrcanus, August 17, 1878. Soon after the decease of said Farr, the defendant Putnam was appointed administrator of his estate; and on October 29,1878, commissioners to adjust claims against the estate were appointed. In 1840 the defendant, Sarah B. Farr, was married to one Ruscoe; and they lived together as husband and wife for about four years, when he deserted her and went to parts unknown. In 1852 a marriage ceremony was performed between the said Eyrcanus and said Sarah B., she believing that said Ruscoe was dead, and the said Hyrcanus and Sarah B. lived together as husband and wife until his death, both thinking that she was his lawful wife; and what property he left at his death was acquired by the united exertions of both. But the said Sarah B. was mistaken; and said Ruscoe was alive, and resided in Canada. The said Hyrcanus had no children by the said Sarah B., but had a large family of children by a former marriage. After their marriage said Hyrcanus and Sarah B. lived in Woodbury for about live years, and then they moved to Cabot, havinir purchased a farm situated in Cabot and Woodbury, and lived on this farm till September 7, 1876. On that day they left their said home for the purpose of visiting his children in Stannard and Craftsbury. When they left they intended to be absent only two weeks, and their sole object was to visit their friends. For some two years prior to this time the said Hyrcanus had been occasionally afflicted with epileptic fits, and was physically and mentally somewhat impaired. Within an hour after reaching the house of the orator in Craftsbury, said Hyrcanus had a severe fit, and was also stricken with paralysis. For a day or two he was unconscious, and remained helpless until his death.

After the paralytic shock he occasionally had fits, and would be out of his head for a while, and then recover his consciousness, but was mentally and physically quite weak. The said Hyrcanus was not in a condition to be removed to his home in Cabot, and so remained with his son, the said Oliver W. Farr, until his decease. During the last six months of his life he was without his reason. The said Sarah B. remained at the orator's house during the sickness of said Hyrcanus, and went to Cabot at the time of his burial, and, remaining there some weeks, she returned to Craftsbury. After a short time she went back to Cabot, and worked out at different places until the homestead was set out to her from the old farm, on the 20th day of November, 1880. The farm was rented to one Yaw while the said Hyrcanus was sick in Craftsbury; but the master found that, if he had been " able to return to his old home, ha and the said Sarah B. would have so returned." "I do not think that, at the time of said agreement to lease to Yaw, Hyrcanus had decided to permanently abandon his old homestead as and for a homestead, but he was at that time satisfied he would not !for the term of the lease be able to return. And that he then had reason to believe, and did believe, there were grave doubts as to his ever being able to return to Cabot."

The first meeting of the commissioners was at the orator's house, January 7, 1879. The defendants Putnam and J. P. Lamson, Esq. an attorney, representing certain creditors, were present. The orator and said Putnam and Lamson finally agreed that the orator should be allowed $750 for "keeping ward and wife, and services of self and family caring for same, two years." The next day the orator settled his guardianship account with the probate court, and said account was allowed at $750. Immediately after the orator was appointed guardian, January 9, 1877, he took possession of the ward's property, and had control and management of it until the ward's decease. The master found as to surrendering of possession of the property to the administrator by the guardian, as follows:

It is claimed by the defendants that it was agreed at that time that the amount allowed orator by the probate court, on the basis of an allowance of $750 for board and care, as before stated, should be treated as a common debt, and that he should share with the other creditors in the estate. Still, the defendant Putnam admitted upon the stand that he always supposed the orator was to be paid the amount due him as guardian after payment of charges for settlement of estate and amount allowed the widow, and before other creditors were paid. I am unable to find that said Oliver ever understandingly agreed to stand in common with the other creditors so far as his guardian account was concerned, but I do find that he always supposed and expected his guardian account would be paid first, and in preference to other claims. * * *

At the time of the settlement of said guardian's account it was ascertained that there was considerable personal property on hand, the property of said estate, in the possession of said orator; and the farm at Cabot and Woodbury was still unsold and a part of said estate.

After the expiration of Yaw's term, under his lease of the Cabot farm, the orator, as guardian,leased it to one Henry Wheeler, to carry on at the halves, who was in possession of said farm at the time of the death of said Hyrcanus. Some little time after the decease of said Hyrcanus, appraisers were appointed on his estate. Certain of the personal property of said estate was at the orator's in Craftsbury, and the balance at the old homestead in Cabot. The orator was with the appraisers at Craftsbury when they were in the discharge of their duty, and pointed out the property there belonging to said estate, and was also with them when they appraised the personal property and farm at Cabot.

Said Wheeler was on the Cabot and Woodbury farm at the time the appraisers were there to appraise the property. Wheeler remained on said farm through the winter following the death of the old gentleman, under an arrangement made with the administrator, Putnam, to stay and feed out the hay and take care of the stock; and in the spring of 1879 said administrator rented said farm to Jacob Farr, one of orator's brothers, and said Jacob Farr paid for the rent of said farm to said administrator. The orator knew this, and made no objection thereto.

The administrator took possession of the personal and real estate of the intestate, and this was done with the consent of the orator. But I find that the orator, at the time the administrator took such possession, understood and expected that said administrator was going to sell said property, and from the avails thereof he was first to be paid, in full, the amount allowed him in the settlement of his guardian account. The administrator supposed and expected that would be the result; but he did not feel authorized in paying said allowance till so directed by the probate court, and he never made any effort for such an order by said court.

In the fall of 1880 Sarah B. petitioned the probate court for the appointment of commissioners to set out a homestead and dower from the premises belonging to said Hyrcanus at the time of his decease.

The commissioners, on the 20th day of November, 1880, set out a homestead to Sarah B. Farr from said premises, and returned their report and warrant into the probate court on the 27th day of December, 1880; and the report was accepted and ordered recorded.

The orator had no knowledge of such proceedings until after the report of the commissioners had been returned to the probate court and accepted by it; but he did learn of the proceedings in time to take an appeal from the decree and order of the court. The appeal was allowed and duly entered in the County Court for Orleans County, at the February Term, 1881, and continued to the September Term 1881. At this term, defendant Putnam was dismissed as an improper party, and it was ordered and adjudged by the court that the decree of the probate court be affirmed; and the cause was ordered to be certified back to the probate court. The master found:

The orator offered testimony tending to show that there was no trial in said cause, that no issue was formed therein, but that said judgment was rendered by the court without any trial.

The defendants objected to the admission of such testimony for the reason that the orator is bound by the record; and that such testimony is immaterial and incompetent, and an attempt to collaterally impeach a judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction, and does not tend to establish any issue made by any of the pleadings.

I deemed it best to, and did, admit the testimony, subject to the objection and exceptions by defendants. I find, from the testimony thus admitted, that at said last-named term of Orleans County Court the orator in this suit, being the plaintiff in that cause, filed an affidavit for a continuance of said cause to the next term of said court; and there was a hearing upon that question, and the court refused to continue the case. The said Farr's counsel announced that he could not try the case, and the court thereupon rendered judgment as herein before stated.

The judgment so rendered and ordered to be certified to the probate court was so certified, and the certificate thereof was filed in the probate court on the 21st day of December, 1881.

