The following was taken from the NEHGR Vol. 151, Jan, p. 59, 1997 and is why we can't find vitals on some of Stephen Farr's children:
UNRECORDED EARLY BIRTHS
IN BILLERICA, MASSACHUSETTS:
BACON, FARR, BROWN, AND HINDES
Melinde Lutz Sanborn
Most genealogists are only too familiar with frustrations caused by records that are inadequate because of such hazards as illiteracy, court house fires, water damage, and occasional theft. Negligence was often a factor as well, as shown by the following communication from a frustrated registrar in 1686. The document was unearthed recently among Middlesex County Court Files.
Billerica decembr 15, 1686
Capt Hammond, sr I received yours, dated Novembr 6th wherein you are pleased to signify to my self, ye Honrd County Court appointing myselfe to take the account of births & deaths in our Towne, sr, I have here enclosed a list of all that I have heard in our Towne, since my last returne, with a penny a name, according to former customes, but I have not sent ye shilling over pluss, for my purpose is not to hold ye Service any longer; if I may obtaine that favour of ye Honrd Court, & therefore do intreat your self to motion it to ye Court to appoint another. I have served in ye place about twenty year and have returned many a name, & money with them, that I never got a penny for. here is six names in this returne, that none take care of to pay for, in deed ye law made is strikt enought, if p[er]sons would regard it, or that there were a way found to execute it for my owne [blot] I am weary of running after many p[er]sons, & minding them of ye law, unless [blot] would reguard what ye law is. Sr. I will only mention ye names of 3 or 4, which have bin often spoken to, as Michail Bacon, Steven Farre, John Browne has had 2 children since he came into this Towne, & has given account of none. John Hindes, was married 4 year since, often Called upon, but to no purpose, & now is removed to lankastere. So, if men may be p[er]suaded to attend ye law in these respects, I shall be willing to do any service in this kind, w[he]n called to it, but to have so much labour to looke after these things & nothing but ill will for my paines, this I am weary of Pray P[ar]rdon my boldness with yr selfe, I humbly request ye Honrd Court to appoint another in my stead
Sr, I remaine yor Humble, servt, Jonathan Danforth, Senr.
Note by Tim Farr: Stephen Farr and Michael Bacon in another Billerica town record (film #901876) were warned to show at a town meeting in 1681 and they attended. Also in the records p. 247 a Job Caine was warned by the selectmen not to entertain Stephen Farr upon his farm, so as to bring him in as an inhabitant amongst us without ye consent of ye town.
The Case of the Purloined Pigs
Diane Rapaport
ANYONE FAMILIAR WITH LEXINGTON, MASSACHUSETTS, has seen the name Monroe - on the Mnnroe Tavern, the Munroe Center for the Arts, and Munroe Road, to cite a few examples. The first Lexington Munroe, then spelled Munro or Munrow or sometimes just Ro~ was a Scotsman named William, who arrived at Boston Harbor with a shipload of other Scottish war prisoners in 1652. He worked as an indentured servant in Menotomy (today's Arlington), earned his freedom, and settled in Cambridge Farms, as Lexington then was known.
Most of what we know about William Munro - where he bought land and whom he married and when his children were born - tell us little about the kind of man he was. But underused old court records still preserve stories from the lives of people like Munro, often in their own words. One such file from the Massachusetts Archives, Rota a Bacon, tells of lylunro's stubborn quest for justice against an arrogant foe. I call this lawsuit 'The Case of the Purloined Pigs?' The problems started on a Monday in late November 1671, after a heavy snowfall in a remote corner of Cambridge Farms, near today's intersection of Lowell and Woburn Streets. Here, at the house where Munro lived with his wife Martha and three small children, a neighbor arrived looking for his hogs.
Michael Bacon (his real name!) had a reputation for letting his hogs run wild, and this time they had wandered all the way from Bacon's house (in present-day Bedford) to enjoy the companionship of Munro's own pigs. Munro and his wife, wanting only to be rid of the uninvited swine guests depleting their meager forage, helped Bacon to separate his hogs from their own. Bacon then headed off through the woods with his swine, and the Munros returned to their daily chores.
But Bacon's hogs apparently did not want to leave their friends, and they soon came back.This time, when Bacon returned to retrieve them, he did not bother to sort them out; he just drove off the whole lot. Seeing most of the family's worldly wealth hoofing away, Martha shouted at Bacon to stop, but he ignored bet William, who was occupied feeding the oxen or fetching firewood, had to drop everything, strap on snowshoes and take off in pursuit.
