THE EARL OF DERBY AND THE ISLE OF MAN, 1643-1651

J. R. Dicklnson

On 15 June 1643 James Stanley, seventh Earl of Derby,' the most prominent Royalist in Lancashire, landed in the Isle of Man from \\ hitehaven. Apart from a period of perhaps seven months in the spring and summer of the following year, Derby, the hereditary Lord of Man, remained in the island until he was summoned to join Charles II in his march southward through Lancashire in August 1651. His absence from the county in these crucial years encouraged both his Parliamentarian opponents and his detractors at Court to accuse him of deserting the Royalist cause to protect his own interests and property/ Apologists for 'the martyr earl' have, not surprisingly, played down these claims, ignoring the questions of loyalty to the Stuarts, and instead have stressed Derby's dedication to Charles I/ Later historians have suggested that the earl took refuge in the Isle of Man and played no further significant part in the struggle against the Parliamentarians until the Worcester campaign in 1651/ In spite of the considerable amount of attention which has been devoted to the Royalist army in the last fifteen years, no attempt has yet been made to reassess Derby's role after the early 1640s,' a fact which may be attributable to the reluctance of English historians to explore non-English sources or to a conviction that there was little or nothing more to say on the subject. This would account for the neglect of the extensive records of the Stanley administration in the Isle of Man, which provide details of Derby's career in the later 1640s and furthermore

40 J. R. Dickitison

suggest that the accepted impression of his inactivity during this period is in need of some modification.

The circumstances of Derby's departure from Lancashire in June 1643 require some explanation in view of his position and the lead he was expected to provide for the king's party in the county. The position of the Lancashire Royalists seemed relatively promising in early Septemher 1642. The magazines of Lancaster, Preston, and Liverpool had been secured and three regiments of foot had been raised, totalling between two and three thousand men. At the end of that month, however, the Royalists suffered the first of a series of setbacks when they failed to take Manchester after a week-long siege. Bad planning, the inexperience of the Royalist forces, and some formidable resistance doomed the enterprise to failure. John Seacome, the ninth earl's steward, later claimed that the siege was brought to an end by a summons from the king requiring the presence of the regiments for his march on London. 6 There may well be some truth in this assertion as the Lancashire troops reached the king's army only when it had begun its march/ but the impact of both incidents on the Royalists in the county was serious. Derby was left with a much depleted force, comprising only a few regulars, a 'free hold' band armed with weapons seized from Catholics, and the militia from the areas controlled by Royalists. Morale, particularly among the militia, was at a low ebb. In December Derby attempted to improve the situation by organizing the financing of the Royalist forces, probably at the instigation of the two other leading Lancashire Royalist commanders, Richard, Viscount Molyneux, and Sir Thomas Tyldesley, who had both returned from service in the south.

The early months of 1643 witnessed the high point of Royalist fortunes in Lancashire. Even before the first suc­ cess, Royalist opinion was 'that affairs in Lancashire are not so bad as reported'.8 The Parliamentarians had taken Preston in February, but in the next month Derby retook the town. His army consisted of 1,600 regulars, less than a quarter of whom were properly armed, and 3,000 clubmen from neighbouring parts of Amounderness and Leyland. A Parliamentarian attack on Warrington on 5 April, in which the Lancashire forces were assisted by detachments from

Earl oj Derby 41

Cheshire under Sir William Brereton, was beaten off. The Parliamentarians were in some disarray after these reversals and when Derby marched into Blackburn hundred in mid- April, it seemed likely that the Royalists were about to deliver a decisive blow. In fact, the debacle at \Vhalley on 20 April, in which Derby's force was comprehensively routed, marked the end of Royalist hopes in the county.

The loss of Wigan to the Parliamentarians on 22 April compounded the disaster. When news of the town's fall reached the queen at York, she sent a message to Derby that he was not to engage the enemy until reinforcements from her army arrived. 9 Without fresh troops it was clear that the Royalist position was completely untenable. The rein­ forcements failed to appear, and Derby, doubtless with encouragement from Tyldesley and Molyneux, went to the queen in person. That her intention was to despatch a sizeable force to Lancashire is evident from her letter to the king on 23 April. Her plan was 'to detach from the body of the army 2000 footmen and 100 horsemen, 200 dragoons and some cannon and to send them at once into Lancashire to join with the Earl of Derby and to clear out that county'. 10 Derby was to return to assemble his remaining forces and await the arrival of the queen's army before Manchester. Despite these elaborate plans, the scheme came to nothing as a result of the surprise attack on Wakefield by Sir Thomas Fairfax on 21 May, which diverted attention away from the embattled Lancashire Royalists and their plight.

Two roughly contemporary accounts provide different explanations for the earl's departure from England. The anonymous Royalist author of A briefe journal! of the seige against Lathom states that when Derby was at York, the queen 'received intimation of the Scottish designe for the invasion of England, with signification of their intention to shipp from the north of Ireland for the Isle of Man, and soe for England'. 11 The other account, written by Derby himself, confirms that 'a Report was gott of some Scots, intending to assist the pretended Parliament of England, that they would land in the North, and, by the Way, doe their Endeavour to get the Isle of Man'. 12 This was not the first time that the island had been considered as a base for a potential invader of England. In 1593 the Spanish were rumoured to be

42 J. R. Dickinam

planning an expedition against England in collaboration with the Scots and 'may surprize the Isle of Man, as a place verie commodious for their victualling and watering'. 13 According to his own version of events, Derby was 'advised to go immediately for the Isle of Man to secure it for his Majestie's Service, as well as in VVisdome to preserve my owne inheritance'. 14 With the difficult position of the Royal­ ists in Lancashire and the evident ill-feeling between Derby and his fellow commanders Molyneux and Tyldesley, there must have been a strong temptation to follow such advice. If his account is to be credited, however, Derby 'gave no Heede to that Report', but pressed to be allowed to accom­ pany the queen to Oxford. The deciding factor, he main­ tained, was the news of the unrest in the Isle of Man which presumably reached him at York. Derby received letters from his officers in the island warning of the danger of a revolt there. 'For that the People had begun the Fashion of England in Murmuring, and by some damned Spiritt had been taught the same Lessons as I have known in Lon­ don'. 1 ' It was furthermore suspected that the malcontents had invited 'some Strangers into the Island' and that a 'Shipp of Warr' which Derby had acquired for the defence of the island had been taken by 'Parliament Shipps'. Derby noted that this latter report proved to be true and that the queen and her advisers, among whom were Lords Goring, Digby. and Jermyn, and Sir Edward Dering, 'were of Opin­ ion that my Coming hither was necessarie'. 10

Bowing to this suggestion, Derby returned to Lancashire and passed through the Fylde, seeking a ship for the crossing to the Isle of Man, but not stopping even to converse with his colleagues. Edward Robinson of Euxton observed that the 'Lord Molinex quarters were in Clifton and Mr Tildsleys in Kirkham and while they laid there the Earle of Darbie with a few horse passed by Clifton with litle or no speach of him and soe into the North to White Haven'. 1 ' This apparent snub to Molyneux and Tyldesley was perhaps indicative more of the rift which had developed between Derby and his fellow commanders than of the urgency of the position in the island.

When Derby arrived in the Isle of Man, he found that the reports of unrest among the Manx people were only slightly

Earl of Derby 43

exaggerated. General discontent over the payment of tithes and the exactions of the clergy for the drafting of wills and 'Corpspresents' (the proportion of a decedent's estate due to the Church) had been encouraged by Captain Edward Christian of Maughold, the receiver general of the island. In June 1642 the governor, John Greenhalgh of Brandlesholme, had decided with the rest of Derby's officers, who comprised the Lord's Council, and the twenty-four Keys of the island that the Keys and one of the two deemsters, or judges, of the island should investigate the 'greivances of the clcrgie and commonaltie' and together 'settle and compose a peaceable agreement'. 18 The results of this inquiry had not been produced by the following January when Derby appointed Edward Christian sergeant major of all the land forces in the island under Governor Greenhalgh. Christian had him­ self been governor between 1627 and 1634, but had been deprived of the office after giving shelter to Irish Sea pirates, whom the Lord Deputy of Ireland, Sir Thomas Wentworth, was trying to suppress. 19 Although restored to favour and appointed by Derby to the post of receiver in 1636, Christian seems not to have forgotten this affair, and, once in charge of the island's militia, he 'countenanced and incouraged the people the clergie and proctors that they should pay noe tythes And that he would deffende them in withstandinge the same and that not in a legall maner (by Course of Law) but by force and violence'."0 He ordered the officers and soldiers in Peel Castle to obey him 'in all his Comands and send him powder and amunicon what­ soever and whensoever he should require it'. To ensure the garrison's compliance, he mustered the militia of the par­ ishes of Patrick and German near the mouth of the Lhen trench, 'having thither brought and conveyed all the best Armes of the Cuntry'. Christian had already begun to administer an oath of allegiance 'in an vulegar maner and to an unlawful! ende' to 'a greate number of the poore ignorant people' in several parishes. 21 At a Court of Gen­ eral Gaol Delivery in May, Greenhalgh had attempted to imprison one Robert Harrison for refusing to pay his tithes, but 'the multetude took houlde of the delinquent and tooke him away from the handes of justice by force'. Realizing the extent of popular support for Christian's

44 J. R. Dickimon

stand, Greenhalgh promised that petitions for redress of grievance would be considered. 22

At the beginning of 1643 the situation in the Isle of Man was becoming serious. At the same time, Royalist control of the island had assumed a new importance as the king began to look to Ireland for reinforcements for his army. Initially, Charles I's plan was to recall the greater part of the troops sent to Ireland after the outbreak of rebellion there in October 1641. The opening of negotiations between Parlia­ ment and the Scots, which had every likelihood of resulting in Scottish intervention on the side of the king's enemies, made the realization of this scheme even more urgent. To ensure the safe conveyance of the 'Irish' army, however, the king needed to maintain a Royalist presence in the Irish Sea. The defection of the fleet in the Downs had deprived him of almost the entire navy, which had been built up largely with Ship Money in the later 1630s, and left him reliant on vessels provided by his supporters and on chartered privateers. Parliament's naval resources were necessarily stretched to the limit in an effort to control the seas, but if the Isle of Man were to fall into the hands of the king's enemies, the Parliamentarians would have an ideal base from which to prey on Royalist vessels crossing to or from Ireland.

