The year 2010: This page is the result of my interest in locating the source, and examining the validity of the suggestion that there is an affiliation of Lieut. Samuel Pomeroy of Pallice Cork, (C 1616-1702) to the Pomeroy Family of Brixham, Devon. There is, after all, nothing to be found in the public domain to support this affiliation.

An examination of available documents shows that the source, repeated by noted genealogists, is a "tentative affiliation line" drawn by Sir William Betham, Ulster King of Arms, Dublin, 100 years after the death of Samuel Pomeroy of Pallice, Cork.

Margaret R. Falley suggests that Betham "likely" based this tentative affiliation line upon a reference Samuel "may" have made in his will to property in Brixham.

This "affiliation" now appears in several Rootsweb trees.

And repeated by noted Genealogists:

Gary Boyd Roberts, “Royal Descents of 600 Immigrants,” 2008, lists Samuel of Pallice, Cork, as the son of Edward Pomeroy of Brixham. He cited his sources as “Margaret R. Falley.”

http://www.genealogical.com/products/The%20Royal%20Descents%20of%20600%20Immigrants/4963.html

Who is Margaret R. Falley?

Margaret R. Falley was the genealogist responsible for the research of Edwin Moore Pomeroy's genealogy:

“The History and Genealogy of the Pomeroy Family and Collateral Lines: England, Ireland, America, etc. “ by Edwin Moore Pomeroy, 1958.

Falley gives her source for connecting Lt. Samuel Pomeroy to the Brixham Pomeroys in the introduction of this genealogy:

"Sir William Betham, Ulster King of Arms, Dublin, in his “MMS, CHARTED the name of “Samuel Pomeroy of the County of Cork, Ireland,” from the Prerogative Wills of Ireland, and other sources,” placing Samuel Pomeroy as the son of Edward Pomeroy and his wife (Wilmot) Periam, of Brixham, County Devon England (Genealogical Office, Dublin, G.O. MS. vol 205, p. 113).

This genealogical chart of the Pomeroy family of County Devon, beginning with the first English progenitor, Radulphus de la Pomerai, who came from Normandy with William the Conqueror, was continued through the main line of the Pomeroy family for nineteen generations, to and including Samuel Pomeroy.

Falley** states that " the last generation relationship was placed there as a notation, in the same handwriting of Sir William Betham, apparently after the main chart was made up. This is confirmed by the fact that page 116 of this Pomeroy MS. pedigree, which is a continuation of the main pedigree, (and) made at the same time and therefore before the notation was added, shows the affiliation of Edward Pomeroy (brother of Valentine) to Sir Thomas Pomeroy (their father) and a tentative affiliation line links Samuel Pomeroy of Pallice, County Cork, as the son of this Edward."

(Pomeroy, Edwin Moore: 1958, pp. 34-37)

Note: Sir William Betham's transcript of Samuel's will does not include the evidence which may have suggested to him the tentative affiliation, almost 100 years after the will was written, that Samuel was a son of Edward Pomeroy of Brixham.

Falley suggests that it was "likely based upon a reference Samuel may have made in his will regarding property located in Brixham, Devon." The original will no longer exists. She did not see Samuel's will.

AML (2010)

In 1689-1690 there was an uprising in Ireland, and, remembering the brutalities of 1641, Protestants who could went to England, or sent their families, for safety.

The Rev. Rowland Davies, Dean of Cork, left his family and went to London, hoping they could follow. (See His Journal) While in London he visited "sister Pomeroy at her lodging in Long Acres, (St Martins in the Field, Middlesex.")

Sir Rowland Davies, Dean of Cork, was prebend of Clonmel.

His mother was Martha (Mary) Scudamore, who married 1st, Roland Davies, Senior, 2nd Thomas Smyth, and 3rd, Samuel Pomeroy, of Pallice.

UPDATE: June 2018: There are deliberate misunderstandings or misrepresentations applied to the work done by M. Falley on behalf of the Pomeroy family: “The History and Genealogy of the Pomeroy Family and Collateral Lines: England, Ireland, America, etc. “ by Edwin Moore Pomeroy, 1958.

M. Falley writes in the intro to the George Holmes Pomeroy genealogy:

"The genealogies of the early progenitors of the Pomeroy family in England, save for the last generation, have been assembled differently and do not represent (my) original work with primary records, as in the case of the Irish research. Much work has been done during the course of two centuries, to uncover the original records of the English Pomeroys, by the emient genealogists, Bet ham (in regard to Irish connections), Cokayne, Dugdale, Pole, Powley, Prince, Vivian, etc. Therefore my work has been confined to a search of the Pomeroy records published by these and other men, and by comparison of the extent, nature and authority of the primary sources quoted by them, to make an analysis of the records which have been published, and eliminate mistakes made by some, due to incomplete records; later corrected by others with proof.

Falley goes on: "The Pomeroy tradition was first recorded in writing in a brief family history, published in 1879, by J. M. Pomeroy. In this the story of the earliest known ancestor was told in some detail, regarding his circumstances and means of escape to Ireland, as was the tale of George Pomeroy 's escape from his captors in Liverpool to an American bound vessel. Nothing however was said in this publication, which located the family in any particular part of Ireland, nor was it known just why or how George Pomeroy happened to be in Liverpool ."