Munro was not a man to be trifled with. He had endured many hardships - on the battlefield, in a prison camp, during the long Atlantic crossing, and as an indenoared servant. Now he was free to farm his own little piece of land, and those pigs were crucial to his family's survival. Hogs meant meat on the table and income to buy other necessities of life, and Munro could not afford to lose a single animal.
He also knew that Michael Bacon could uot be trusted. If the old court records are any indication, Bacon was known throughout the county for making trouble. His hogs had damaged crops for miles around, but he always denied responsibility, blaming others for failing to keep their fences in repair or claiming that the hogs belonged to someone else. Bacon's name appears repeatedly in land disputes, cases of \vandering horses and cattle, slander and forgery accusations, breaches of contract, even a paterrnty case. Thus, when Munro set off in the snow after Bacon and his pigs, he had good reason to expect problems.
Munro trudged north through three miles of drifted snow, following hog tracks until he finally overtook Bacon and found most of his livestock. One pregnant sow was "so tired and spent that shee could not come back," and he had to leave her with Bacon. Another sow, also "big with pig," was missing. Munro was angry, but nothing more could be done before nightfall. He drove the rest of his hogs back home.
The next day, Munro sought out constable's deputy John Gleison and his brother William. He showed them the hoof-trodden farmyard and the path through the woods, and together they trekked back to Bacon's house to retrieve the last two swine. Bacon's response was predictable. First he pretended the incident never happened. Then, when the Gleisons clearly were not accepting that story he "confessed that William Rows swine was with him in the drift the day before, but...he did them no wrong," and he had none of them"in his hands" now" If Row lost them, he must go look for them." Bacon, of course, did not offer to help.
On Wednesday, the weary Munro turned to his neighbors John and Benjamin Russell, and together they scoured the woods for the missing hogs. They found one, stuck in a drift, amazingly still alive, and with "much difficulty" they brought her home.
One sow was still missing, and Munro's patience was running out. He took the law-abiding next step, which required yet another long journey on foot through the snow. He walked to Cambridge, to magistrate Thomas Danforth's house overlooking Harvard College, where he filed a claim against Bacon. The amount in controversy was small enough that the magistrate could resolve the dispute without resort to the courts. Danforth took up quill pen to issue a warrant, ordering Michael Bacon "to appeare before me at my house, the last day of the weeke at 12. of the clock to answear the complaint of William Rov~ for violence done him in taking away his swine out of his yard, & driving them away.
At the appointed time, six people - William and Martha Munro, the Russells, and the Gleison brothers - crowded into the magistrate's study to testi~'. Danforth recorded the evidence with careful penmanship, and the witnesses all signed with their marks. Michael Bacon was not there and he lost the case.The constable's deputy set out to seize a "branded steere" from Bacon to ensure payment of Munro's damages.
Shortly thereafter, before Munro could collect a single shilling, his missing sow reappeared at his door. She was "lamed and went but upon three legs;' delivered by a man who claimed that he "found" her and was asked by Bacon to bring her home. Bacon probably hoped that returning the sow would get him off the hook for damages, but Munro stood firm. In late December, Bacon asked for a rehearing, which Danforth granted on January 29. The result was the same, only now Bacon
owed more, reflecting the added costs for witness time and constable's fees.
Still Bacon refused to pay, and he mounted a vigorous appeal, seeking a jury trial in the Middlesex County Court. He hired Concord lawyer John Hoare to draft a tedious petition with a long series of technical arguments, from improper service of the attachment on his steer to misfeasance by the well-respected Danforth. The trial took place in Cambridge on April 2, 1672, probably at the local Blue Anchor Tavern (as was customary in those days, since only Boston had courtroom facilities). Someone apparently represented Munro at the trial (although his identity is not known),for an elegantly-written legal argument appeared in the court records on Munro's behalf.
The final result, after more than four months of legal wrangling, was judgment again in favor of Munro: "One Pound sixteen shillings & foure pence$ plus court costs, a goodly sum, but probably less a financial boost than a moral victory for the dogged Scotsman. Presumably Bacon paid, for heit the paper trail of Row v. Bacon ends. Munro returned to a quiet farming llfe, but Bacon continued to keep the courts busy in disputes with other neighbors. Anyone who thinks that the "litigation explosion" is a modern phenomenon should read seventeenth-century court records!•
DIANE RAPAPORT is an attorney and historian who lives in Lexington, Massachusetts. Her article "Scots for Sale: The Fate of the Scottish Prisoners in Seventeenth-Century Massachusetts," appeared in the winter 2003 issue of NEW ENGLAND ANCESTORS, and she is writing a book to be published by NEHGS, New England Court Records: A Research Guide for Genealogists and Historians. Her email address is rapaports@aol.com.