Derby's arrival in the island had almost coincided with another confrontation between Greenhalgh and Christian's supporters. The governor had ordered that a meeting should be held for the airing of grievances at Douglas on 13 June. The Lord's officers, the officers spiritual, and the twenty-four Keys duly assembled and Greenhalgh ordered the deemsters and Keys 'to inquire and ccrtifie him and the rest of the lords Counsel!, of the true state of the grevances both of the Clergie and ComonaltieV' 1 The governor had directed that two representatives from each of the seventeen parishes should attend 'to the end that hee and the whole assembly might better understand and doe the same'; Christian, however, had seen his opportunity to force the issue. A mustering cross, or crash vusta, went out in several parishes, calling the inhabitants to arms. The armed men appeared 'in an unusuall maner armed to the terror of the whole Courte and assemblie'. Greenhalgh endeavoured to

Earl oj'Derby 45

defuse the situation by asking them 'to bee quiett and shew themselves good subjects until a solution could be agreed upon, and assured them that another day would be appointed for the hearing of their complaints. Christian's supporters were not to be so easily denied. They rejected Greenhalgh's offer. William Carrett of Sulby shouted that 'the Cuntry would pay no more tythes to the Temporall procters and that they would (eight and dye first, and within this fbrthnight in a threatening maner you shall knowe more'.-^ Nevertheless, Greenhalgh persuaded them to disperse peacefully. Derby did not perhaps exaggerate when he recorded that 'it was believed a few Days had ended the happie Peace which this island had so long enjoyed'/'

Derby immediately took steps to prevent a full-scale revolt. Finding the Manx 'one parte ready to cutt one anothers throate or title better'/'' he arranged a meeting to deal with the people's grievances at Peel Castle on 18 July. To gain the advantage, he recruited 'some informers, who unsuspectedly might mingle with the People; thereby discovering afbrehand, the Motions they would make me, their Cham­ pions they relied on, and what likeliest might best content them'/^ On the night before the meeting. Derby consulted his officers about the best way of approaching the situation, although he kept his spies' reports to himself.

At the meeting of the court at Creg Mallin Green in Peel, Derby displayed no little skill in handling the proceedings. After listening to the grievances both of those who kept within the 'Boundes of Modestic' and those 'who sawcily behaved themselves', he appointed that 'a select .Jury or Grand Inquest' composed of twelve Keys and twelve of the parish representatives summoned to the court should draw up a list of the matters at issue. This appeared to placate the assembled people, but Christian 'pressed them and certain peticons of his owne drawinge and devisinge soe farre that his Lordship was forced to checke and publickly reprehende his insolente misdemeanors'.-"

Christian was subsequently charged with attempting 'to subvert the fundamental! Lawes of this Island . It was alleged that 'certayne escripts' in his own hand showed that he intended to remove the existing body of twenty-four Keys, which included many of the larger landholders and

46 y. R. Difk'nt\un

which was appointed with the Lord's approval, 'as evill members and enemyes to the State and Comon good of the Islande'. His plan was that 'a new xxiiij should bee chosen after a new devise never heard of in this nacon', that is, by the people in the parishes. The new Keys, who 'should bee noe feed men (that is noe sworne man to the Lord)', were to take an oath that 'to the best of your power you will doe all that in you lycth for the generall good of the Isle and people thereof. Under Christian's regime, the deemsters, who were usually appointed by the Lord, were to be chosen from these newly installed Keys; one was to be nominated by the Keys themselves, the other by the Lord. The posts, normally held for life in practice, were to be reviewed every three years to allow any man the liberty 'to complayne and give in Articles of greveances injustice oppressions or any other wrongs whatsoever against them'. 29

Whether such a scheme was the product of a deeply felt need for reform among the people or of a conviction held by Christian is not certain. The aims of most of those who appeared at the court in Douglas in June 1643 were prob­ ably limited to obtaining a favourable solution to the tithes question rather than the far-reaching changes which Christian set out. Christian, whose suitability for the posi­ tion of sergeant major may be attributable to his early career as a seaman in the East Indies, had perhaps acquired a taste for power during the 1620s. when he spent some time in the company of the duke of Buckingham and had the opportunity to observe politics at the Court in London. 50 Despite the fact that he had been restored to favour two years after losing the governorship of the island, albeit in a lesser post, Christian may have nurtured plans to regain at least some measure of his former influence. The disturbed conditions of the 1640s provided him with what appeared to be a perfect opportunity. With the king looking to Ireland for assistance and Parliament eager to prevent the Irish army from crossing to England, Christian exploited the discontent in the island, probably hoping for aid from a Parliament only too pleased to dislodge the earl of Derby from the island.

Certainly there could be no half measures as far as Christian was concerned, for his actions were a direct threat

Etui of Derby 47

to the Stanleys' powers in the island. After he left the court on 18 July. Christian went into Peel and called together some of the townspeople. He told them that they had undone themselves in submitting themselves to Derby and that 'his Lordship had taken a wronge course in leavinge the Parlament and adhearinge to the KingeV He was immedi­ ately labelled as 'a dissaffected man towards his majestie', but this probably reflects his opportunism as much as his ideals. Whatever his motives might he, it is clear that Greenhalgh and the rest of the officers believed that his activities could well deliver the island to Parliament. By inciting revolt. Christian would 'lay open the whole lande and people into some encmyes hands in these dangerous and distracted tymes'/"

In the event, Christian's supporters were won over rel­ atively easily by Derby's promises. Faced with the earl himself, and doubtless conscious of the garrison troops in the vicinity, their resolve, such as it was, evaporated. Christian himself was subsequently imprisoned. His trial took place only after the question of the clergy's alleged abuses had been settled. Having received the report of the Grand Enquest appointed to investigate the matter, Derby assembled the clergy. Keys, and parish representatives at Castle Rushen on 30 October. Particular details which had not already been ironed out were then 'agittated and disputed before his Lordship'.^ Derby had the casting vote in all the motions, but hoped that he had given the people 'good Satisfaction: redressing what was amisse in Church or State'/"

Once the Ibundations of Christian s support had been undermined, it was safe to proceed with his trial. On 13 December, Christian was brought before Greenhalgh, the two deemsters, Ewan Christian and Robert Quayle, and the rest of the officers at Castle Rushen. It seems that Derby himself was not present, although he was still in the island. Perhaps not surprisingly, there had been some comment on the length of time between Christian's arrest and the trial. Derby remarked that 'many wonder thereat, as savouring of injustice, and that his 1 ryall should be soe long deferr'd'. He believed, however, that Christian 'deserves what he hath, and a great deale more'. He bemoaned the fact that

48 J. R. Dukinson

the 'Judges doe pretend they want Presidents', claiming that 'in this Countrey any Offence will be excused, if of never soe high a Nature, provided he steale not Sheepe. And that because the Judges be Sheepemastcrs.' 3) The jury, comprising twenty of the Keys, found that Christian had 'most seditiously and tumulteously behaved himself against the peace of our sovraigne lord the kings Majestic of England and the lord of the islande', and that he was 'worthy of sevcare fine and ymprissonment'. The governor, deemsters, and officers pronounced that he should be fined one thousand marks and sentenced him to life imprison­ ment."' The outcome was never really in doubt, except in detail. Derby was probably instrumental in determining the sentence, for, despite his recorded opinion that it 'was safer much to take mens Lives than their Estates', he had no desire to create a martyr. 5 ' Christian was confined in Peel Castle, where he was held until the Isle of Man fell to Parliament in 1651. ;i "