The warrant issued to the commissioners commenced:

Whereas Hyrcanus Farr, late of Craftsbury, in said district, deceased, intestate, died seised and possessed of the following described real estate, to wit: It being the home farm where the said Hyrcanus Farr last resided in said Cabot, containing about 160 acres of land, said land being situated in the towns of Cabot and Woodbury, in said county, and out of which Sarah Farr, the widow of said deceased, is entitled to a homestead, and said widow is also entitled to dower; therefore, by the authority of the State of Vermont, you are hereby appointed commissioners, and authorized to appraise all the real estate whereof said deceased died seised. * * * When you have completed your inventory you will then proceed to set out from the dwelling-house, outbuildings, and lands used in connection therewith, and used and kept by said Hyrcanus Farr at the time of his decease, as a homestead, to said Sarah Farr.

As to the administrator's account, it was found that it came under the consideration of the probate court, after due notice, on the 18th day of July, 1881; that although no one appeared to object, at the request of the orator, it was continued to October 26, 1881, and was again continued till December 27, 1881, when said account was examined, sworn to, allowed, and ordered recorded, and is as follows:

Hiram Putnam,

Administrator of the Estate of Hyrcanus Farr, late of Craftsbury, Deceased.

In Account with Said Estate.

To the Estate, Dr. To amt. of real estate and personal property as per appraisal J2.R38.53

To cash rec'd for property not appraised. 13 SO To Income from real estate 113 10

$2,065 13

To the Same Estate, Cr. By homestead set to widow out of real estate $600.00

Hy shrinkage on appraisal, as per "Schedule A"... 1,212 07

By household poods assigned to widow 128 12

* * * Then this account was examined and sworn to, the question of its allowance being continued, awaiting the result of a matter pending in Orleans County Court.

Attest, O. H. Austin, Judge.

After the homestead was set out to the said Sarah B. Farr, the administrator, having obtained license to sell the real estate of his intestate, advertised for sale, and sold, at public auction, all the residue of the real estate of which the intestate died seised, to the said Sarah B. Farr, for the sum of $400, she being the highest bidder for the same.

And, in accordance with said sale, said Putnam, as such administrator, under bfe license aforesaid, executed a deed of the same to the said Sarah B., and she paid him therefor.

And all the personal property belonging to the estate of the said Hyrcanus, which had not previously been disposed of, was sold at the time of said auction. The orator knew that the administrator, Putnam, had applied for, and obtained, a license to sell all the real estate of which the said Hyrcanus Farr died seised, a long time previous to the time said homestead was set out; but he at all times claimed that he must be paid in full the amount of his guardian account from the avails of the property of which the said Hyrcanus died seised.

At the time the defendant Sarah B. bid off the balance of the said premises for $400, she was in need of funds with which to pay for the same, and she applied to the defendant Abbie A. Lamson for a loan of said money. Mrs. Lamson had money which she held in her own right, and passed over to her husband, J. P. Lamson, a check for the money required by the said Sarah B., and he obtained the currency therefor. At the time the administrator deeded said real estate, so sold at auction, to the said Sarah B., the said J. P. Lamson, acting for and on behalf of his wife, passed over to the said Sarah the sum of $430. And Mrs. Farr therefor, on the 20th day of April, 1881, executed and delivered a mortgage of said premises, including the homestead, to Mrs. Lamson, to secure the payment of said sum of money, as specified in two promissory notes then executed and delivered to said J. P. Lamson for his said wife.

The prayer of the bill was that defendants be foreclosed from all right in the said estate unless they paid the said $750. Mr. JJ- H. Thompson, for the orator: The orator, having been appointed guardian of Hyrcanus Farr under the provisions of Rev. Laws, 2436, 2438, until legally discharged from that appointment, had the possession and management of the estate of his ward, the care and custody of his person, and the care and custody of such members of his family as were dependent upon said ward for support.
Rev. Laws, § 2445; Waterman v. Wright, 36 Vt. 165,

By his appointment as guardian, the orator became a trustee, and thereby assumed the liabilities, and acquired the legal and equitable rights, of a trustee as to his ward's estate.

Rev. Laws, §§ 2447, 2285; 3 Pom. Eq. Jur. §§ 1088. 1097.

As trustee or guardian, the orator had an equitable lien upon his ward's estate, which took precedence of all other claims against the estate; and all persons taking said property with knowledge of said orator having been guardian took the same subject to his lien.

See Perry, Tr. 1st ed. 907, 910; Schoul. Bom. Rel. pp. 464,465; 2 Pom. Eq. Jur. B 1085; Rensselaer & 8. R. Co. v. Miller, 47 Vt. 152; Field v. Wilbur, 49 Vt. 165.
The defendant Abbic A. Lamson had constructive notice of orator's rights by virtue of proceedings in probate court. Again, she cannot stand as an innocent purchaser for value without notice, as she had actual notice; as her agent, attorney, and husband, J. P. Lamson, who acted for her, had full knowledge, at the time of taking her mortgage, of the equitable lien of the orator on said real estate.

Story, Ag. 140, 140a/ Bart v. Farmers & M. Bank, 33 Vt. 253.

A widow takes a homestead by operation of the law which says that, on the death of a housekeeper or head of a family leaving a widow or minor children, "his homestead shall pass to and vest in such widow or children."

Rev. Laws, g§ 1898, 1899.

The widow takes the homestead by virtue of her relation as wife to the deceased, the same as she does dower which does not depend on the contingency of dower being set out.

Dummerston v. Newfane, 87 Vt. 13; Johnson v. Johnson, 41 Vt. 467; Grant v. Parham, 15 Vt. 649.

The setting out of a homestead is a proceeding to sever and partition, and not to give title. If no title or homestead exists, the proceeding goes for nothing.

Rev. Laws, § 1970; Grice v. Randall, 23 Vt. 243; Freem. Judg. § 304.

The orator is not estopped by the judgment in the homestead proceedings.

Freem. Judg. 276, 281, 803.

He stands as a mortgagee of the property he is pursuing. The right under a mortgage is not affected by the setting out of a homestead.

Goodall v. Boardman, 53 Vt. 92.

The court of chancerv has jurisdiction.

3 Pom. Eq. Jur. 1088, 1097; 1 Pom. Eq. Jur. § 100; Harris v. Harris, 44 Vt. 820; Field v. Torrey, 7 Vt. 372.

Messrs. J. P. Lamson and Bates & May,

for defendants:

If the orator had any equitable lien at the time his father died, he lost it by voluntary delivery of property to Mr. Putnam, as administrator, to be administered as assets of the estate.

Richardson v. Merrill, 82 Vt. 27.

The orator is estopped from asserting his present claim.

Stone v. Fairbanks, 58 Vt. 145.

The guardianship ceased on the death of the ward, and it was the duty of the orator then "to pay over and deliver the estate and effects remaining in his hands * * * to persons entitled to same," namely, the administrator.

8 Redf. Wills, p. 457, § 56; Rev. Laws. 2447, 2488.

The probate court has jurisdiction of the appointment, power, duties, and rights of guardians and wards, and settlement of estates.