1879: A BRIEF FAMILY HISTORY PUBLISHED BY J. M. POMEROY is online. The traditions are the same: Except the first Pomeroy was Thomas, not George. The story was the same.

What is curious is that M. Falley made no attempt to explain the difference in first name.. J. M. Pomeroy spoke the entire time about THOMAS; Falley, tells the same story, calling him George Pomeroy. I would expect the Ms Falley, would have given a documented explanation as to why the name was different.

What was the name given in the birth records for the children of Thomas aka George born in Cumberland County, PA? Who was correct?

J. M. Pomeroy in 1879 quoted ARTICLES published in papers about the Indian ATTACK in which the wife and children of THOMAS POMEROY, an early settler in Cumberland County, were slain. FALLEY, in the 1956 genealogy, covering the same family, calls him George, and ignores the story of the Indian Attack altogether.

Update 10/02/2019

This update finalizes our thinking, based upon a joint interest on the part of members of the Pomeroy Family Association in locating the source of the published affiliation of Lieut. Samuel Pomeroy of Pallice Cork, (C 1616-1702) to the Edward Pomeroy Family of  Brixham, Devon. 

In addition, the YDNA results of several descendants of George Pumroy show that they are Pomeroy's, not Holmes. 

 “The History and Genealogy of the Pomeroy Family and Collateral Lines: England, Ireland, America, etc. “ by Edwin Moore Pomeroy, 1958.) 

There are two weak points, or flaws, in the published genealogy.

#1: Inserting a child into a family:  Edward Pomeroy of Brixham had no child named Samuel. What was the reasoning behind doing this?   

Gary Boyd Roberts, “Royal Descents of 600 Immigrants,” 2008,  lists Samuel Pomeroy of Pallice, Cork, as the son of Edward Pomeroy of Brixham, Devon.  This looked promising. I was excited to learn his source was “Margaret D. Falley.”

Margaret D. Falley was a respected genealogist, author and authority on Irish heritage. Disappointingly, an examination of her references boiled down a “tentative affiliation line" in the papers of Sir William Betham, Ulster King of Arms, Dublin in the early 19th century. 

Margaret D. Falley suggested that Sir Betham “likely”* based this tentative affiliation upon a reference Samuel “may" (*her word)  have made in his will.   She did not see the original will, which had been lost. The copy of the original will made by Betham did not reveal what he may have seen that might suggest the affiliation to Edward Pomeroy of Brixham, Devon.  

"Sir William Betham, Ulster King of Arms, Dublin, had charted the name of “Samuel Pomeroy of the County of Cork, Ireland,”  from the Prerogative Wills of Ireland, and other sources,”  tentatively placing Samuel Pomeroy as the son of Edward Pomeroy and his wife (Wilmot) Periam, of Brixham, County Devon England (Genealogical Office, Dublin, G.O. MS.  vol 205, p. 113). “ 

“This genealogical chart of the Pomeroy family of County Devon, beginning with the first English progenitor, Radulphus de la Pomerai, was continued through the main line of the Pomeroy family for nineteen generations, to and including Samuel Pomeroy.”

However, Falley went on to note that "the last generation relationship,” (i.e. Samuel as son of Edward Pomeroy of Brixham), “was placed there as a notation, in the same handwriting of Sir William Betham, apparently after the main chart was made up.”   

Falley stated that Sir William Betham's transcript of LT Samuel Pomeroy’s will did not include any clear evidence which may have suggested the tentative affiliation. She also remarked that the affiliation line from the Samuel Pomeroy pedigree to the Pomeroy Family tree had been hatched out. 

We have to break it all down.  This is the only source we have: Margaret  D. Falley looking for the reason Betham made a tentative connection in the first place, and concluding it was "likely based upon a reference Samuel may have made in his will regarding property located in Brixham."  

But then Bethel hatched out the line. 

There was no Samuel in the Edward Pomeroy of Brixham Family. 

Falley has a stellar reputation which I do not wish to tarnish by the suggestion she engaged in genealogy fabrication. She was perhaps carried away a bit by excitement and enthusiasm. She cautioned the reader by saying “may have...or possibly”..... Like Betham, she had no proof. 

Flaw #2: LT Samuel Pomeroy of Pallice, Ireland had no adult sons to inherit his property, or carry down his YDNA. Daughter Martha married William Holmes, and their son Thomas assumed the surname Holmes-Pomeroy, in order to inherit the Pomeroy estate. Thomas Holmes-Pomeroy had many children, including a son George, mentioned in his father's will as being a long time missing and declared dead. This missing and declared dead son became the man escaping a press gang and taking ship to Pennsylvania from Liverpool. Possible? It's one theory, but doesn't make good genealogy.  

Note: Documented male descendants of George Pumroy (Pomroy) and Martha have taken yDNA tests. Genetically they match many Pomeroys, but not a single Holmes.