Although the potential revolt had been avoided, Derby did not leave the island until February 1644, and then it was almost certainly news from Lancashire which persuaded him to return to England. He may well have received the summons from Charles I to attend a Parliament at Oxford on 22 January, but though the number of merchant vessels calling at the island's ports in no way diminished during the 1640s, he was either unable or unwilling to risk the long and dangerous journey. 30 The defeat of the Royalist forces under Byron at Nantwich on 25 January had an altogether greater impact, since it had freed Parliamentarian troops to assist in the reduction of the two remaining Royalist outposts in Lancashire, Greenhalgh Castle and Lathom House. When he had quit the county, Derby had left his wife, the redoubtable Charlotte de la Tremouille, to super­ vise the defence of Lathom, which had become an important refuge for the embattled local Royalists. On 24 February the Lancashire County Committee decided to despatch col­ onels Assheton, Rigby, and Moore to take the house, and three days later the siege commenced. Derby appears to have crossed from the Isle of Man to Chester, from where he wrote to Prince Rupert on 7 March, requesting relief for his wife and the garrison at Lathom. 10 On 23 March, he again

Earl oj Derby 49

wrote to the prinee, urging him to take action to relieve the 'very great distress" of Lathom House and its occupants.^' Derby may then have made personal application to Rupert, joining him at Shrewsbury, or he may have returned to Chester. Whichever course he followed, he was certainly with the prince when Rupert trounced the regiments of Henry Mainwaring and Robert DuckenReld near Storkport on 25 May.^ As soon as intelligence concerning Rupert's approach was confirmed two days later, the Parliament­ arians before Lathom dispersed. On the following day Rupert, accompanied by Derby, took Bolton by storm in an action which earned Derby a reputation for cruelty through the partisan reports of Parliamentarian pamphleteers.^ Derby was an obvious target lor the pens of the king's opponents since he had been declared a traitor by Parlia­ ment as early as the summer of 1642 and continued to be an obstacle to a Parliamentarian victory in the north west, acting as a focal point for Royalist opposition, with Lathom and the Isle of Man serving as symbols of his defiance.

Derby's movements during the summer of 1644 are not certain. There seems to be no evidence that he was at Marston Moor in July nor are there conclusive signs that he was elsewhere although the other principal Lan­ cashire Royalist commanders, Molyneux and Tyldesley, were present. There may be a hint that he was in Lancashire at the time, for when Rupert returned to Lancashire after the battle with the remnants of his troops, he arrived at Lathom on 22 July to find the 'Erie of Darbye gone'." It is possible that Derby accompanied Countess Charlotte to the Isle of Man, where she landed on 30 July, but, if he did not, he must have made the crossing soon afterwards and certainly before mid-September, when he was once again in residence at Castle Rushen.^

During Derby's absence, signs of discontent had reappeared in the island. In June 1644 it was discovered that there were plans under consideration to seize the governor and the comptroller and to release Edward Christian. A number of disaffected men had met at the house of Henry Woods of Michael and, according to the testimony of Henry Galthropp of Lezayre, one of them, either Philip Canncll or John Cayne, had said that 'their speaker was imprisonned'

50 /. K. Dickmson

and that 'now was the tyme for them to helpe themselves'. If a petition for Christian's release did not achieve the desired result. Woods confidently stated that 'they would sett a guard of 2 or 300 men upon two of the officers untill Captain Christian had more liberty', and that those officers would be Greenhalgh and John Sharpies, the comptroller.*6 In August, William Christian of Knockrushen, the prisoner's brother, was indicted for treason for endorsing the plan.47 He was at first imprisoned, but was subsequently freed. Woods, Cannell, and Cayne were each fined the considera­ ble sum of £20, but no further action was taken against the conspirators. 48

Perhaps the most important source of friction between the earl and the Manx people was Derby's attitude towards the system of land tenure in the island. The Lord's tenants held their lands l by the straw', a form of customary copy­ hold by which, on the alienation of a property by whatever means, the tenant was to come into the court and 'make resignacon thereof by delivering of a Straw'. 49 Since at least the early sixteenth century, however, the Stanleys had been attempting to alter the basis of this system by encouraging the tenants to take leases of their properties for lives. Before 1643, this policy had met with little success, despite the fact that over the years several commissions had been sent to the island by the Stanleys with this end in mind. Limited personal supervision by the Lord Earl Henry was the first Stanley to visit the island in more than 150 years when he crossed the Irish Sea in 1577 and the unwillingness of the tenants to comply meant that only direct action would yield results. It was without doubt the presence of Derby and the increased number of soldiers under arms in the island at the time which accounts for the success of the commission to let the Lord's lands addressed to Greenhalgh, Sharpies, Wil­ liam Smith, the receiver, and Deemster John Cannell in December 1643. 3'1 The composition fines arising from the activities of these commissioners eventually brought in a sum in excess of £3,000. ol

It seems that Greenhalgh expected this move to cause trouble. In May 1644 the captains of the parishes were summoned to Peel to take a new oath of allegiance and, at the same time, Greenhalgh and the other officers admin-

Earl of Derby 51

istered it to those Keys 'whoe are not before sworne as Captaines'.'~ As an extra precaution, Greenhalgh took additional soldiers to the Tynwald Court in June besides those who would normally have accompanied the gover­ nor. 03 The court passed off without incident, but the simmering resentment eventually surfaced at the musters. When the captains attempted to assemble their militia companies for training, they met with considerable opposi­ tion, and, of those who refused to comply with the sum­ mons, John Lace the elder of Andreas, Patrick Kinlcy of Lezayre, and William Curghey of Michael were arrested and tried as an example to others. Lace stated that 'they would keepe noe Campe excepte they had pay from my Lord whoe had broken their Tenure'. Kinley had encour­ aged them to seize the muskets kept in Michael and, if they could find no powder and bullets, they could take the lead from the tower at Bishopscourt and 'make a mould in the Earthe or a moulde of Clay to caste bulletts in'. ;>4 The punishment meted out to these offenders indicates Derby's intention to encourage conformity. Each was fined 405. and Kinley and Curghey were imprisoned at the Lord's discretion. The latter petitioned the countess for remission of his fine on grounds of poverty and Derby, always ready to show a degree of clemency so long as his authority was not affected, gave his consent 'for my wifes sake'/' 5

During Derby's stay in the island, his principal residence was at Castle Rushen. Derby House, the Lord's house within the walls of the castle, was enlarged by his order in 1644, with the addition of a third floor. Here was located 'My Lordes bedchamber', 'my Ladies chamber', a closet, a dressing room, and a wardrobe. 0<) The inventory drawn up after the surrender of the castle in 1651 provides further information about the style in which the Derbys lived. In 'the long roome' on the second floor of the keep, which apparently served as Countess Charlotte's chamber shortly before the arrival of the Parliamentarian forces, it is recorded that there were ' 12 pillowes covered with yellow damask. 6 Stooles and 6 Chaires covered with redd velvett, 1 great chayre with redd velvett' and '3 black velvett imbroidered stooles and quishin'. There was a well stocked library with '265 bookes of great vollomes, whereof guilded

52 /. R. Dickinson

54, besides smale bookes; 8 Mapps, 3 pictures'. 57 Visitors were received and functions were held in the hall on the first floor. Thomas Parr, vicar of Malew, recorded that on Twelfth Night 1645 the earl and countess 'invited all the Officeres, temporall and sperituall, the Clergie, the 24 Keyes of the Isle, the Crowners [coroners] with all theire wives, and likewise the best sort of the rest of the Inhabi- tance of the Isle, to a great maske'. In a deliberate evocation of the masques of the Court of Charles I, Charles, Lord Strange, Derby's son and heir, appeared 'with his traine, the right ho[norajble Ladies, with their attendance, were most gloriously decked with silver and gould, broidered workes, and most costly ornaments, bracellets on there hands, chaines on there necks, jewels on there foreheads, earings in there eares, and crownes on there heads'. The enter­ tainment was followed by a great feast which. Parr observed, 'was most royall and plentiful', and the evening was rounded off with 'shuttings of ornans' [shootings of ordnan­ ce]. j!i Following the practice of the Caroline Court, this seems to have been an annual event while Derby was in the island. 59

Like the Channel Isles, the Isle of Man offered sanctuary to Royalists escaping their enemies or retreating from the unpleasant effects of war. In October 1645 Lord George Digby and Sir Marmaduke Langdale, both prominent Royalists, abandoned the remnants of the cavalry units under their command at Dumfries and found a boat to take them to the island. 60 The Committee of Both Kingdoms informed Derby in November that if the earl was, as they understood, 'desirous to procure the peace of the kingdoms', they could conceive of 'nothing likely to conduce more immediately thereto, or be more acceptable to the Parliaments of both kingdoms, than the delivery up to them' of Lord Digby, Robert Maxwell, earl of Nithsdale, Robert Dalzell, earl of Carnwath, Sir Marmaduke Langdale, Sir William Huddleston, 'and the other persons now in your power, who have been the greatest causers of these troubles'. 61 Not surprisingly, Derby ignored the request. Other Royalists of note, such as the one-legged Irish baronet and veteran soldier Sir Arthur Aston, the Chester alderman Sir Francis Gamull, and Sir Fulke Hunckes also

Earl of Derby 53

made their way to the island at one time or another, although most of the refugees stayed only for a short time/'2 Digby, for example, soon departed for Ireland, arriving in early 1646, and by May in the same year Langdale had reached France by some circuitous means. Others made use of the island as a temporary bolt hole when life in England proved too hazardous. The Catholic William Blundell of Crosby retired to the Isle of Man on two occasions, in 1646 and 1648.''* On the second occasion, he recorded that 'wearied with being so often wakened at midnight to fly from the King's and Parliament's troops (both equally feared, because equally plundering), and finding no shelter under the Snodon hills, ... I resolve[dj to banish myself voluntarily for a time in the Island of Man'. Alter the end of the second Civil War, Blundcll returned to his Lancashire estates/'^