Rev. Laws, § 2018; Lathrop v. Hitchcock, 38 Vt. 496; Boyden v. Ward, 38 Vt. 628; 2a Vt. 50.

The decree of the probate court, affirmed by the county court, as to the homestead of Mrs. Farr, concludes the orator both in law and equity.

Atwood v. Robbins, 35 Vt.'580; 82 Vt. 472; 18 Vt. 77; 11 Vt. 148; 34 Vt.865;

Leach v. Leach, 51 Vt. 440; 3 Vt. 400; 16 Vt. 813; Grice v. Randall, 28 Vt. 239:

Stone v. Peasley, 28 Vt. 716; Lenehan v. Spaulding, 67 Vt. 115; Gaujolle v.

Curtis, 80 U. 8. 18 Wall. 465 (20 L. ed. 507); Roderigas v. East River Sav. Inst. 63N.Y. 460; S. C. 20 Am. Rep. 555; Gates v. Treat, 17 Conn. 392; Freem. Judg. 256, 272, 818; Thomp. Homesteads, § 614; 38 Tex. 491; 6 Cal. 234; 2 Bish. Marr. & D. 765; 84 La. 805; 48 Mo. 560; 17 Ind. 183; Freem. Judg. § 819a.

The guardian had no right to sell the real estate.

Rev. Laws, § 2477.

If he had such license the wife must join. Rev. Laws, § 1910.

The real estate of Hyrcanus was never charged to the guardian and was never under his control.

Munroe v. Holmes, 9 Allen, 244; 13 Allen, 109.

There is no such equitable lien as claimed bv orator in this case.

1 Story, Eq. Jur. § 506 et seq.; 2 Story, Eq. § 1216; Schoul. Exrs. § 264.

But if the unpaid balance is to be treated as a lien upon the property, it should not be paid before the reasonable, necessary expenses of administration are satisfied.

2 Story, Eq. Jur. § 1246.

The case of Pingree v. Goodrich, 41 Vt. 47, seems to be a full and complete answer to orator's claim.

In order to render the orders and decrees of the probate court void, it must appear upon the face of the record that the court has proceeded in a manner prohibited or not authorized by law.

Probate Court v. Winch, 57 Vt. 282. See Byram v. Byram, 27 Vt. 285; True v. Morrill, 28 Vt. 672.

The orator can reach this balance in the hands of the administrator by applying to the probate court, and, if dissatisfied, by appeal.

Dans v. Gaines. 104 U. S. 386 (26 L. ed. 757); Rorer, Jud. Sales, § 470.

The decree of the probate court allowing 1172.12 to Mrs. Farr was final.
Richardson v. Merrill, 32 Vt. 27; Leach v. Leach, 51 Vt. 440; 3 Vt. 400; 16 Vt. 313. See Probate Court v. Van Duzer, 13 Vt. 135.

Rowell, J., delivered the opinion of the court:

Before and at the time of the death of Hyrcanus Farr, an insane person, on August 17, 1878, the orator was his guardian.

By his bill the orator seeks to subject his ward's estate in the hands of the administrator and of the other defendants, as far as they have had to do with it to a first charge or lien for the payment of the balance found due him on settlement of his guardianship account in the probate court on January 8, 1879. The bill goes upon the ground that, in the orator's bands, his ward's property was chargeable with the payment of what was due him as guardian; but that the property was unlawfully, and against his will, taken from his possession by the administrator, and therefore is still chargeable in his favor by way of an equitable hen or mortgage for the foreclosure of which he prays.

But the findings of the master do not sustain the allegation that the property was taken from the orator unlawfully and against his will. On the contrary, it appears that the administrator took it with his consent, though with an understanding and expectation, on his part, that it would be sold, and he paid from the proceeds. And the administrator expected the result would be that he would be thus paid; but he did not feel authorized to make payment without an order of the probate court, which he has never attempted to obtain.

It also appears that the orator was with the appraisers when they appraised the property of the estate, and pointed out some of it to them; that before the property was sold he knew the administrator had obtained license to sell the real estate; and that at one time he bargained with the administrator to buy the whole estate for $1,350, but the trade fell through. During all this time it does not appear that the orator claimed any lien on the property, but only,when he said anything about it, that he should be first paid out of the proceeds.

The orator concedes that if he never had a lien on the property, or if he had one and has lost it, he cannot maintain his bill. Now, without undertaking to say whether he ever had a lien or not, we think, if he ever had one, he has waived and lost it. See what be has done. Everything shows that he did not intend to retain a lien on the corpus of the property itself in the hands of the administrator; for he consented to let it go into his hands, supposing and expecting he would sell it in due course of administration. And his consent was not, as claimed, on condition that be should be paid from the proceeds; but it was unconditional and absolute. How, then, can it be said that he intended to retain a lien on the property? It is clear that he did not so intend, not even as to the homestead; for that went into the hands of the administrator, with his consent, with the rest of the estate, and with the same expectation on his part that he was going to be paid out of the avails of the property sold; and at that time the estate appeared to be ample, aside from the homestead, to pay him, if he was to be preferred to other creditors; and that was what be expected; and he then neither claimed nor expected anything else; but now, the estate having been all sold except the homestead, and converted into money, it transpires that, by reason of the depreciation of the property in value from the appraisal, there is very little left of the avails with which to pay anybody. This makes the idea of setting up a lien on the property look very much like an afterthought on the part of the orator, conceived when, in the course of events, a necessity for it seemed to arise.

We have not inquired whether the orator has a superior right to be paid out of the avails of the property; for, if he has, he cannot assert it under his bill as drawn, certainly,if he could by a bill properly drawn and against proper parties.

This renders it unnecessary to consider the other points made in argument. Decree affirmed, and cause remanded.

DEATH: Death record names parents as Jacob and Hannah.

Dorothy Paige "Dollie" SMITH [scrapbook] was born 1 on 18 Jun 1804 in Hardwick, Caledonia, Vermont, United States. She died 2 on 25 Sep 1850 in Woodbury, Washington, Vermont, United States. She was buried in Harvey Cemetery, Woodbury, Washington, Vermont, United States. Dollie married Hyrcanus FARR on 13 Dec 1827 in Vermont, United States.

They had the following children.

  M i John FARR was born on 6 Jul 1828. He died on 22 Oct 1896.
  F ii Emily FARR was born in 1830. She died on 1 Jan 1865.
  M iii
Oliver W. FARR was born on 29 Jul 1831 in Vermont, United States. He died 1 on 20 Nov 1908 in Walden, Caledonia, Vermont, United States. He was buried in South Walden, Caledonia, Vermont, United States.

Oliver was counted in a census 2 in 1850 in Woodbury, Washington, Vermont, United States.
  M iv Edmond FARR was born on 11 Jul 1833.
  M v Benjamin A FARR was born on 21 Oct 1834. He died on 5 Feb 1889.
  F vi
Laura FARR was born in 1836 in Vermont, United States.

Laura was counted in a census 1 in 1850 in Woodbury, Washington, Vermont, United States.
  M vii Rufus H. FARR was born on 21 Mar 1839. He died on 12 Nov 1911.
  M viii Jacob W. FARR was born in Mar 1840. He died on 21 Jun 1918 from of Hemoplegia.
  F ix
Dorothy FARR was born in 1842 in Vermont, United States.