Diane Rapaport
-- MERGED NOTE ------------
The following was taken from the NEHGR Vol. 151, Jan, p. 59, 1997:
UNRECORDED EARLY BIRTHS
IN BILLERICA, MASSACHUSETTS:
BACON, FARR, BROWN, AND HINDES
Melinde Lutz Sanborn
Most genealogists are only too familiar with frustrations caused by records that are inadequate because of such hazards as illiteracy, court house fires, water damage, and occasional theft. Negligence was often a factor as well, as shown by the following communication from a frustrated registrar in 1686. The document was unearthed recently among Middlesex County Court Files.
Billerica decembr 15, 1686
Capt Hammond, sr I received yours, dated Novembr 6th wherein you are pleased to signify to my self, ye Honrd County Court appointing myselfe to take the account of births & deaths in our Towne, sr, I have here enclosed a list of all that I have heard in our Towne, since my last returne, with a penny a name, according to former customes, but I have not sent ye shilling over pluss, for my purpose is not to hold ye Service any longer; if I may obtaine that favour of ye Honrd Court, & therefore do intreat your self to motion it to ye Court to appoint another. I have served in ye place about twenty year and have returned many a name, & money with them, that I never got a penny for. here is six names in this returne, that none take care of to pay for, in deed ye law made is strikt enought, if p[er]sons would regard it, or that there were a way found to execute it for my owne [blot] I am weary of running after many p[er]sons, & minding them of ye law, unless [blot] would reguard what ye law is. Sr. I will only mention ye names of 3 or 4, which have bin often spoken to, as Michail Bacon, Steven Farre, John Browne has had 2 children since he came into this Towne, & has given account of none. John Hindes, was married 4 year since, often Called upon, but to no purpose, & now is removed to lankastere. So, if men may be p[er]suaded to attend ye law in these respects, I shall be willing to do any service in this kind, w[he]n called to it, but to have so much labour to looke after these things & nothing but ill will for my paines, this I am weary of Pray P[ar]rdon my boldness with yr selfe, I humbly request ye Honrd Court to appoint another in my stead
Sr, I remaine yor Humble, servt, Jonathan Danforth, Senr.
Note by Tim Farr: Stephen Farr and Michael Bacon in another Billerica town record (film #901876) were warned to show at a town meeting in 1681 and they attended. Also in the records p. 247 a Job Caine was warned by the selectmen not to entertain Stephen Farr upon his farm, so as to bring him in as an inhabitant amongst us without ye consent of ye town.
The Case of the Purloined Pigs
Diane Rapaport
ANYONE FAMILIAR WITH LEXINGTON, MASSACHUSETTS, has seen the name Monroe — on the Mnnroe Tavern, the Munroe Center for the Arts, and Munroe Road, to cite a few examples. The first Lexington Munroe, then spelled Munro or Munrow or sometimes just Ro~ was a Scotsman named William, who arrived at Boston Harbor with a shipload of other Scottish war prisoners in 1652. He worked as an indentured servant in Menotomy (today’s Arlington), earned his freedom, and settled in Cambridge Farms, as Lexington then was known.
Most of what we know about William Munro — where he bought land and whom he married and when his children were born — tell us little about the kind of man he was. But underused old court records still preserve stories from the lives of people like Munro, often in their own words. One such file from the Massachusetts Archives, Rota a Bacon, tells of lylunro’s stubborn quest for justice against an arrogant foe. I call this lawsuit ‘The Case of the Purloined Pigs?’ The problems started on a Monday in late November 1671, after a heavy snowfall in a remote corner of Cambridge Farms, near today’s intersection of Lowell and Woburn Streets. Here, at the house where Munro lived with his wife Martha and three small children, a neighbor arrived looking for his hogs.
Michael Bacon (his real name!) had a reputation for letting his hogs run wild, and this time they had wandered all the way from Bacon’s house (in present-day Bedford) to enjoy the companionship of Munro’s own pigs. Munro and his wife, wanting only to be rid of the uninvited swine guests depleting their meager forage, helped Bacon to separate his hogs from their own. Bacon then headed off through the woods with his swine, and the Munros returned to their daily chores.
But Bacon’s hogs apparently did not want to leave their friends, and they soon came back.This time, when Bacon returned to retrieve them, he did not bother to sort them out; he just drove off the whole lot. Seeing most of the family’s worldly wealth hoofing away, Martha shouted at Bacon to stop, but he ignored bet William, who was occupied feeding the oxen or fetching firewood, had to drop everything, strap on snowshoes and take off in pursuit.
Munro was not a man to be trifled with. He had endured many hardships — on the battlefield, in a prison camp, during the long Atlantic crossing, and as an indenoared servant. Now he was free to farm his own little piece of land, and those pigs were crucial to his family’s survival. Hogs meant meat on the table and income to buy other necessities of life, and Munro could not afford to lose a single animal.