The impression that Derby frittered away his time in the Isle of Man in playing the host to Royalist refugees, staging elaborate entertainments, and only occasionally devoting himself to practical matters would, however, be quite mis­ leading. Shortly after his arrival in June 1643, he began to strengthen the defences of the island in order to secure it against attack by Parliamentarian ships. This was the direct result of a raid by a Scottish ship on the coast of the parish of Bride and the town of Ramsey. The ship's company plundered the locality and. even allowing for the exagger­ ations of the victims' statements of their losses, carried off an impressive haul of booty. One of the parishioners, John Christian, claimed that the 'shipp men' had deprived him of three 'Incalfe Cowes', two oxen, one steer, fifty sheep, thirty geese, one fishing boat and two oars, a 'new hearing fishinge nett', an old net, five blankets, a coverlet, a 'bed ticke , a coat, two pewter dishes, some Oax, spoons, a pan. cans, stockings, a "psalter booke', and four fishing lines. Other local men reported similar if less comprehensive looting/"

In response, Derby ordered the construction of a battery at Cranstal in Bride, and at Ramsey 'caused a lew pieces of ordinance to be mounted and placed in places fitting to oppose a sudden attempt until a fort could be erected'''*' (map 1). The batteries at Ramsey were sited at Dane's Fort, near the mouth of the Ballure stream, and at Gob ny Rona,

54 /. A". DickiiLioii

to the east of Port Lewaigue. With an effective range of about 400 yards, these two batteries could not have preven­ ted a landing at the town and it is clear that another fort, closer to Ramsey, \vas needed as soon as possible to complete the system of defence. Work on Fort Loyal at the mouth of the Sulby River did not, however, commence until 1648. This delay may perhaps be explained by the inun­ dation of the town in January 1643 and the damage caused to the sea defences (the Ramsey Fence) by the high spring tides. The inhabitants of Ramsey petitioned Derby for assistance to raise 'a defence against the sea', as they had done his commissioners on a similar occasion in 1630, and orders were issued for repairs to be undertaken under the supervision of overseers. (>7 When all three batteries were in operation, they were individually equipped with a 'Whole Culvering' [culverin], a demi-culverin, and a falconet, the latter being at 'the low Fort', probably Fort Loyal. The culverin and demi-culverin, together with some shot, had been obtained from James, duke of Ormonde, Lord Lieuten­ ant of Ireland, at a cost of about £60, and shipped from Dublin in June 1645. 68

The harbour at Derbyhaven, which also served Castle- town, was protected by a stone round tower with eight gun ports, built about 1540 on St Michael's Island. This was considered inadequate to deny access to enemy ships in the 1640s and proposals for 'the buildinge of a fort on Michaells Island', presumably drafted by Derby in consultation with Greenhalgh and the other officers, were put to the Keys. In January 1645 the deemsters and Keys agreed that it was 'necessary and fitting that a fort shalbe there builded for the safty of the harbour of Randalsway [Ronaldsway] beinge one of the greatest danger in the Island'. 1 ' 9

This was graphically demonstrated by an incident in June 1645, less than two months after the fortification had been named 'Derby fort' on the anniversary of the capture of the Parliamentarian mortar piece during the siege of Lathom. On 8 June Captain Robert Page had brought his ship, the Plyodes, into Derbyhaven 'under the comande of Derby ffbarte'. Shortly afterwards, the Royalist pinnace Blessing, owned by Captain John Bartlett of Dublin, arrived, carrying the ordnance from Ormonde which was destined for the new

Earl of Derby 55

Castle Fort

Battery

'St Michael's Isle .Fort 1539-40

* Derby Fort (Battery) 1645

\ /Calf of Man " 1651'

Map 1: Fortifications ol' the Isle ol' Man, c. 1540-1651, based on R. A. Curphey, 'The coastal batteries, 1; The Lord's defences: to the revestment', Journal of the Manx Museum, VII (1966-1976), pp. 50-57.

56 J. R. Dickiiison

batteries in the north. Page, who met Derby at or near the Fort, promised, in the presence of the pinnace's captain Cornelius Monts, that 'hee would not attempt or offer any violence' to the pinnace. Whether it had been realized that the vessel was carrying ordnance for the defence of the island is uncertain, but Page and his men eventually decided, three days later, to try to seize the pinnace. Opening fire on the Royalists, he sent his long boat to take the Blessing. Only the action of the Lord's soldiers prevented Page from taking the pinnace. When questioned before Greenhalgh as to whether 'hee had any order to attempt any thinge against this Island or anv vessel! whatsoever in particular, which should come into this Islande', Page answered that he had no specific target 'but in gencrall, according to his commission'/0

The defences of Douglas were apparently not significantly strengthened during the 1640s. The only fortification was Douglas Fort, situated on the Pollock Rock at the mouth of the Douglas River, at the southern end of the crescent- shaped bay. Contemporary with the sixteenth-century stone fort on St Michael's Island, Blundell described it as 'a most considerable fort, strongly built of hard stone, round in form, upon which are a mounted tower, [and] 4 pieces of ordinance'. 71 Assuming that Blundell was accurate in his description, several additions were made to the armament of the fort before 1651. When the island surrendered, the Parliamentarians found that Douglas Fort contained four sling pieces without chambers, a saker, a falcon, and a falconet.'" Given the limited range of these guns, it may seem surprising that Derby did not have another battery constructed on the bay. Since there were a considerable number of experienced soldiers in the island at one time or another during the 1640s, men such as Aston and Hunckes, there was no lack of military expertise available to Derby and his officers. The solution to the puzzle may lie in Blundell's comment that although ships 'of great burthen may there cast anchor within the road under the shelter of 2 high rocks, mountains on each side', any vessel that might 'rashly presume to approach near unto the town without a Manks guide to conduct him, the ship is in an inevitable danger to miscarry by reason of latent rocks, on every side of

Earl of Derby 57

the fort, lying undiscoverable either at the high or low water'. /J On the other hand, James Chaloner, one of the commissioners of Lord Fairfax, Lord of Man during the interregnum, wrote in the 1650s that he considered Douglas 'the safest' harbour for shipping/4

In spite of its dominant position on St Patrick's Isle, Peel Castle could not preyent enemy ships from entering the bay and making a landing at Peel. In about 1540 a round stone battery, similar in layout to that on St Michael's Island, had been added to the already formidable defences of the castle and sited on the Horse Rock on the northern, seaward side. It could not, however, solve the problem. The cannon of the period had an effective range of 400 yards, which meant that to defend a large bay several batteries were required. Since Peel and Douglas were apparently not regarded as likely places for an attempted landing, no additional fortifications were deemed necessary. If the enemy were to appear, the system of watch and ward the day and night watch kept from certain hills and at the ports would operate to raise the militia for the defence of the island' 1 (map 2). After the experience of the raid on the northern coast in 1643, Derby seems nevertheless to have thought it advisable, at the suggestion of Sir Arthur Aston, to construct the battery on Peel Hill which bore the latter's name. Blundell noted that the 'skonce' was built 'to stop any relief which might be brought by boats in case the castle shou'd either rebel or be besieged'/6 When rebellion broke out after Derby's depar­ ture in 1651, Aston's battery was doubtless used against the Manx rebels who briefly held Peel Castle. 77

The Calf of Man was fortified and in 1651 occupied by a company of soldiers. Two batteries were built, one above South Harbour, on the south side of the islet, and the other at Fold Point, overlooking Grant's Harbour and the Sound on the north-east side. 78 Around Bishopscourt in Michael, normally the residence of the bishop of Sodor and Man but vacant, like the see, since the death of Bishop Richard Parr in 1644, Derby constructed large ramparts, a ditch, and a glacis with bastions at each corner. 711 This was much larger than the similar earthen fort at Ballacurry in Andreas, in the centre of the northern plain, which may have been built at about the same time as the batteries at Peel, Douglas, and St

58 /. R.

* Day watch hills Night watch ports

- ' Parish boundaries

Tg Land over 150m

km 8

Map 2: Watch and ward stations in the Isle of Man, 1627, from B. R. S. Mcgaw, 'A thousand years of Watch and Ward: from Viking beacon to Home Guard', Journal of the Manx Museum, V (1941-1946), p. 10 (Reproduced by courtesy of the Manx Museum and National Trust).

