414 
ISLE op M A N. 
duke in the Ifle of Man were held by petty ferjeanty. 
Yet the bill three times repeats the falfe aifertion. It was 
fallely aflerted alfo, either that the duke’s anceftor was 
compelled to alienate his rights in the Ifle of Man, or that 
be did not receive full compenfation for his iniquitous 
gains, which arofe entirely from fmuggling. 
Lord Sidmouth oppofed the bill at great length. Dur¬ 
ing his adminiftration, in 1802, the duke prefented a me¬ 
morial to his majefty, which was referred to the privy- 
council. After confulting the lau’-officers of the crown, 
they came to the unanimous refolution, that there was no 
ground for conceiving the former compenfation inade¬ 
quate. Soon after the change of adminiftration, a fimilar 
petition was referred to the privy-council, and they came 
to a refolution exaflly the reverie of the former. 
The bill, however, paffed; and foon afterwards received 
his majefty’s afl'ent. 
Thus then the nation is faddled with an expence of at 
leaft 3000I. per annum for ever, in addition to what was 
paid in 1765; a grant which appears altogether the more 
exceptionable, as it may be called in queftion, with great 
propriety, whether his grace’s family had any legal, mo¬ 
ral, or defenfible, title or right, in the equivalent of which 
the 70,000!. (terling, and the annuity of 2000I. per an¬ 
num, were the compenfation. That the revenue of his 
grace, as feudal fovereign of the ifland, derived princi¬ 
pally from the fmuggling which was there carried on, will 
not now be contefted; and Hill lefs will it be aflerted, 
that the paramount authority of Great Britain was not 
lawfully enabled to put it down altogether. 
At the commencement of the laft century, the average 
produce to the cuftoms was about iool. per annum, and 
fmuggling had certainly taken root in 1709. The board 
of cuftoms enquired into this grievance, but no effectual 
ftop was-put to it, fo that the then lord of the ifland pro¬ 
ceeded, in 1720 or 1721, to leafe the cuftoms at ioool. per 
annum, to two merchants at Dublin and Liverpool, who 
commenced the fyftem of fmuggling teas from the Swedifh, 
Danifti, and Dutch, Eaft-India Companies. In confe- 
quence, however, of the adds of the 7th and 12th of 
George I. by which a check was put to thefe practices, 
the leafe was cancelled. By the latter aft the treafury 
was empowered to treat with the Derby family for the 
purchafe of the lordfliip; but it does not appear that any 
effectual overtures were made till 1735, when the lordfhip 
devolved upon the duke of Athol; and the treaty was not 
effected till 1765. During this interval, the contraband 
trade, and confequently the infular duties levied upon it, 
bad increafed conflderably. The revenues of the duke of 
Athol arof^in import and export'duties upon illicit arti¬ 
cles landed in the Ifle of Man, in order to be fmuggled 
into England, to the injury of the public revenue. It 
may well be faid, that the lord of the ifland was not en¬ 
titled to any compenfation ; and the opinions of fome of 
the ableft lawyers at the time were of a very different 
complexion, calling rather for retribution. A liberal po¬ 
licy, however, prevailed 5 and the family received 70,000b 
fterling. and the annuity of 2000I. in lieu of an illicit re¬ 
venue. The firft fum was alked by the duke in full—the 
annuity was gratuitoufly given by the crown. 
Out of the revenues of the ifland, however, whether 
their fource were pure or impure, the lord was bound to 
defray, and did aftually defray, the whole public expen¬ 
diture, the, falaries of all public magiftrates and officers, 
from the jufticeof peace to the conftable; to e reft and re¬ 
pair all public buildings; and to maintain a fmall armed 
eftablifhment: nor is it very wife or very fcrupulous in 
any one to pretend, that the whole produce of the taxes 
of any place is the exclufive property or private gain of 
the fovereign. The purpofe for which taxes are levied 
can never be a perfonal right or advantage. Still further, 
there appears, fomething extraordinary we do not fay, 
but prepofterous and abfurd, in the duke of Athol claim¬ 
ing a new and relative compenfation, commenfurate with 
the increafed profperity of the ifland, which has aiifen in 
its having been taken out of his jurifdiftion. 