Dorothy was counted in a census 1 in 1850 in Woodbury, Washington, Vermont, United States. She was counted in a census 2 in 1860 in Cabot, Washington, Vermont, United States.
  M x
Artemas G FARR was born in 1843 in Vermont, United States.

Artemas was counted in a census 1 in 1850 in Woodbury, Washington, Vermont, United States.
  M xi William H. FARR was born on 18 Aug 1844. He died on 2 May 1915 from of lanerma.
  F xii Sarah H. FARR was born about 1845. She died on 10 Sep 1932 from of arterial sclerosis.

Hyrcanus FARR [Parents] [scrapbook] was born on 18 Aug 1808 in Corinth, Orange, Vermont, United States. He died 1 on 17 Aug 1878 in Cabot, Washington, Vermont, United States. He was buried in Woodbury, Washington, Vermont, United States. Hyrcanus married 2, 3 Sarah B. RUSCOE on 23 Sep 1852 in Woodbury, Washington, Vermont, United States.

Hyrcanus was also known as Artemas Farr.

Other marriages:
SMITH, Dorothy Paige

New England reporter: all cases determined in the courts of last resort, as follows : Maine, Supreme judicial court; New Hampshire, Supreme court; Vermont, Supreme court; Massachusetts, Supreme judicial court; Rhode Island, Supreme court; Connecticut, Supreme court of errors, Volume 5 (Google eBook)

Oliver W. FARR
v.
Hiram PUTNAM et at.

1. On the death of an insane ward, his administrator took possession of his estate, with the consent of the guardian. The whole conduct of the guardian showed that be did not intend to retain a lien on the corpus of the property for what was due him, until after the sale of the property, when it appeared that the estate was insolvent; but he expected to be first paid out of the avails of what was sold. Held:

(a) That, if the guardian ever had an equitable lien, he had lost it.

(b) That he had no lien on the homestead; for that also went into the possession of the administrator, with the guardian's consent.

2. On a bill brought in such case to procure a foreclosure of the lien, the court declined to decide whether the guardian had a superior right to the avails of the property after its sale; or whether, on a bill properly drawn, he had such right.

(Orleans Decided February 2, 1888.)

BILL to foreclose an equitable lien. Heard on the pleadings and the report of a special master, February Term, 1887, Veazey, Chancellor. Decree that the bill be dismissed. Affirmed.

The defendants were Hiram Putnam, Sarah B. Farr, J. P. Lamson, and Mrs. J. P. Lamson.

On January 9, 1877, the orator, being a son of Hyrcanus Farr, was appointed his guardian by the probate court; and he remained such until the death of said Hyrcanus, August 17, 1878. Soon after the decease of said Farr, the defendant Putnam was appointed administrator of his estate; and on October 29,1878, commissioners to adjust claims against the estate were appointed. In 1840 the defendant, Sarah B. Farr, was married to one Ruscoe; and they lived together as husband and wife for about four years, when he deserted her and went to parts unknown. In 1852 a marriage ceremony was performed between the said Eyrcanus and said Sarah B., she believing that said Ruscoe was dead, and the said Hyrcanus and Sarah B. lived together as husband and wife until his death, both thinking that she was his lawful wife; and what property he left at his death was acquired by the united exertions of both. But the said Sarah B. was mistaken; and said Ruscoe was alive, and resided in Canada. The said Hyrcanus had no children by the said Sarah B., but had a large family of children by a former marriage. After their marriage said Hyrcanus and Sarah B. lived in Woodbury for about live years, and then they moved to Cabot, havinir purchased a farm situated in Cabot and Woodbury, and lived on this farm till September 7, 1876. On that day they left their said home for the purpose of visiting his children in Stannard and Craftsbury. When they left they intended to be absent only two weeks, and their sole object was to visit their friends. For some two years prior to this time the said Hyrcanus had been occasionally afflicted with epileptic fits, and was physically and mentally somewhat impaired. Within an hour after reaching the house of the orator in Craftsbury, said Hyrcanus had a severe fit, and was also stricken with paralysis. For a day or two he was unconscious, and remained helpless until his death.

After the paralytic shock he occasionally had fits, and would be out of his head for a while, and then recover his consciousness, but was mentally and physically quite weak. The said Hyrcanus was not in a condition to be removed to his home in Cabot, and so remained with his son, the said Oliver W. Farr, until his decease. During the last six months of his life he was without his reason. The said Sarah B. remained at the orator's house during the sickness of said Hyrcanus, and went to Cabot at the time of his burial, and, remaining there some weeks, she returned to Craftsbury. After a short time she went back to Cabot, and worked out at different places until the homestead was set out to her from the old farm, on the 20th day of November, 1880. The farm was rented to one Yaw while the said Hyrcanus was sick in Craftsbury; but the master found that, if he had been " able to return to his old home, ha and the said Sarah B. would have so returned." "I do not think that, at the time of said agreement to lease to Yaw, Hyrcanus had decided to permanently abandon his old homestead as and for a homestead, but he was at that time satisfied he would not !for the term of the lease be able to return. And that he then had reason to believe, and did believe, there were grave doubts as to his ever being able to return to Cabot."

The first meeting of the commissioners was at the orator's house, January 7, 1879. The defendants Putnam and J. P. Lamson, Esq. an attorney, representing certain creditors, were present. The orator and said Putnam and Lamson finally agreed that the orator should be allowed $750 for "keeping ward and wife, and services of self and family caring for same, two years." The next day the orator settled his guardianship account with the probate court, and said account was allowed at $750. Immediately after the orator was appointed guardian, January 9, 1877, he took possession of the ward's property, and had control and management of it until the ward's decease. The master found as to surrendering of possession of the property to the administrator by the guardian, as follows:

It is claimed by the defendants that it was agreed at that time that the amount allowed orator by the probate court, on the basis of an allowance of $750 for board and care, as before stated, should be treated as a common debt, and that he should share with the other creditors in the estate. Still, the defendant Putnam admitted upon the stand that he always supposed the orator was to be paid the amount due him as guardian after payment of charges for settlement of estate and amount allowed the widow, and before other creditors were paid. I am unable to find that said Oliver ever understandingly agreed to stand in common with the other creditors so far as his guardian account was concerned, but I do find that he always supposed and expected his guardian account would be paid first, and in preference to other claims. * * *

At the time of the settlement of said guardian's account it was ascertained that there was considerable personal property on hand, the property of said estate, in the possession of said orator; and the farm at Cabot and Woodbury was still unsold and a part of said estate.

After the expiration of Yaw's term, under his lease of the Cabot farm, the orator, as guardian,leased it to one Henry Wheeler, to carry on at the halves, who was in possession of said farm at the time of the death of said Hyrcanus. Some little time after the decease of said Hyrcanus, appraisers were appointed on his estate. Certain of the personal property of said estate was at the orator's in Craftsbury, and the balance at the old homestead in Cabot. The orator was with the appraisers at Craftsbury when they were in the discharge of their duty, and pointed out the property there belonging to said estate, and was also with them when they appraised the personal property and farm at Cabot.