Earl of Derby 59

Michael's Island, in the early sixteenth century80 (map 1).To finance his activities Derby needed money. Although

lie could legitimately call on his tenants to perform their customary labour services for some of the necessary building work, he still had to pay his officers and soldiers, furnish them with arms and ammunition, and purchase supplies from merchants visiting the island. Even though the Stanleys enjoyed rights of purveyance which enabled them to buy goods at a special Lord's price, there was a constant drain on Derby's resources. The income from his tenants' lands, the rents due in lieu of customary payments in kind, and the customs revenue amounted to about £1,600 per annum in the late 1640s, but almost all of this total was accounted for by fees paid to the officers and soldiers, extraordinary and customary payments for services rendered, and sums paid to craftsmen and workmen for their materials and labour. 81

This shortage of ready cash was the principal reason behind the commission to set the Lord's lands for lives in 1643. Although relatively successful, it inevitably took some­ time for the fines to be collected. The death of Bishop Parr in March 1644 provided Derby with an opportunity to augment his income which he was not slow to seize. The patronage of the bishopric lay in his hands by virtue of the original grant of 1406, and he was at liberty to choose a 'Reverend and Holy Man' as long as his nominee was acceptable to the king. 8 -' Derby, always alert to new sources of cash, chose to leave the see vacant and to enjoy the episcopal revenues himself, while the episcopal authority was exercised through Archdeacon Samuel Rutter, Derby's chaplain. It was not such a great prize, however, as the diocese was very poor by comparison with English sees. Writing to Archbishop Laud in 1634, Hugh Cannell, vicar of Michael and assistant vicar general, reported that the bishopric was worth only £140 per annum 'by reason of leases made by the late Bishop'. 1" Derby was not disheart­ ened for, as he noted with some satisfaction, 'in a few Yeares, the Leases will be expired; and then the Bishoprick shallbe worth the having'. 84 Nevertheless, in 1651 the yield of the bishop's revenue was still disappointingly low, bring­ ing only £109 Is. \\d. into the Lord's coffers. 85

60 J. R. Dickinson

Derby also used other methods to generate income. In August 1648 the Keys consented to 'a general! laye and assessment', probably through the persuasion of Derby, Greenhalgh, or both, 'fTor and towards [Derby's] supply in the Honourablle Expedicon hee is aboute fibr his Majesties service'. 8t> The nature of this mission was not mentioned, nor has any other indication of its purpose been discovered, but it is possible that Derby was considering an attempt to join the Scottish army then in Lancashire. If this was the case, it was a piece of good fortune for him that lie did not make the crossing: the Scots were defeated at Preston on 18 August and subsequently surrendered en masse at VVar- rington.8/ The assessment was to be paid by all the inha­ bitants of the island, each paying 'accordingc to the proporcon of Meale which was lastc assessed upon them flbr the victualing of the Castles' at the rate of 6s. 8d. per firlot. 88 This had been a useful scheme to provision the garrisons, but, since the harvest in England in 1647 had been particu­ larly bad, and had probably been at least as bad in the island, it is unlikely that the Manx would have any grain to spare and doubtless little money either. A certain sum was collected but, when the 'intended jorny for England' was abandoned, the money was returned. 811

In the same year Derby wrote to the Keys, requesting a loan of £500 'ffrom the Tenaments and ITarmors of this Islande'. The Keys, who showed little sign of opposition, directed that a mark should be levied from all quarterlands [i.e. farmland] in the island. They added that if the amount collected did not come to £500, 'Cotters, Intacke houlders and Towncsmen', who had not made a contribution, would be assessed. 90 Derby also made direct appeals to his ten­ ants. These seem to have had only limited success. A call issued to the parishes of Santan, Malew, Arbory, and Rushen in particular elicited responses from a mere handful of willing contributors, all of whom were either connected with the island's administration or otherwise came from the ranks of the 'better sort': Henry Taylor of Rushen, probably a soldier in the garrison of Castle Rushen; Captain Richard Stevenson of Balladoole, Arbory; William Tyldesley of the Friary, Arbory; William Christian of Ronaldsway, Malew, the receiver; Thomas Huddleston of Malew, a member of

Earl of Derby 61

the Keys; Captain William Huddleston of Ballahot, Malew; and Robert Barrey, the water bailiff and constable of Castle Rushen. Derby, 'having not met with such successe I did then expect', attributed this poor return to 'the disabilitie and urgent Occasions of some and the colde Affections of others'. He was not deterred, for he was assured that 'manie more will be willing to contribute in like proportion to the present victually of my Garrisons'.'" In October 1649 he ordered that approaches should be made to 'such as are reputed of ablest Estates', in Santan, Malew, Arbory. and Rushen 'to treate with them concerning such sumes as (of their owne Accorde) they will be willing to contribute to the present and so necessarie service'. ' n As an inducement, he promised that the money or victuals would be repaid 'so soone as God shall enable us'; but the tenants either could not or would not pay. Out of almost the entire population of the island only two dozen answered the Lord's request, and most of these were the larger landholders or, again, mem­ bers of Derby's administration, who would be expected to comply with his wishes. The largest single contributions came from Deemster John Christian of Milntown, Lezayre, and Thomas Moore of the Abbey, near Ballasalla, Malew. 93

Money was also raised by assessments for specific pur­ poses, and particularly for the purchase of arms and ammu­ nition. The militia may well have been short of weapons in 1643, but Derby had made some effort even before 1640 to ensure that they were at least reasonably well trained. In 1639, at the same time as he was mustering the militia of Lancashire and Cheshire for the king's service against the Scots Covenanters, Derby had attempted to secure the Isle of Man against possible attack by sending a Mr Lee to the Island 'ffor the exercysinge and dissplyninge of our men in the use of their Armes'. Lee had been awarded a salary of £13 6s. 8d., to be levied from the tenants and farmers, but, by October in that year, he had received nothing and an order had to be given by the governor and officers for the collection of an assessment to pay him. Distraints were to be levied on the goods of defaulters to guarantee that the muster master obtained his wages.94

After acquiring guns for the new batteries at Ramsey, probably with some of the proceeds from the composition

62 J. R. Dukiihun

fines, Derby turned his attention back to the militia. In November 1645, to correct 'the defect of Armes in this Island', Greenhalgh, the officers, and Keys ordered that 'one thousand dirkes or skeynes' be provided by levying from the parishioners 2s. 6d. for each weapon allocated to their parish. 9;) In the following March the sum of £75 was set to be collected from the country to pay for a similar number of 'halfe pykes', which were to be made with 'all convenient speede'.96 These extraordinary levies were not imposed without causing a good deal of resentment, although ill- feeling surfaced only occasionally. In 1647 Richard Rowany of Andreas objected to the assessment laid on him by the four men 'sworne for the assessment of pikes' in the parish and said that 'hee would not give a strawe for their oathes'. 97 Such minor outbursts concealed a good deal more discontent, and the longer the unusual demands for grain and money continued, the greater was the likelihood that this would manifest itself in open opposition to Derby.

After the bad harvests of 1647 and 1648 the island experienced considerable hardship and food shortages and higher prices meant that the Manx were less able to support Derby's activities. In May 1649 the Keys considered the position of the militia companies following a proposal from Derby that 100 light muskets be obtained 'in steccl of those which are heavie Musketts that the people are not able to beare'. They determined that those 'able in estate' were to provide themselves with a musket if necessary, but they would give no further order 'in regarde of the greate poverty and scarsety divers of the Countrey are in at this present'. 98 However difficult the position of the inhabitants might be, assessments still had to be paid to permit the purchase of vital supplies. In April 1650, at Derby's direction, the officers and Keys ordered \0s. to be levied from every quarter of land [i.e. farmland] to raise the sum of £415 to buy 'Plaine Powder and Amunicon which is now brought into the Countrey from Holland as sent hither by some honourablle ffreinds of his Lordships'. If required, the able Tntacke houlders, Tradesmen and Townesmen' were also to be assessed and the clergy, under the supervision of Archdeacon Rutter, were to supply a 'competent' sum. 99

While Derby prepared the defences of the Isle of Man to

Earl uj Derby 63

resist the expected Parliamentarian attack, his English estates had been sequestrated by Parliament's authority. Although he had been impeached for high treason by Parliament even before the siege of Manchester in Septem­ ber 1642, it seemed that he was ready to try to negotiate for peace with his opponents. In October 1644 Sir John Mel- drum established contact with Derby through his agent, Major Ashhurst, who had been present at the siege of Latliom. Meldrum hoped that by persuading Derby to surrender, 'the accessary members' of the Royalist party in Lancashire 'might be more easily tempted to follow the example'. 100 He believed that Derby was 'inclinable to any course which may give the Parliament contentment', but he was not prepared to countenance any arrangement which left Lathom House or Greenhalgh Castle in Royalist hands."" Much as Derby may have desired a settlement which would have halted the erosion of the Stanley estates in the county, it is unlikely that he would have consented to a deal involving the loss of further Stanley property, particularly Lathom. It seems rather that he was playing for time. In his letter to Meldrum, he expressed himself ready to accept the surrender of Lathom and Greenhalgh Castle so long as he might 'expect to have fair and noble dealings'. 102 Negotia­ tions continued until at least December, when Meldrum wrote to the Committee of Both Kingdoms that the 'Earl of Derby's resolution ... is expected daily'.'"' He was appar­ ently confident that agreement would be reached, asking whether 'after the full accomplishment of the treaty, [the earl] may not begin his journey towards London, and stay at St. Albans until he shall receive order from both Houses or from your Lordships to come to London'. 104 The Committee seems not to have shared Meldrum's optimistic assessment of the earl's intentions, and in this they were proved right. In view of Derby's later explicitly stated refusal to deliver up the Isle of Man and his antipathy towards the king's enemies, whom he compared to 'Wolves' and denigrated as 'worse than Beasts', it is clear that any agreement made with Meldrum would not have been honoured any longer than necessary. 100 Significantly, Derby's name was the first after those of the princes Rupert and Maurice of Nassau in the list of Royalists who were to expect no pardon which was