When the treaty for the purchafe of the Ifle of Man 
was opened, about fifty years ago, the duke and duchefs 
of Athol wrote a letter to the lords of the treafury, con¬ 
taining the following propofal ; viz. “We hope neither 
his majefty nor the parliament will think the clear fum 
of 70,000b too great a price to be paid us, in fult compen - 
falion, for the abfolute furrender of the Ifle, Caftle, and 
Peel, of Man, and all rights, jurifdiftions, and interefts, 
in or over the faid ifland, and all its dependencies.” This 
price was paid ; and, in addition thereto, an annuity was 
given to the duchefs of 2000b for her life. But it wds 
afterwards difcovered, that the duke and duchefs would 
have afked more, if they had thought that more would 
have been given. Therefore it was under the fear and 
terror of being refufed a great deal more than the thing 
was worth, that their graces were contented to part with 
it at only a good deal more than its aftual value. Now, 
faid the advocates for the claim, a bargain concluded un¬ 
der the influence of fear and terror is not binding on the 
parties fo feared and terrified. The duke of Athol was 
therefore entitled to afk as much more as he can get, and 
to have a fuller compenfation than the full compenfation which 
his father and mother had obtained. But then a future 
duke may, in his turn, difeover that his prefent grace aft- 
ed under the very fame fort of apprehenfions that vitiated 
the former contraft. For affuredly the duke of Athol is 
a man of too much fenfe to have reftrifted himfelf to a 
part of the revenues of the Ifle of Man, except from the 
fear that parliament might not have been difpofed to grant 
him the whole. When a future duke, therefore, fhall 
have the good fortune to meet with as powerful fupport 
in a future parliament, he muft infallibly fucceed in get¬ 
ting the whole of the revenues of the ifland on the lame 
principle on which the prefent duke has obtained a pdfrt, 
of them. t ' 
The Ifle of Man contains four principal towns, and fe- 
veral villages. Ruflien, or Caftletown, is the metropolis; 
the other chief towns are Douglas, Ramfey, and Peel, 
which fee refpeftively. As to the population, Bede re¬ 
lates, that in his time, the eighth century, it did not ex¬ 
ceed three hundred families. Hollinfhed, who wrote in 
the year 1584, fays, “there were formerly thirteen hun¬ 
dred families in this ifland, but now fcarcely half that 
number.” In the year 1667, the ifland contained 2531 
men between the ages of fixteen and fixty years. The 
following Table will Ihow the population at three diftinct 
periods, the years 1726, 1757, and 1792. It is given in 
this form of detail, in order to bring the reader acquaint¬ 
ed with the names of the different parifhes and towns in 
the ifland. 
Pari/hes and Towns. 
1726 
1757 
1792 
Kirk Michael - - - 
643 
826 
1003 
Ballaugh ----- 
806 
773 
1015 
Jurby ------ 
483 
467 
713 
Andreas ----- 
967 
1067 
1555 
Bride ------ 
612 
629 
678 
Lezayre ----- 
1309 
1481 
1721 
Maughold - 
529 
759 ? 
.... 
Ramley ----- 
460 
8825 
2uG7 
Lonan ----- 
5+7 
869 
1408 
Oncan ----- 
370 
+ 3 + 
69O 
Braddon ----- 
780 
1121 X 
Douglas ----- 
810 
1814 5 
50+5 
Marown ----- 
580 
658 
842 
Santon ----- 
376 
507 
5*2 
Malew ----- 
890 
.14667 
Caftletown, or Rufhen - 
785? 
3 3 33 
Balafalla ----- 
360 i 
9153 
Arbory ----- 
661 
785 
ii +3 
Kirk Chrift Ruflien 
813 
1007 
J 59 ° 
Patrick ----- 
7+5 
95 + 
2 i 53 
German ----- 
5 ro 
925 ? 
Peel town - 
+75 
805 s 
2505 
Totals - - 
i +5 11 
19144 1 
279G 
At 
