A quick look at the General Armoury suggests that you are referring to the arms of Larkin "Ermine, three leopards faces sable ". Burke does not give an origin for these but reference to the Visitation of Cambridgeshire 1619 shows them as belonging to Thomas Larkin a Doctor of Physic at Cambridge University. The visitation gives Thomas as the son of Thomas Larkin of Frynsbury in Kent. There is no record of a Larkin coat of arms in the visitation of Kent in 1619 and I wonder if the arms were granted to, or assumed by, Thomas Jr on his appointment to Cambridge.
Thomas Jr was predeceased by his son leaving his estate divided between two daughters; one of whom married into the Amye family thus producing the Larkin-Amye arms shown.
It is possible that there is no grant of Arms as during the Elizabethan and early Stuart periods control by the College of Arms was poor and many of the new merchant, professional and land owning classes simply adopted a Coat of Arms for themselves. It was this that gave rise to the Heralds' Visitations of the early 1600s in an effort to tidy up the situation. If the holder of an unrecognised coat of arms could show that it had been used in their family for a couple of generations or more, that it was not a duplicate of another claimant and that they also appeared to the Herald to be of good standing, the Herald would approve the arms. (I have seen records of visitations where the Herald has refused to register somebody's arms on the grounds that the person was "No Gent".!)
As an aside, I notice that there was a house in Frynsbury known as Larkin House. A Google search might provide more information, if you don't already have it.
I must also observe that the "General Armoury" is a very poor guide to family heraldry as Mr Burke
was somewhat casual about the information he collected. However, in this case, he seems to have got it right !
I hope this is of some help.
Maec