64 J. R. Dickimon

included in the Propositions of Newcastle sent to the king in July 1646." )()

Military preparations in the Isle of Man continued in anticipation of the expected and inevitable attempt to take the island for Parliament. Captain Thomas Stanley 10 ' was appointed in 1644 to supervise the training of the militia at two camps, one for the north side of the island at Knock y Doonee and the other for the south side, the location of which is not certain. lu8 Derby had already selected Stanley to take charge of the mounted militia, the 'Muster horses' of each parish, in September 1643.' 0<J In the following May musters of the 'best horse[sj in the island' were ordered to take place immediately in each sheading. 110 To provide experienced troops to bolster the unseasoned Manxmen, Derby aimed to secure the services of men who had seen action in the war. In April 1644 plans were approved 'ffor the puttinge of the Cuntrie in a posture of defence againste fforraigne invasions' which involved recruiting 'Seaventeene Sergeants, two trumpetters, and a drum Maior out of England or Ireland, to aide and assiste Captainc Barrowes, whoe is nowe in the Islande', and the parish captains in organizing the forces."' With the removal of Edward Christian as sergeant major in 1643, overall command had devolved upon Derby himself, but two years later, perhaps in preparation for his departure for England, if and when the opportunity should arise, Derby chose to appoint his trusted right-hand man, Governor John Greenhalgh, as lieutenant general to act in his stead."-

Despite the dismal failure of the Royalists in the second Civil War in 1648, the king's party still held to the hope that Charles I could be delivered from his enemies. The trial and execution of the king in January 1649 dealt a stunning blow to Royalist morale and was a considerable shock to the people of his kingdoms at large. Quite how the news was received in general in the Isle of Alan is unclear, but there can be little doubt that Derby and his officers realized that the newly established Republic would now turn its attention to outposts of Royalist resistance and look for assistance from discontented elements in their locality. In February 1649 the Council of State considered the reduction of Royalist strongholds in Ireland, Guernsey, Jersey, and the

Earl of Derby 65

Isle of Man." J Ireland was. of course, the principal concern, but in the interval before undivided attention could be given to the Royalist privateering bases, other methods were adopted in an eflbrt to secure them. Henry Ireton wrote to Derby, requesting that he surrender the island; Derby returned a stinging reply to the effect that he was 'so far from delivering this Island to your advantage that I will keep it to the utmost of my power to your destruction'. In words often quoted by historians of the Stanleys, he warned Ireton that "if you trouble me with any more Messages upon this occasion, I will burn the paper and hang the bearer'."^ Six days later, on 18 July. Derby issued a declaration, which was allegedly printed in secret in London, 'to hold out this island to the advantage of his Majesty, and the annoyance of all rebels and their abettors'. He invited 'all my allies, friends, and acquaintances, all my tenants in the counties of Lancaster and Chester, or elsewhere, and all other his Majesty's faithful and loyal subjects, to repair to this island, as their general rendezvous and safe harbour'."^"

If an expedition against the island was expected as a result, it did not materialize. This was for the simple reason that the Council of State and the army had other more pressing business at hand, especially in Ireland. Even though the army's supplies had to be transported across the Irish Sea, there were no men or ships to spare to deal with an island which, while a Royalist base, posed little serious threat to the continuation of the Irish campaign. In August 1650. after a complaint from the Irish Committee, the Admiralty Committee informed the Navy Commissioners that there was 'great want of a ship of force for transporting treasure, men, horses, etc., into Ireland, from Chester and Liverpool, and for plying about the Isle of Man, where pirates and pickeroons lurk, to the great prejudice of trade and passengers V* This was something of an exaggeration since, judging from the island's customs revenue, trade in the Irish Sea. at least with the Isle of Man. actually increased in volume in the 1640s."'

That privateers operated out of the Isle of Man cannot be denied. In fact, they proved to be reasonably successful in the later part of the decade. Captain Cotterell, one of the leading Royalist privateers, captured an Irish barque in

66 /. R. Dickinsnn

August 1649 and brought it into Peel. From subsequent testimony, it appeared that this was not the first time that the vessel's voyage had been interrupted; John Blythe, one of the merchants on board, stated that some of the parcel of sack which he was shipping 'was wasted and druncke by the Company of two parliament firigots who before tooke them and kept them three or four dayes'. 118 Another privateer frequently operating out of Manx waters was Captain George Bradshaw. In June 1650 he seized the Mary of Liverpool off the Irish coast, near Carrickfergus, 'with a longe boate from the Hand of Man, manned with Sixteene Oares', and armed with '2 guns, one murderer, and several musketts'. The vessel was taken to the island where George Saver, the factor of Robert Massey of Warrington, petitioned Derby about the detention of his master's goods which formed part of the cargo. He obtained no satisfaction, but had to be content with Derby's uncompromising answer that 'a fifteenth parte he did take for the Kinge, a tenth parte for himself, and the Remainder for the taker'."'* During August, Captain John Bartlett, a regular visitor to the Isle of Man, was particularly active. On 4 August Bartlett, in 'His Majesty's frigate Elizabeth', captured the fishing boat Hopewell of Yarmouth near the Faroe Islands and confiscated its cargo of 7,000 fish. At the end of the month, having returned to home waters, he took the Michael of Liverpool en route from Drogheda to Liverpool with a cargo of horses, skins, hides, and linen cloth. 120

Derby's absence from England has sometimes been ascribed to his disenchantment with the Royalist high command, which seems to have grown from the beginning of the war. In 1642 Charles I rejected his suggestion that the royal standard should be raised at Warrington, a decision which may have injured Derby's pride, but which he recog­ nized the king had the right to make. More serious was his inability to secure reinforcements for the struggle in Lan­ cashire and the king's attempt to override Derby's right of presentation to the bishopric of Sodor and Man. The last straw may well have been his treatment at the hands of Prince Rupert in 1644. If Seacome is to be believed, the Prince justified the appointment of men other than Derby to positions of authority by saying that he was fully acquainted

Earl oj Derby 67

with the 'vile and Scurrilous Suggestions and Insinuations to his Majesty, that it was not safe to trust him with too much Power, who had so near an Alliance to the Crown, and knew so well how to use it to his own Advantage'.'" 1 Claren­ don, whose opinion of Derby may have been influenced by the unsympathetic reports of Molyneux and Tyldesley, certainly reflects this hostility.'"2 Other parties had different views. To the Parliamentarians, Derby was escap­ ing from the war; the newspaper the Perfect Diurnal noted contemptuously in June 1643 that the earl was 'at his house in Holy Island'. 1 " 3 William Blundell's somewhat ambiguous comment was that 'his residence there seemed to be but as a refuge or a retiring place from the noise and troubles which were then in England, and especially in Lancashire, his own shire'. 124

Whatever his reasons, Derby had nevertheless shown himself ready to leave the island to join the Royalists in 1648 and, when plans for the campaign of 1651 were being laid, he was closely involved. Derby was in contact with Sir Philip Musgrave in Cumberland, making arrangements for a crossing with a force of Manxmen. The link between the earl and the Royalists in Scotland was maintained by Captain Isaac Birkenhead, and when the latter was captured at Greenock in March, Derby's plans suffered a setback. Musgrave, who had accompanied Birkenhead, managed to escape and reached the Isle of Man. The Council of State, determined to frustrate any Royalist plans, despatched a squadron of twelve ships to the Irish Sea and the Isle of Man in particular, but, in spite of the navy's efforts, contact between the island and Scotland was quickly restored. 123

Before finally leaving for England, Derby took further steps to improve the island's defences. In April 1651 a weekly assessment in the parishes was instituted for the maintenance of a force of 170 soldiers. The towns were exempted 'by reason of the gards to bee kepte in them Everie night'. 126 On 8 August, four days before he left for England, an order was issued for a quarter of the weekly assessment to be set aside for a company of forty soldiers to protect the Calf. 127 These precautions were designed to make it easier for the countess, who was left in charge at

68 J. R. Difkinson

Castle Rushen, to hold the island against external attack or internal rebellion. That feeling was running high in the island as a result of the unusual burdens of the 1640s is clear from the attempt made on Derby's life in August 1650. Returning from Captain Bartlett's ship at Derbyhaven, Derby 'escaped a great danger of being killed in a Mankes Boat' by a shot fired from the very ship he had just left. It is not certain whether this was an accident, as was claimed, or whether it was a premeditated attempt on his life; Derby himself had his own suspicions in this respect, recording in his diary that the shot was fired '(whether by chance or no is doubtfull)'. One of Derby's companions in the boat, Richard VVeston, was killed outright and another, Colonel Snead, was seriously wounded. Derby reflected that he, 'sitting in the midst of them escaped by the great goodness of Almighty God'. 128

The misfortune which dogged the Lancashire Royalists in the late spring of 1643 seems also to have followed Derby in the campaign of 1651. When he left the Isle of Man for Lancashire on 12 August, Derby was accompanied by a force of about 300 men, including sixty horse. According to one report, disaster struck as the boats carrying the earl's forces were about to land on the VVyre, when two of the vessels appear to have been badly damaged. 129 On the march southwards through Lancashire, Derby's force clashed with a Parliamentarian patrol at YVigan Lane on 25 August. Most of the Manx soldiers and a number of notable Royalists, including Sir Thomas Tyldesley, were killed. The remnants of Derby's 'army' hurried to join the main Royal­ ist army, which was finally defeated at Worcester on 3 September. Derby escaped with a few followers, but ran into a detachment under the command of Captain Oliver Edge. Derby surrendered on the promise of quarter, but it had already been decided that he would face a court martial. Following the trial at Chester Castle, the outcome of which was a foregone conclusion, Derby was taken to Bolton, the scene of his alleged misdeeds in 1644, and beheaded on 15 October.

