I was wrong about Wid Looney when I wrote:
'Wid. Looney" aged 82 (Yack) buried 22 Feb.1838 was probably the widow of John Looney 87 (Yack) buried 2 Dec 1835, so b.c. 1748, and his wife was b.c.1755/6." Unless she was his second wife, as you wrote LWJ.

That is if Constance Radcliffe was correct when she wrote on a Looney chart which I hadn't seen “(2) Boshin (Gob-ny-Scoute): JOHN LOONEY (1748-1835 A 1836.54) m Isabel Camaish (d 1817 A84). Their four children are John (1788); Eliza (1794 d x [signifies smallpox]); Margaret (1790), m William Stowell with children William and Isabella, who inherited John Looney’s property); and Robert (1799).”

Before discounting Isabel Camaish as having married John Looney c.1748-1835, surely a Looney researcher who has seen CR's chart has looked at this Isabel (Camaish) Looney will?

CR made mistakes with some of her families, especially ones who were not landowners, but she was exceptional with land records. Not just NSS/SSS, but all of them. Apparently she was a Latin scholar and land records were her main interest.

Sue