Said Wheeler was on the Cabot and Woodbury farm at the time the appraisers were there to appraise the property. Wheeler remained on said farm through the winter following the death of the old gentleman, under an arrangement made with the administrator, Putnam, to stay and feed out the hay and take care of the stock; and in the spring of 1879 said administrator rented said farm to Jacob Farr, one of orator's brothers, and said Jacob Farr paid for the rent of said farm to said administrator. The orator knew this, and made no objection thereto.

The administrator took possession of the personal and real estate of the intestate, and this was done with the consent of the orator. But I find that the orator, at the time the administrator took such possession, understood and expected that said administrator was going to sell said property, and from the avails thereof he was first to be paid, in full, the amount allowed him in the settlement of his guardian account. The administrator supposed and expected that would be the result; but he did not feel authorized in paying said allowance till so directed by the probate court, and he never made any effort for such an order by said court.

In the fall of 1880 Sarah B. petitioned the probate court for the appointment of commissioners to set out a homestead and dower from the premises belonging to said Hyrcanus at the time of his decease.

The commissioners, on the 20th day of November, 1880, set out a homestead to Sarah B. Farr from said premises, and returned their report and warrant into the probate court on the 27th day of December, 1880; and the report was accepted and ordered recorded.

The orator had no knowledge of such proceedings until after the report of the commissioners had been returned to the probate court and accepted by it; but he did learn of the proceedings in time to take an appeal from the decree and order of the court. The appeal was allowed and duly entered in the County Court for Orleans County, at the February Term, 1881, and continued to the September Term 1881. At this term, defendant Putnam was dismissed as an improper party, and it was ordered and adjudged by the court that the decree of the probate court be affirmed; and the cause was ordered to be certified back to the probate court. The master found:

The orator offered testimony tending to show that there was no trial in said cause, that no issue was formed therein, but that said judgment was rendered by the court without any trial.

The defendants objected to the admission of such testimony for the reason that the orator is bound by the record; and that such testimony is immaterial and incompetent, and an attempt to collaterally impeach a judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction, and does not tend to establish any issue made by any of the pleadings.

I deemed it best to, and did, admit the testimony, subject to the objection and exceptions by defendants. I find, from the testimony thus admitted, that at said last-named term of Orleans County Court the orator in this suit, being the plaintiff in that cause, filed an affidavit for a continuance of said cause to the next term of said court; and there was a hearing upon that question, and the court refused to continue the case. The said Farr's counsel announced that he could not try the case, and the court thereupon rendered judgment as herein before stated.

The judgment so rendered and ordered to be certified to the probate court was so certified, and the certificate thereof was filed in the probate court on the 21st day of December, 1881.

The warrant issued to the commissioners commenced:

Whereas Hyrcanus Farr, late of Craftsbury, in said district, deceased, intestate, died seised and possessed of the following described real estate, to wit: It being the home farm where the said Hyrcanus Farr last resided in said Cabot, containing about 160 acres of land, said land being situated in the towns of Cabot and Woodbury, in said county, and out of which Sarah Farr, the widow of said deceased, is entitled to a homestead, and said widow is also entitled to dower; therefore, by the authority of the State of Vermont, you are hereby appointed commissioners, and authorized to appraise all the real estate whereof said deceased died seised. * * * When you have completed your inventory you will then proceed to set out from the dwelling-house, outbuildings, and lands used in connection therewith, and used and kept by said Hyrcanus Farr at the time of his decease, as a homestead, to said Sarah Farr.

As to the administrator's account, it was found that it came under the consideration of the probate court, after due notice, on the 18th day of July, 1881; that although no one appeared to object, at the request of the orator, it was continued to October 26, 1881, and was again continued till December 27, 1881, when said account was examined, sworn to, allowed, and ordered recorded, and is as follows:

Hiram Putnam,

Administrator of the Estate of Hyrcanus Farr, late of Craftsbury, Deceased.

In Account with Said Estate.

To the Estate, Dr. To amt. of real estate and personal property as per appraisal J2.R38.53

To cash rec'd for property not appraised. 13 SO To Income from real estate 113 10

$2,065 13

To the Same Estate, Cr. By homestead set to widow out of real estate $600.00

Hy shrinkage on appraisal, as per "Schedule A"... 1,212 07

By household poods assigned to widow 128 12

* * * Then this account was examined and sworn to, the question of its allowance being continued, awaiting the result of a matter pending in Orleans County Court.

Attest, O. H. Austin, Judge.

After the homestead was set out to the said Sarah B. Farr, the administrator, having obtained license to sell the real estate of his intestate, advertised for sale, and sold, at public auction, all the residue of the real estate of which the intestate died seised, to the said Sarah B. Farr, for the sum of $400, she being the highest bidder for the same.

And, in accordance with said sale, said Putnam, as such administrator, under bfe license aforesaid, executed a deed of the same to the said Sarah B., and she paid him therefor.

And all the personal property belonging to the estate of the said Hyrcanus, which had not previously been disposed of, was sold at the time of said auction. The orator knew that the administrator, Putnam, had applied for, and obtained, a license to sell all the real estate of which the said Hyrcanus Farr died seised, a long time previous to the time said homestead was set out; but he at all times claimed that he must be paid in full the amount of his guardian account from the avails of the property of which the said Hyrcanus died seised.

At the time the defendant Sarah B. bid off the balance of the said premises for $400, she was in need of funds with which to pay for the same, and she applied to the defendant Abbie A. Lamson for a loan of said money. Mrs. Lamson had money which she held in her own right, and passed over to her husband, J. P. Lamson, a check for the money required by the said Sarah B., and he obtained the currency therefor. At the time the administrator deeded said real estate, so sold at auction, to the said Sarah B., the said J. P. Lamson, acting for and on behalf of his wife, passed over to the said Sarah the sum of $430. And Mrs. Farr therefor, on the 20th day of April, 1881, executed and delivered a mortgage of said premises, including the homestead, to Mrs. Lamson, to secure the payment of said sum of money, as specified in two promissory notes then executed and delivered to said J. P. Lamson for his said wife.

The prayer of the bill was that defendants be foreclosed from all right in the said estate unless they paid the said $750. Mr. JJ- H. Thompson, for the orator: The orator, having been appointed guardian of Hyrcanus Farr under the provisions of Rev. Laws, 2436, 2438, until legally discharged from that appointment, had the possession and management of the estate of his ward, the care and custody of his person, and the care and custody of such members of his family as were dependent upon said ward for support.
Rev. Laws, § 2445; Waterman v. Wright, 36 Vt. 165,

By his appointment as guardian, the orator became a trustee, and thereby assumed the liabilities, and acquired the legal and equitable rights, of a trustee as to his ward's estate.

Rev. Laws, §§ 2447, 2285; 3 Pom. Eq. Jur. §§ 1088. 1097.

As trustee or guardian, the orator had an equitable lien upon his ward's estate, which took precedence of all other claims against the estate; and all persons taking said property with knowledge of said orator having been guardian took the same subject to his lien.

