My understanding is like Frances the Moarship was a burden that became due by strict rotation. The Moar's perquisite was his own farm rent free for the year. THe Moar had to come up with the rent from every holding, and if you look at the Lord's own accounts (Receipts & Disbursements)the entries appear for any allowance given for irrecoverable rents. THey should all balance against each other.

The Coronership was valuable and he paid a fee to the Lord. The Setting Quest is discussed in detail in the Nantlys Manuscript (M/F in MNHLib but not via SLC). The SQ is mentioned in the early Statute Book as well. THe membership was I always assumed the most senior of the largest Lord's Tenants in the parish, excluding possibly the Officers and Keys, and with the proviso that a tenant could not 'present' a transaction involving himself. It would be worth seeing if members of the Keys were excused from service - I guess that as they were themselves a senior appellate jury this might be the case.

During the currency of the Compositions, the entries in Lib Vast are not kept up very well. A comparison of Lib Assed 1702 and 1703 shows this.In 1703 or 5 they started off from scratch with new lists.Look at the intro to my Survey of Douglas Volume 1 for all this.

After the Act of Settlement 1703 the Lord was due a fine on every transfer or descent, and vertually full records ensued for many years.

The Nantlys document discusses whether the SQ were liable for all the rents, but this was the Moarship.

I am currently looking in detail at the Lib Vast 1511 and 1512 very interesting to see what they were doing.

Keep up your interest Robert - I have multiple Cannell and Cannon lines as you can imagine.

NGC