He also knew that Michael Bacon could uot be trusted. If the old court records are any indication, Bacon was known throughout the county for making trouble. His hogs had damaged crops for miles around, but he always denied responsibility, blaming others for failing to keep their fences in repair or claiming that the hogs belonged to someone else. Bacon’s name appears repeatedly in land disputes, cases of \vandering horses and cattle, slander and forgery accusations, breaches of contract, even a paterrnty case. Thus, when Munro set off in the snow after Bacon and his pigs, he had good reason to expect problems.
Munro trudged north through three miles of drifted snow, following hog tracks until he finally overtook Bacon and found most of his livestock. One pregnant sow was “so tired and spent that shee could not come back,” and he had to leave her with Bacon. Another sow, also “big with pig,” was missing. Munro was angry, but nothing more could be done before nightfall. He drove the rest of his hogs back home.
The next day, Munro sought out constable’s deputy John Gleison and his brother William. He showed them the hoof-trodden farmyard and the path through the woods, and together they trekked back to Bacon’s house to retrieve the last two swine. Bacon’s response was predictable. First he pretended the incident never happened. Then, when the Gleisons clearly were not accepting that story he “confessed that William Rows swine was with him in the drift the day before, but...he did them no wrong,” and he had none of them”in his hands” now” If Row lost them, he must go look for them.” Bacon, of course, did not offer to help.
On Wednesday, the weary Munro turned to his neighbors John and Benjamin Russell, and together they scoured the woods for the missing hogs. They found one, stuck in a drift, amazingly still alive, and with “much difficulty” they brought her home.
One sow was still missing, and Munro’s patience was running out. He took the law-abiding next step, which required yet another long journey on foot through the snow. He walked to Cambridge, to magistrate Thomas Danforth’s house overlooking Harvard College, where he filed a claim against Bacon. The amount in controversy was small enough that the magistrate could resolve the dispute without resort to the courts. Danforth took up quill pen to issue a warrant, ordering Michael Bacon “to appeare before me at my house, the last day of the weeke at 12. of the clock to answear the complaint of William Rov~ for violence done him in taking away his swine out of his yard, & driving them away.
At the appointed time, six people — William and Martha Munro, the Russells, and the Gleison brothers — crowded into the magistrate’s study to testi~’. Danforth recorded the evidence with careful penmanship, and the witnesses all signed with their marks. Michael Bacon was not there and he lost the case.The constable’s deputy set out to seize a “branded steere” from Bacon to ensure payment of Munro’s damages.
Shortly thereafter, before Munro could collect a single shilling, his missing sow reappeared at his door. She was “lamed and went but upon three legs;’ delivered by a man who claimed that he “found” her and was asked by Bacon to bring her home. Bacon probably hoped that returning the sow would get him off the hook for damages, but Munro stood firm. In late December, Bacon asked for a rehearing, which Danforth granted on January 29. The result was the same, only now Bacon
owed more, reflecting the added costs for witness time and constable’s fees.
Still Bacon refused to pay, and he mounted a vigorous appeal, seeking a jury trial in the Middlesex County Court. He hired Concord lawyer John Hoare to draft a tedious petition with a long series of technical arguments, from improper service of the attachment on his steer to misfeasance by the well—respected Danforth. The trial took place in Cambridge on April 2, 1672, probably at the local Blue Anchor Tavern (as was customary in those days, since only Boston had courtroom facilities). Someone apparently represented Munro at the trial (although his identity is not known),for an elegantly—written legal argument appeared in the court records on Munro’s behalf.
The final result, after more than four months of legal wrangling, was judgment again in favor of Munro: “One Pound sixteen shillings & foure pence$ plus court costs, a goodly sum, but probably less a financial boost than a moral victory for the dogged Scotsman. Presumably Bacon paid, for heit the paper trail of Row v. Bacon ends. Munro returned to a quiet farming llfe, but Bacon continued to keep the courts busy in disputes with other neighbors. Anyone who thinks that the “litigation explosion” is a modern phenomenon should read seventeenth—century court records!•
DIANE RAPAPORT is an attorney and historian who lives in Lexington, Massachusetts. Her article “Scots for Sale: The Fate of the Scottish Prisoners in Seventeenth-Century Massachusetts,” appeared in the winter 2003 issue of NEW ENGLAND ANCESTORS, and she is writing a book to be published by NEHGS, New England Court Records: A Research Guide for Genealogists and Historians. Her email address is rapaports@aol.com.
Diane Rapaport
NEW ENGLAND ANCESTORS Winter 2004 55