See Perry, Tr. 1st ed. 907, 910; Schoul. Bom. Rel. pp. 464,465; 2 Pom. Eq. Jur. B 1085; Rensselaer & 8. R. Co. v. Miller, 47 Vt. 152; Field v. Wilbur, 49 Vt. 165.
The defendant Abbic A. Lamson had constructive notice of orator's rights by virtue of proceedings in probate court. Again, she cannot stand as an innocent purchaser for value without notice, as she had actual notice; as her agent, attorney, and husband, J. P. Lamson, who acted for her, had full knowledge, at the time of taking her mortgage, of the equitable lien of the orator on said real estate.

Story, Ag. 140, 140a/ Bart v. Farmers & M. Bank, 33 Vt. 253.

A widow takes a homestead by operation of the law which says that, on the death of a housekeeper or head of a family leaving a widow or minor children, "his homestead shall pass to and vest in such widow or children."

Rev. Laws, g§ 1898, 1899.

The widow takes the homestead by virtue of her relation as wife to the deceased, the same as she does dower which does not depend on the contingency of dower being set out.

Dummerston v. Newfane, 87 Vt. 13; Johnson v. Johnson, 41 Vt. 467; Grant v. Parham, 15 Vt. 649.

The setting out of a homestead is a proceeding to sever and partition, and not to give title. If no title or homestead exists, the proceeding goes for nothing.

Rev. Laws, § 1970; Grice v. Randall, 23 Vt. 243; Freem. Judg. § 304.

The orator is not estopped by the judgment in the homestead proceedings.

Freem. Judg. 276, 281, 803.

He stands as a mortgagee of the property he is pursuing. The right under a mortgage is not affected by the setting out of a homestead.

Goodall v. Boardman, 53 Vt. 92.

The court of chancerv has jurisdiction.

3 Pom. Eq. Jur. 1088, 1097; 1 Pom. Eq. Jur. § 100; Harris v. Harris, 44 Vt. 820; Field v. Torrey, 7 Vt. 372.

Messrs. J. P. Lamson and Bates & May,

for defendants:

If the orator had any equitable lien at the time his father died, he lost it by voluntary delivery of property to Mr. Putnam, as administrator, to be administered as assets of the estate.

Richardson v. Merrill, 82 Vt. 27.

The orator is estopped from asserting his present claim.

Stone v. Fairbanks, 58 Vt. 145.

The guardianship ceased on the death of the ward, and it was the duty of the orator then "to pay over and deliver the estate and effects remaining in his hands * * * to persons entitled to same," namely, the administrator.

8 Redf. Wills, p. 457, § 56; Rev. Laws. 2447, 2488.

The probate court has jurisdiction of the appointment, power, duties, and rights of guardians and wards, and settlement of estates.

Rev. Laws, § 2018; Lathrop v. Hitchcock, 38 Vt. 496; Boyden v. Ward, 38 Vt. 628; 2a Vt. 50.

The decree of the probate court, affirmed by the county court, as to the homestead of Mrs. Farr, concludes the orator both in law and equity.

Atwood v. Robbins, 35 Vt.'580; 82 Vt. 472; 18 Vt. 77; 11 Vt. 148; 34 Vt.865;

Leach v. Leach, 51 Vt. 440; 3 Vt. 400; 16 Vt. 813; Grice v. Randall, 28 Vt. 239:

Stone v. Peasley, 28 Vt. 716; Lenehan v. Spaulding, 67 Vt. 115; Gaujolle v.

Curtis, 80 U. 8. 18 Wall. 465 (20 L. ed. 507); Roderigas v. East River Sav. Inst. 63N.Y. 460; S. C. 20 Am. Rep. 555; Gates v. Treat, 17 Conn. 392; Freem. Judg. 256, 272, 818; Thomp. Homesteads, § 614; 38 Tex. 491; 6 Cal. 234; 2 Bish. Marr. & D. 765; 84 La. 805; 48 Mo. 560; 17 Ind. 183; Freem. Judg. § 819a.

The guardian had no right to sell the real estate.

Rev. Laws, § 2477.

If he had such license the wife must join. Rev. Laws, § 1910.

The real estate of Hyrcanus was never charged to the guardian and was never under his control.

Munroe v. Holmes, 9 Allen, 244; 13 Allen, 109.

There is no such equitable lien as claimed bv orator in this case.

1 Story, Eq. Jur. § 506 et seq.; 2 Story, Eq. § 1216; Schoul. Exrs. § 264.

But if the unpaid balance is to be treated as a lien upon the property, it should not be paid before the reasonable, necessary expenses of administration are satisfied.

2 Story, Eq. Jur. § 1246.

The case of Pingree v. Goodrich, 41 Vt. 47, seems to be a full and complete answer to orator's claim.

In order to render the orders and decrees of the probate court void, it must appear upon the face of the record that the court has proceeded in a manner prohibited or not authorized by law.

Probate Court v. Winch, 57 Vt. 282. See Byram v. Byram, 27 Vt. 285; True v. Morrill, 28 Vt. 672.

The orator can reach this balance in the hands of the administrator by applying to the probate court, and, if dissatisfied, by appeal.

Dans v. Gaines. 104 U. S. 386 (26 L. ed. 757); Rorer, Jud. Sales, § 470.

The decree of the probate court allowing 1172.12 to Mrs. Farr was final.
Richardson v. Merrill, 32 Vt. 27; Leach v. Leach, 51 Vt. 440; 3 Vt. 400; 16 Vt. 313. See Probate Court v. Van Duzer, 13 Vt. 135.

Rowell, J., delivered the opinion of the court:

Before and at the time of the death of Hyrcanus Farr, an insane person, on August 17, 1878, the orator was his guardian.

By his bill the orator seeks to subject his ward's estate in the hands of the administrator and of the other defendants, as far as they have had to do with it to a first charge or lien for the payment of the balance found due him on settlement of his guardianship account in the probate court on January 8, 1879. The bill goes upon the ground that, in the orator's bands, his ward's property was chargeable with the payment of what was due him as guardian; but that the property was unlawfully, and against his will, taken from his possession by the administrator, and therefore is still chargeable in his favor by way of an equitable hen or mortgage for the foreclosure of which he prays.

But the findings of the master do not sustain the allegation that the property was taken from the orator unlawfully and against his will. On the contrary, it appears that the administrator took it with his consent, though with an understanding and expectation, on his part, that it would be sold, and he paid from the proceeds. And the administrator expected the result would be that he would be thus paid; but he did not feel authorized to make payment without an order of the probate court, which he has never attempted to obtain.

It also appears that the orator was with the appraisers when they appraised the property of the estate, and pointed out some of it to them; that before the property was sold he knew the administrator had obtained license to sell the real estate; and that at one time he bargained with the administrator to buy the whole estate for $1,350, but the trade fell through. During all this time it does not appear that the orator claimed any lien on the property, but only,when he said anything about it, that he should be first paid out of the proceeds.

