Now that the three John Looneys whose destinies needed to be changed have been settled, there are a couple of points relating to one family that I have not yet raised, because they do not have a bearing on those three Johns. I am starting a new thread as the old one was becoming so unwieldy.

Thank you, Averil, for your postings, in particular of 29/8/2011, 12:56 am. I did see Daniel Looney’s 1826 will and the 1851 will of Mary Looney als Taggart on Brian Lawson’ site. She left everything to her son George. So although she did not mention Gob-ny-Scoute specifically, her will is consistent the conjectural devolution of that place, that the part that was intended for John son of John Looney and Margaret Kelvie, on the latter’s death, passed instead to Margaret’s youngest son Ewan, and from his widow Mary to their son George.

Now for the new points, Averil. These both relate to sons of John Looney and Margaret Hutchin, who appear on Constance Radcliffe’s Looney Bwoaillee Losht sheet 2, but which should have formed her Looney Yack sheet 2.

The first is about John jr.’s date of birth (son of Mgt H). Many times (for instance in your posting of 24/8/2011, 3:57 am) you have said that he was born in 1777. CKR does have a John born that year, the eldest, but puts a d against him because she has another John born to the same parents in 1781, who possibly married Ann Costen and died in 1810. That has interesting implications for the 1802 expression “John Looney my son and heir”, for son William, b 1779, was still alive in 1802. What do you make of these 1777 and 1781 Johns?

The other point arises from your posting of 24/8/2011, 4:31 am. This relates to Daniel (son of Mgt H). Apart from the 1841 enumerator’s mistake, on which I agree with you, there is another mistake, in the 1823 marriage. If Daniel had been married to Ann Cowin first, he would not have been a bachelor in 1823 as stated. Presumably his fourth child Thomas, also succumbed early, as had the first three children, and then the mother, making Daniel a widower. Do you agree that the condition of bachelor was a mistake, or does it cast doubt on the identity of Daniel, husband of Ann Cowin?