The discontent which had been simmering in the island finally erupted after Derby's departure. Encouraged by the receiver, William Christian of Ronaldsway, the disaffected

Earl of Derby 69

elements, estimated to be about 800 men in all, gathered at Christian's house and took an oath 'that the people should withstand the Lady of Derby in her designes until shee had yealded or condissended to their aggreavances'. The mal­ contents included many of the parish captains and it was consequently a relatively simple task for them to persuade their discontented men to join their cause. The militia took the forts, apparently without bloodshed, but the castles refused to capitulate. When a Parliamentarian force under Colonel Robert Duckenfield finally managed to land in October, after weathering storms in the Irish Sea, only Castle Rushen and Peel Castle were held by the countess. Once she received news of her husband's execution, she realized that further resistance was futile, and the island was surrendered to Parliament on 1 November. 150

Historians have perhaps been too quick to accept the assessment of Derby's military ability by contemporary observers. As Dr Peter Newman has shown, when Derby commanded adequate forces, as he did at Preston in March 1643, he was at the least a competent commander. 131 Foll­ owing the defeat of the Royalists at Whalley, however, Derby found himself with little possibility of raising more troops in Lancashire in the short term and deprived of support from the queen's army by developments elsewhere. His withdrawal to the Isle of Man a few months later, apparently with the encouragement of the queen and her advisers, may only have been intended as temporary, the aim being the suppression of the unrest fomented by Edward Christian and the strengthening of the island's defences. If it was part of a longer term strategic plan, it may have been a calculated move to protect the sea route to Ireland so that the Trish' army could cross to England in safety. If this was the case, Derby's absence from Lancashire left the Royalists in the county without their most promi­ nent leader.

The Isle of Man may not have been one of the most important Royalist strongholds during the Civil Wars, but Derby's possession of the island did provide the king's party with a base in the Irish Sea and, more importantly, preven­ ted Parliament from making use of it. This was particularly significant in the winter of 1643-4, when part of the Irish

70 J. R. Dirkinson

army was being transported to England to fight for the king. The island also served as a haven for Royalists and for privateers with a commission from the king, who preyed on Irish Sea traffic, though not, it would seem, to the detriment of the island's trade. Derby devoted most of his time in the island to improving its defences, by creating or improving the forts and developing, at least on paper, a sizeable militia force to man them. Derby might have played a more prominent role in the wars had he remained in England, but the evidence reveals conclusively that he did not retire from the conflict by leaving Eancashire for the Isle of Man.

NOTES

1 Before his father's death on 29 Sept. 1642, Derby was known by the courtesy title of Lord Strange. To avoid confusion, he is referred to here throughout as Derby.

2 E. Broxap, The Great Civil War in Lancashire (1642-1651) (Manchester, 1910, reprinted 1973), pp. 85-86; Anon., Description of sieges and battles in the North (1785), p. 125, cited in F. R. Raines (ed.f, The Stanley Papers, part 3, vol. I (C.S., O.S., LXVI, 1867), p. Ixxxix.

3 Raines, Stanley Papers, part 3, vols I and II (C.S., O.S, LXVI and LXVII 1867), passim; F. J. Leslie, 'James, seventh earl of Derby', T.H.S.L.C., XLI (1889), pp. 147-174.

4 Dictionary of National Biography, LIV (1898), pp. 71-73; Broxap, Great Civil War, pp. 25 26; P. R. Newman, Royalist officers in England and Wales, 1642-1660: a biographical dictionary (1981),'p. 356; idem, 'The royalist army in northern England, 1642-5' (unpub. D.Phil, thesis, York Univ.,'l978), pp. 158-159.

5 Derby's military contribution in the early 1640s has been re- examined in Newman, thesis. His apparently difficult relationship with the other principal Royalist commanders in Lancashire, Molyneux and Tyldesley, has been discussed in J. M. Gratton. 'The military career of Richard, Lord Molyneux, c. 1623-54, T.H.S.L.C., CXXXIV (1985), pp. 17-37. The question of Derby's success as a recruiter for the king has been dealt with by J. L. Malcolm, 'A king in search of soldiers: Charles I in 1642', Historical Journal [hereafter H.J.], XXI (1978), pp. 268-269; and eadem, Caesar's due: loyalty and King Charles, 1642-1646 (London, 1983), pp. 79-88. Professor Mal­ colm's charge that Derby and other major landowners were guilty of using coercion to recruit soldiers from their tenants and the local militia has been challenged by M. D. G. Wanklyn and P. Young, 'A king in search of soldiers: Charles I in 1642: a rejoinder, H.J., XXIV (1981), pp. 147-154.

6 J. Seacome, Memoirs: containing a genealogical and historical account of the ancient and honourable house oj Stanley (Manchester, 1767), p. 76.

Earl of Derby 71

7 Derby .s contingent probably joined the kind's army at Meri- den Heath in Warwickshire: Wanklyn and Young. 'Rejoinder',p. 151.

8 Mejcurius Aulicus, 15 Mar. 1643. cited in Broxap. (treat Civil \\'ar. p. 75, n. 2.

9 Broxap, Great Civil H'ar, p. 84.10 M. A. E. Green (ed.), The letters of Qiieen Henrietta Maria (London.

1857), p. 190.11 G. Ormerod (ed.). Tracts relating to mililan proceedings in Lancashire

during the Great Civil ll'ar (C.S., O.S., II. 1844) [hereafter C.U'.T.}. p. 160.'

12 James [Stanley], seventh earl of Derby. The history and antiquities of the Isle oj .Man. in F. R. Raines (ed.). Stanley Papers, part 3. vol. Ill (C.S., O.S.', LXX, 1867). p. 9.

13 Acts uf the Privy Council of England. 1592-3, ed. J. R. Dasent (London.1901), p. 53. "

1 1 Derby. History and antiquities, p. 9.15 Ibid.'16 Ibid.17 W. Bcamont (ed.), .1 discourse of the warr in Lancashire (C.S., O.S.,

LXII, 1864), p. 37.18 A. W. Moore, A history of the Isle of Man (2 vols. London, 1900,

reprinted Douglas, 1977), I, p. 235.19 Manx Museum Library [henceforth M.M.L.], MD401/1716/27

[Knowsley Papers, formerly held at Lancashire Record Office and classed DDK]; M.M.L., Liber Scaccarii 1634. inter 32-33; W. Knowler (ed.). The earl of Strafford's letters and dispatches (London, 1739), I, pp. 135, 136, 154.

20 M.M.L., Rolls Office 43. Proceedings against Captain Edward Christian. 13 Dec. 1643 [hereafter Rolfs Office 43].

21 Ibid.22 Moore, History, I, p. 236; Derby. History and antiquities, p. 11.23 M.M.L., Rolls Office 43.24 Ibid.25 Derby, History and antiquities, p. 10.26 M.M'.L., Rolls Office 43.27 Derby, History and antiquities, pp. 22-23.28 M.M'.L., Rolls Office 43; Derby, History and antiquities, p. 26.29 M.M.L.. Rolls Office 43.30 Christian served as an officer and subsequently as captain of the

East India Company vessels Hosiander and Globe: W. Foster (ed.), The voyage of Thomas Best to the East Indies, 1612-14 (Hakluyt Society, second' series, LXXV, 1934), pp. 55, 297 n. 4. Through his connection with Buckingham, Christian appears to have secured a post on the king's frigate Bonaventure: A. W. Moore, Alan.\ worthies (Douglas, 1901, reprinted 1971), pp. 60-63. His career is outlined in Derby, History and antiquities, pp. 30-32.

31 M.M'.L.. Rolls Office 43.32 Ibid.

72 ,/. R. Dickinsnn

33 J. F. Gill fed.). The statutes oj the Isle of Man, I, 1417-1824 (1883), 'pp. 92-99.

34 Derby, His/on* and antiquities, p. 28.35 M.M.L., Rolls Office 43: Derby, History and antiquities, pp. 40-41.36 M.M.L., Rolls Ollice 43.37 Derby, Historr and antiquities, p. 41.38 Moore, Manx worthies, p. 63.39 S. R. Gardiner, History of the Great Civil H'ar, 1642-1649 (revised edn.