The orator concedes that if he never had a lien on the property, or if he had one and has lost it, he cannot maintain his bill. Now, without undertaking to say whether he ever had a lien or not, we think, if he ever had one, he has waived and lost it. See what be has done. Everything shows that he did not intend to retain a lien on the corpus of the property itself in the hands of the administrator; for he consented to let it go into his hands, supposing and expecting he would sell it in due course of administration. And his consent was not, as claimed, on condition that be should be paid from the proceeds; but it was unconditional and absolute. How, then, can it be said that he intended to retain a lien on the property? It is clear that he did not so intend, not even as to the homestead; for that went into the hands of the administrator, with his consent, with the rest of the estate, and with the same expectation on his part that he was going to be paid out of the avails of the property sold; and at that time the estate appeared to be ample, aside from the homestead, to pay him, if he was to be preferred to other creditors; and that was what be expected; and he then neither claimed nor expected anything else; but now, the estate having been all sold except the homestead, and converted into money, it transpires that, by reason of the depreciation of the property in value from the appraisal, there is very little left of the avails with which to pay anybody. This makes the idea of setting up a lien on the property look very much like an afterthought on the part of the orator, conceived when, in the course of events, a necessity for it seemed to arise.

We have not inquired whether the orator has a superior right to be paid out of the avails of the property; for, if he has, he cannot assert it under his bill as drawn, certainly,if he could by a bill properly drawn and against proper parties.

This renders it unnecessary to consider the other points made in argument. Decree affirmed, and cause remanded.

DEATH: Death record names parents as Jacob and Hannah.

Sarah B. RUSCOE was born in 1820 in of Woodbury, Washington, Vermont, United States. Sarah married 1, 2 Hyrcanus FARR on 23 Sep 1852 in Woodbury, Washington, Vermont, United States.


THORNTON was born in 1810 in Woodbury, Washington, Vermont, United States. THORNTON married Hannah FARR.

Hannah FARR [Parents] was born 1, 2 on 25 Oct 1814 in Woodbury, Washington, Vermont, United States. Hannah married THORNTON.

Other marriages:
RIDEOUT, Herbert P


Herbert P RIDEOUT was born in Nov 1855 in of Woodbury, Washington, Vermont, United States. Herbert married Hannah FARR.

Hannah FARR [Parents] was born 1, 2 on 25 Oct 1814 in Woodbury, Washington, Vermont, United States. Hannah married Herbert P RIDEOUT.

Other marriages:
THORNTON,


William FARE [Parents] was born about 1563 in Flitwick, Bedfordshire, England, United Kingdom. He died 1 on 27 Jul 1624 in Flitwick, Bedfordshire, England, United Kingdom. William married Alice HARDING on 17 Nov 1613 in Streatley, Bedford, England, United Kingdom.

William was also known as William FARY.

PCC
William Farey
25 July 1624
Flitwick, Bedford
Trancribed bt Pam Bott


In the name of god Amen the 25th of July one thousand sixe hundred twenty fower I William ffarey of *dennel end in the p(ar)ishe of flitwicke in the County of Bedd yeoman being in good and p(er)fect remembrance (thanks be to god therefore) I ordayne and make this my pr(esen)t will and Testament conteyninge in the same my last will and testament in manner and forme followinge (that is to saye) ffirst I bequeath my soule to Allmighty God my maker trusting assuredly to be saved and enter into life eternall onely by the deathe and merritts of my blessed lord and Saviour Jesus Christ my Redeemer and my body to be buried in the church yard of flitwicke a foursaid Also I bequeath unto the repayre of the said Church 5 shillings Item I give to the minister to make a sermon at my burial 1- shillings Also I give to the poore 20 shillings Also I give to dorothe ffarey Elizabeth ffarey and Alice ffarey my kinswomen five pounds a peece Also to Edmund ffarey my kinsman halfe a dozen of sheep not the worst Also to Joseph ffarey I give 5 shillings Also to david ffaldoe twenty shillings of the forty shillings which his father oweth me Also I give to my Godchildren 12 pence a peece And to my servants 12 pence the (not “a”) peece Item I give to Ann Bigg 3 shillings 4 pence Item I give to my daughter Mary Pearls Twenty poundes to be paid unto her if she shalbe then living or a Child by her at two yeares end after my decease Alsoe I doe give to my said daughter Mary my best Cove(rlet) which was her grandmothers Item where as I have heareto foregiven Alice my wife by Surrender one copyhold in Tagglaine in the p(ar)ish of fflitwick with seaven acres of land and meadow more or lesse thereunto belonginge in lew of her *dower or Joynture If therefore she be contented and doe surrender the said copiholde and seaven A(c)res of land and meadow aforesaid to my sonne John ffarey ymediatly after my death Then I give unto her my house wherein I nowe dwell And the Close in *stanyate next the the (he writes “the” twice. He meant “to the”) lane for one and twenty years if she live soe longe Prodied she make noe wast or spoyle by cutting or shredding any tres or hedges or disinembring the houses (not sure what he’s saying here) And afterwards to my sonne John and his heirs forever upon Condition she make noe further Challenge of any dower or thirds out of my freehold land after my decease upon my heyres or heir my will is to give her forty pounds of Currant English mony upon that Condition within sixe monethes after my decease otherwise no money at all Item I give one coffer and *ffoser in which I put my writings And all the goodes and writings which is within them to my sonne John And all such furniture as belongeth to my husbandry As Carts plow timer *harrowes Iron and such like Alto I give unto John Collopp my Godsonne forty shillings to be paid by my Executo(ur) presently after my decease Also I give to Edmund Colopp my kinsman tenn shillings Item I give all my money bills bonds and *specialties to my sonne John towards the paying my debtes and legacies aforesaid And I give all the other halfe to be devided betwixt my sonne John and my daughter Mary And Moreover my will and mynde is that my wife should have the *ambling Nagge and my sonne John the other two horses in regard of his husbandry And for my *tilth I give the one moytie+ (mightiest) and the other to my sonne John Also I give to my sonne John ffarey all my freehold land in fflickwicke aforesaid to him and to his heires forever whome I doe constitute make and ordaine my sole Executo(ur) of this my last will (no “and”) Testament In wittinesse where of I have to my hand and seale the day and yeare above written The marke of William ffarey signed sealed and published in the pre9sen)ce of John Collopp John Bestowe The marke of Anne Garett

Probate is in Latin dated 16 September 1624
*Denel End is correct spelling. It is a hamlet in Flitwick
Itilth: that which is tilled; tillage ground; the state of being tilled or prepared for a crop
*dower: N.W. 1828 That portian of the lands of a man which his widow enjoys after her husband death
*I can’t find “Stanyate” or “stauate” or any sp close to it.
*I can’t find the word “fosser” or anything close to it in N.W. 1828 Dict. Or on Dict. Com
*harrows: An instrument of agriculture formed or pieces of timber, and set with iron teeth. It is drawn over plowed land to level it and to break the clods N.W. 1828 dict.
*specialties: A special contract; an obligation or bond N.W. 1828
*amble: To move with a certain peculiar pace, as a horse first lifting his 2 legs on one side, and then changing to the other N.W. 1828 Dict.

Alice HARDING. Alice married William FARE on 17 Nov 1613 in Streatley, Bedford, England, United Kingdom.

Alice is not the mother of these children.

