Part of the Norwegian Kingdom of the Hebrides until the 13th century when it was ceded to Scotland, the isle came under the British crown in 1765.
The Times, June 8, 1805
London, United Kingdom
ISLE OF MAN -- ATHOL CLAIMS
Colonel Stanley moved the Order of the Day for the consideration of the Report of the Committee on the claim of the Duke of Athol.--The Order being read:
Mr. Corwen, in a speech of two hours continuance, went into an historical detail on the financial and legislative transactions of the Isle of Man, from the time of Henry IV in the fifteenth century to the present day, for the purpose of showing, that at no time were the revenues of that island rightfully or constitutionally vested in any individual for his own private emolument, but for the public good. That the grant of the sovereignty of that island to the predecessors of the Duke of Athol, by James I, with the liberty of imposing taxes arbitrarily on the people, without any other control than the discretion of the Sovereign, and the means of the inhabitants to pay, was not a lawful right, nor one which it was the power of any King of this country, of his own mere will, to grant; that the grant of an unlimited power to any subject by a limited Monarch was unprecedented in the history of nations; that the legislation of the Isle of Man was, like that of Great Britain, tripartite, and depended on the consent of the House of Keys, who were the representatives of the Commons, the Council, and the Lords of the Island; and that never, but in one single instance, was the absolute sovereignty of taxing the people, granted by James the IId, exercised by the Lord of the Island. The predecessor of the Duke of Athol, in selling that Island to the English Government, had no right whatever to sell the revenues, as they were not his but those of the people, and were inalienable, and consequently be had no right whatever to claim any compensation, on the ground that those revenues had since increased; and even if the right to the revenues had originally vested in him, the bargain was finally closed when once he sold them. He had for fifteen years acknowledged his compensation to be liberal, and be had no right now to come forward with a new claim, because the revenues had since increased by the industry and commerce of the people, and the fostering protection of the British Parliament, any more than the country would have a right lo call upon him to refund part of the purchase-money in case the revenues had decreased. But, in fact, the purchase-money given to the Duke of Athol, was for the surrender of territory and not revenue. He had nothing to sell, but his estate in the island, accompanied by a barren sceptre; and therefore any claim now for further compensation, which would subject the people of that island to additional taxes, was unjust, and such as he trusted that House would never sanction. He concluded by moving, "That the Report, instead of now, be taken into consideration this, day three months."
Sir WM. BURROUGHS declined entering into the discussion of topics that were not now before the House. However, from a general view of the history of the Sovereignty of the Isle of Man, and from the opinion of Lord Coke, and several other writers on the subject, he maintained that there was no tribunal in this country competent to decide upon the merits of the case. When it was first discussed hi Great Britain, Lord Coke had expressly stated that the Isle of Man was an independent kingdom of itself, that it was no part of England; and consequently the Parliament or the Government of England had no more authority over it than it would have over any other independent state, except in a case where there was a rational ground of war, such as might be deeded fit with respect to any other power. The Noble Duke had given up his right under an impression of completions which had never been erased from his mind; and in justice we were bound to make him ample compensation for his loss of the honor of sovereignty, as well as for his pecuniary loss in revenue. He therefore supported the original motion.
Mr. BOND said, when he opposed the present reception of this Report, he did it on the principles laid down by Lord Coke. Sir Wm. Blackstone and by the Attorney and Solicitor General, who had all concurred in the opinion, that the authority of Parliament was paramount, and that it had an unquestionable right to legislate for the Isle of Man. Whatever ingenious a reasoning might have been employed by the Hon. and Learned Baronet, there were no facts to show that the Duke of Athol was independent of this control. The Commissioners appointed to enquire into this business said, that if the Custom duties were increased, it must have been with the consent of the Insule, who would require a return for such a concession. How, then, could the Duke obtain an increase of revenue from this source to the extent that had been pretended? The only question of importance was, if the compensation already made to the House of Athol was grossly inadequate: if it were not, there could be no sufficient reason for owning what had so long been closed. The increase in profit, from the advance of population, and the improvements of the state of society, could not be any fit ground for such a proceeding. He was in the Privy Council when this subject was before it, it was not, therefore, wholly new to him. The matter was at that time referred in the Law Officers of the Crown, and their Report was received with the respect it deserved. To this Report the Noble Duke was permitted to reply, by the exercise of unusual indulgence, in the form of a memorial; and before the decision of the Council was laid before his Majesty, his Grace applied to submit some new facts, to which also the Privy Council condescended, with the express injunction, that these new facts should not only be new but important. When he (Mr. Bond) was no longer a Member, the Privy Council came to a resolution, that the remuneration was inadequate, but he knew nothing of what led lo this change of sentiment, and had in no respect altered his opinion on the subject. If it were not competent, the onus probendi was with the Duke, and that burthen he had not thought proper to sustain. The memorial stated, that the revenues of 1808 were much greater than those of 1765; but should the compensation be governed by the present state of the income, and not by the produce at the time the contract was made? This was an application, it should be remembered, not to the liberality, but to to justice of the House; and on no principle of justice could it be supported.