They had the following children.

  F i Mary FARY was born about 1604.
  M ii John FARY was born about 1600. He died in 1635/1636.

John FARY [Parents] was born about 1600 in of Flitton with Silsoe, Bedfordshire, England, United Kingdom. He died in 1635/1636 in Flitwick, Bedfordshire, England, United Kingdom. John married Cecily Garrett HODGKIN on 21 Nov 1621 in Flitton with Silsoe, Bedfordshire, England, United Kingdom.

PCC
11/170 Pile
PRO Online

John Fary, also spelled Farey in the will dated 26 February 1635 and probated 26 March 1636 which is a month later. He is a yeoman and very wealthy.  He owns a lot of land, closes, messuages, tenements, cottages, etc. and gives each of his sons 300 pounds, his daughters 200 pounds,  and his wife 400 pounds.  He has 2 sons named John and William and 2 daughters named Mary and Elizabeth.  John is the younger son.  His wife's name is Cecily.  He also gives to Thomas Garrett  Jr. and his godchildren who are unnamed.  His kinsmen and overseers are listed as Edmond Fary and Thomas Arnald.  He has a cottage with a close in tenure of Marmaduke Pettie, and a close in tenure of George Cripsey and another of Richard Bauldwyn .  He has an acre of meadow next to Ruxoxe.  The only sense I could make of this is that the gazetteer  under Flitwick says:"... ..a cell to Dunstable Abbey was founded at Rokesac in 1170."  Names in probate are Henrici
Marten, Rolando Jennings
, and Cicilie Fary.

Luton Archives Online, Reference AD57
Title Sale by William Gostwyck of Marston Morton,gentleman, to John Farye of Flitwick, yeoman, of land called Stockwell in Wroxhill in the parish of Marston. (Signature.)
Date 8 May 1632

Cecily Garrett HODGKIN was born about 1602 in of Flitton with Silsoe, Bedfordshire, England, United Kingdom. Cecily married John FARY on 21 Nov 1621 in Flitton with Silsoe, Bedfordshire, England, United Kingdom.

Other marriages:
PEARCE, Roger

Chr. 11 NOV 1582 Trimingham, Norfolk, England???


Luton Archives
L12/45 Assignment of term 86
(i) Allin Bread of Flitwick, yeo.
(ii) Cicely Farrye of Flitwick, widow and Ben. her s.
(Rec. of 12/44.)
-- land of 12/44. (i at request of i of 12/44 & for cons. above pd.
by ii to them, the greater part of which is to pay Jn. Stile &
all other persons that (i) stands bound to: ass. to Cicely for
40 yrs. or till death, or marr., then Ben.)
Seal of (i); conv. dev., poor.
Witd.: Thos. Arnald, Wm. Farr. 6 Dec 1637

L12/47 Assignment of term Competent sum
(i) Th. Pearce of Marston Morteyne, yeo., excr. of 12/46.
(ii) Thos. Arnald of Ampthill, sen.
(Rec. of 12/44-45. (ii) of 12/45 marr. Roger Pearce f. of (i).
i now vested with Ben. Fary's rights in land below.)
-- land of 12/45. Redr. of term to (ii).
Seal of (i), papered.
Witd.: Arnald jun., Tho. Martin, Alice Baskerfield.

L12/48 Feoffment 80
(i) Rog. Pearce of Marston Morteyne, yeo. & w. Cicely
Thos. Pearce of Marston Morteyne, excr. of 12/46.
(ii) Thos. Arnald of Ampthill, gent.
-- property of 12/47; cott. N.W. on road; S.E. on Hawkins Bread;
occ. Chris. Bishop.
0. metd.: Edwd. Penifather, Thos. Ball & w. Joan
Seal of (i), papered
Witd.: Thos. Martin, Alice Baskerfield
Endsd.: Livery of seisin of 24 Sept. 1662, witd. by Ben. Sparkes, Issarke
Goodbody, Jn. Balls.

They had the following children.

  M i William FEARY was christened on 1 Sep 1622. He died on 10 Aug 1674.
  F ii Mary FAYRIE was christened on 19 Mar 1626.
  M iii John FAREY was christened on 15 Jun 1628.
  F iv Elizabeth FARY was christened on 22 Jan 1632.
  M v
Ben FARY was born about 1635 in Flitwick, Bedfordshire, England, United Kingdom.

BIRTH:

Shows in property records of his mother and step-father.
  F vi Ann FARY was born about 1635.

William PEARLES. William married Mary FARY on 12 Nov 1623 in Flitton with Silsoe, Bedfordshire, England, United Kingdom.

Mary FARY [Parents] was born about 1604 in of Flitton with Silsoe, Bedfordshire, England, United Kingdom. Mary married William PEARLES on 12 Nov 1623 in Flitton with Silsoe, Bedfordshire, England, United Kingdom.


Roger PEARCE. Roger married 1 Cecily Garrett HODGKIN on 1 Aug 1638 in Flitwick, Bedfordshire, England, United Kingdom.

Cecily Garrett HODGKIN was born about 1602 in of Flitton with Silsoe, Bedfordshire, England, United Kingdom. Cecily married 1 Roger PEARCE on 1 Aug 1638 in Flitwick, Bedfordshire, England, United Kingdom.

Other marriages:
FARY, John

Chr. 11 NOV 1582 Trimingham, Norfolk, England???


Luton Archives
L12/45 Assignment of term 86
(i) Allin Bread of Flitwick, yeo.
(ii) Cicely Farrye of Flitwick, widow and Ben. her s.
(Rec. of 12/44.)
-- land of 12/44. (i at request of i of 12/44 & for cons. above pd.
by ii to them, the greater part of which is to pay Jn. Stile &
all other persons that (i) stands bound to: ass. to Cicely for
40 yrs. or till death, or marr., then Ben.)
Seal of (i); conv. dev., poor.
Witd.: Thos. Arnald, Wm. Farr. 6 Dec 1637

L12/47 Assignment of term Competent sum
(i) Th. Pearce of Marston Morteyne, yeo., excr. of 12/46.
(ii) Thos. Arnald of Ampthill, sen.
(Rec. of 12/44-45. (ii) of 12/45 marr. Roger Pearce f. of (i).
i now vested with Ben. Fary's rights in land below.)
-- land of 12/45. Redr. of term to (ii).
Seal of (i), papered.
Witd.: Arnald jun., Tho. Martin, Alice Baskerfield.

L12/48 Feoffment 80
(i) Rog. Pearce of Marston Morteyne, yeo. & w. Cicely
Thos. Pearce of Marston Morteyne, excr. of 12/46.
(ii) Thos. Arnald of Ampthill, gent.
-- property of 12/47; cott. N.W. on road; S.E. on Hawkins Bread;
occ. Chris. Bishop.
0. metd.: Edwd. Penifather, Thos. Ball & w. Joan
Seal of (i), papered
Witd.: Thos. Martin, Alice Baskerfield
Endsd.: Livery of seisin of 24 Sept. 1662, witd. by Ben. Sparkes, Issarke
Goodbody, Jn. Balls.

Home First Previous Next Last

Surname List | Name Index