Lord Glenbervie asked if the opinions of the Attorney and Solicitor General were to be considered as law; or that they were supposed to be binding on any Member of that House. Lord Coke's opinion was erroneous with respect to the right of England to legislate for Ireland at that time, as had been declared afterwards in effect by the Act of 1782. His opinion relative to the Isle of Man was equally unfounded. Yet the Attorney and Solicitor General had only pronounced a negative opinion on the case, they had never come to any positive decision. For his point, he thought that from consideration of all the circumstances of the case, if he was on a Jury upon the merits of the case, he should be bound to say, that at least it was entitled to reconsideration.
Lord Temple observed that the business had the appearance of a job; and, of all times that could possibly be thought, the present was the most unpropitious to a measure of that sort. which the very heavy burthens to which the people of England cheerfully submitted for the necessary expenses of the State, he would not think of voting away their money to any individual, however highly respectable, merely because the revenues of the Isle of Man had increased since the bargain was made. If the first contract was a close bargain, as had been urged, he conceived that a much greater compliment could not be paid to his revered relative (Mr. George Grenville), who was then the Minister, and had been so provident of the public money. For these reasons, he felt himself bound to support the amendment.
Mr. Pitt supported the original motion. He considered the compensation in a two-fold aspect, as a compensation for dignity, and as a compensation for revenue. The original sum of 70,000 pounds might be considered as nearly exhausted by the compensation for dignity, leaving but a small surplus for revenue. He urged the claims of the Duke also on account of the increase of revenue since that period.
Mr. Windham spoke at great length against any farther claims . . .
The Committee in which these claims have been considered, has been treated as indecorous, irregular and even clamorous. It had the general detects of all Committees, and this was all that could be slated justly against it. The whole of the present debate was out of time; the Gentlemen who had discussed the subject ought to have attended in the Committee of which they complain, and to have assigned their reasons for the conduct they would now pursue. The question now before the House was, whether the Report of the Committee should be taken into consideration; and it was absurd on such an enquiry, to examine into the general merits. The whole affair bad been charged as administerial job. He should not easily be suspected of conducing to any project of this kind, and the doubt was not what the Duke of Athal should receive in remuneration, but whether the House of Commons should preserve that dignity and justice in its proceedings, by which it should be ever characterised. Much of the argument has been applied to the sovereign rights of the House of Athol. He should have been extremely glad to have seen the Right Hon. the Attorney-General in his place, to have denied the existence of such rights, and as he did not appear in his place to support his former opinion, he might at least be permitted to conjecture, the Right Hon. and Learned Gentleman had abandoned his former sentiments. He reluctantly opposed the friends with whom he was accustomed to concur, but he felt it his duty to vote for receiving the Report . . .
After Mr. Windham had explained, the House divided on the question, that the word "now" do stand part of this:
Ayes: 114
Noes: 46
Majority 66Before strangers were admitted, the House had agreed to go into the Committee on the Report.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer then proposed that the Committee be appointed for Wednesday next, as the first open day, which was opposed by Mr. Curwen and Mr. Peter Moore, who moved an amendment, to insert the words on Monday night The House then divided,
Against the Amendment: 40
For it: 14
Majority for the Committee on Wednesday: 26The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the House adjourned, at half past three o'clock this Morning, to Monday.
(Today: Isle of Man is a British crown dependency but is not part of the United Kingdom or of the European Union. However, the UK Government remains constitutionally responsible for its defense and international representation. Current concerns include reviving the almost extinct Manx Gaelic language. )