London. 1893. reprinted 1987), I, p. 259.40 B.L., Additional MS. 18981, f. 81.41 B. E. G. Warburton (ed.). Memoirs of Prince Rupert and the Cavaliers (3

vols. London, 1849), I. p. 363.42 C.'. V. Wedgwood, The King's War. 1641-1647 (London, 1958, reprin­

ted Harmondsworth, 1983), p. 320; R. N. Dore, The Civil IVars in Cheshire (Chester, 1966), p. 40.

43 C.li'.T., pp. 188-198.44 C. H. Firth (ed.), The journal of Prince Rupert's marches, 5 Sept.

1642 to 4 July 1646, Eng. H.R., XIII (1898), p. 737.45 Diary of James [Stanley], seventh earl of Derby in F. R. Raines

(ed.)', Stanley Papers, part 3, vol. Ill (C.S., O.S., LXX, 1867), p. 4; M.M.L., Lib. Scacc. 1644, inter 47-48.

46 M.M.L., Lib. Scacc. 1644, 82-83.47 Ibid., 46.48 Ibid., 84.49 M.M.L., Lib. Scacc. 1636, quoted in M.M.L., MS. 15040; John Parr,

An abridgement or short tract of the most usejull laives acts and ordinances conteyned in the Statute Book of this Isle of Man ( 1679), p. 87.

50 Statutes, p. 100. Only a relatively small number of leases survive from the period before 1643. A clear indication that the Manx, and even some of the island's administration, were reluctant to comply with Derby's wishes can be seen by the fact that only fifteen leases were made with the commissioners sent over to the island in 1630, and of these, eight were not executed: M.M.L., MD401/1725/4-18. There can be little doubt that more leases were made before 1643 than arc now extant, but the vast majority of the Manx continued to hold their property by the customary tenure. This is confirmed in an anonymous account of the island written in the early 1660s by an author with first-hand knowledge of the subject, who stated that only 'some few . . . held by lease' before 1643: Clwyd R.O., Nantlys MS. D/NA/905, 7. The success of Derby's drive to force the Manx to accept leases is discussed in B. Coward, The Stanleys, Lords Stanley and earls of Derby, 1385-1672 (C.S., third series, XXX^ 1983), p. 63."

51 Clwyd R.O., Nantlys MS. D/NA/905, 3. By June 1648 John Sharpies, the controller, had received £2,870 9j. Id. in lines: M.M.L., Rolls Office, Books of disbursement of John Sharpies, controller of the Isle of Man, 17 Jan. and 10 Feb. 1644; 20 Jan. 1645; 20 June 1648, cited in Coward, Stanleys, p. 63.

52 M.M.L., Lib. Scacc. 1644, inter 16-lY53 Ibid., 75.

Earl of Derby 73

54 Ibid., 70-71.55 Ibid., inter 88-89.56 R. A. Curphey, Ancient centres of government in the Isle of Man (Douglas,

n.d.), p. 29.57 J.H. Stanning (ed.). The Royalist Composition Papers, vol. II (R.S.L.C.,

XXVI, 1892) [hereafter R.C.P.], p. 199.58 W. Harrison (ed.), Mona Miscellany, second series (Manx Society,

XXI, Douglas. 1873), p. 258.59 Parr recorded 'such another feast' on the same day the year before:

ibid.60 D. Stevenson, Revolution and Counter-Revolution in Scotland. 1644-1651

(London, 1977), pp. 43-44; C. H. Firth (ed.), The memoirs of Edmund Ludlow, Lieutenant-General of the Horse in the army of the Commonwealth of England, 1625-1672 (2 vols, Oxford, 1894), I, p. 126.

61 Calendar of State Papers, Domestic [hereafter C.S.P.D.], 1645-1647, pp. 242-243.

62 M.M.L., Lib. Scacc. 1649, inter 24-25, 29, 43, 48-49.63 M. Blundell (ed.). Cavalier: letters of H'illiam Blundell to his friends.

1620-1W8 (London. 1933), pp. 19. 32-33.64 W. Blundell, A history of the Isle of Man, ed. VV. Harrison (2 vols, Manx

Soc., XXV and XXVII, 1876'and 1877). I. pp. xxiii. 91; Blundell, Cavalier, p. 35.

65 M.M.L., Lib. Scacc. 1643, 45-47.66 Blundell, History, I, p. 91.67 M.M.L., Lib. Scacc. 1644, 36.68 Mercurius Politicus, no. 75, 6 Nov.-13 Nov. 1651, cited in VV. Harrison

(ed.), Illiam Dhone and the Manx rebellion, 1651 (Manx Soc., XXVI. Douglas, 1877), p. 75; M.M.L., Lib. Scacc. 1645, inter 60-65. There was no standard classification of types of ordnance in this period. The culverin was the largest of the guns mentioned, but could vary from about 9 ft to 1 1 ft in length, with a calibre of 51 in., firing shot of up to approximately 18 Ib. in weight. The demi-culverin was about 9 ft long, having a calibre of 4 in. and firing shot of about 9 II). in weight. The falconet was a smaller gun, about 6 ft in length, with a calibre of 2 in. and firing shot of about 1 Ib. in weight: R. A. Curphey, 'The coastal batteries of the Isle of Man. 1; The Lord's defences: to the revestment', Journal of the Manx Museum [hereafter /JO/. |, VII (1966-1976), p.'57.

69 M.M.L., Lib. Scacc. 1645, 37-38, 56.70 Ibid., 72-74.71 Blundell, History, I, p. 89.72 Mercurius Politicus. no. 75, 6 Nov.-13 Nov. 1651, cited in Harrison,

Illiam Dhone, p. 75. Sling pieces were light guns with detachable chambers, firing shot of between about 2 Ib. and 4 Ib. in weight. A saker was between 6 ft and 8 ft in length, with a calibre of 3j in. and firing shot of approximately 6 Ib. weight. A falcon was only slightly larger than a falconet, being similar in length, about half an inch larger in calibre, and delivering 2 Ib. shot: Curphey. 'Coastal batteries', p. 57.

74 ./. R. Dickinson

73 Blundfll. History, I, p. 89.74 J. Chaloner, .1 short treatise of the file of Man. ed. J. G. Cuiiiining

(Manx Soc.. X, Douglas. 1864), p. (>.75 Blundell, History, I, pp. 50, 95-97; \V. Cubbon, 'Watch and \Vard in

A.D. 1627', Proceedings of the Isle of Man Natural History and Antiquarian Society [hereafter Prof. l.o..\f .\.H.A.S.], N.S., III (3) (1927-1928), pp. 258-263; B. R. S. Megaw, 'A thousand years of Watch and Ward: from Viking beacon to home guard', J..\I.M.. V (1941 1916). pp. 8-13.

76 Blundell, History. I. p. 92.77 Harrison. Illiam Dhone, p. 66.78 Curphey, 'Coastal batteries', p. 56.79 R. A. Curphey, 'Bishopscourt'../..!/..!/.. VII (1966-1976), p. 223.80 See the plan of Ballacurry fort, discovered by A. W. Moore, in Proc.

I.o.M.X.H.A.S., I (1906-1915), p. 126.81 M.M.L.. Derby Receipts and Disbursements [hereafter D.R.D.].

1627-1650, Books of Charge, Peel Castle. 1648 and 1649; Books of Charge, Castle Rushen. 1648 and 1649; M.M.L., Ingates and Outgates [hereafter I.O.], 1646-1659; Waterbailiffs accounts, 1648 and 1649. This figure also includes the gross income derived from the bishopric and abbey lands, based on figures for 1651: M.M.L.. D.R.D., 1651-1670, Book of Charge, abbey and bishop's revenue. 1651 and Book of abbey and bishop's spiritualities and tempor- alties, 1651-1658.

82 Derby, History and antiquities, p. 14.83 C.S.P.D., 1633-1643, p. 547. The late bishop was John Phillips, who

died in June 1633: M.M.L., MF/PR/24. Michael parish registers, burials.

84 Derb\, History and antiquities, p. 14.85 M.M'.L., D.R.D., 1651-1670, Book of abbey and bishop's revenue,

1651.86 M.M.L.. Lib. Scacc. 1648. 77.87 A. H. Woolrych. Battles of the English Civil ll'nr (1961. reprinted 1966),

chapter 8.88 M.M.L., Lib. Scacc. 1648, 77.89 M.M.L., Lib. Scacc. 1649, 5.90 Ibid., 3-4.91 M.M.L., Lib. Scacc. 1650, inter 2-3.92 Ibid.93 Ibid., 3-6.94 C.S.P.D., 1638-1639, pp. 307, 387; M.M.L., Lib. Scacc. 1639, 52-53.95 M.M.L., Lib. Scacc. 1645, 98.96 M.M.L.. Lib. Scacc. 1646, 13-14.97 M.M.L., Lib. Scacc. 1647, 76.98 M.M.L., Lib. Scacc. 1649, inter 63-64.99 M.M.L., Lib. Scacc. 1650, 35-36.

100 'An impeachment of high treason, exhibited in Parliament against James Lord Strange, son and heir apparent of William earle of Derby', in C.ll'.T., pp. 35-37.

of Derby 75

101 C.S.P.D.. 164-1-1645. p. 109.102 Ibid., p. 137.103 Ibid., p. 191.101 Ibid.105 Derby. History and antiquities, p. 7.KltJ Broxap, Great Civil dor. p. 179. Derby's name occupied the same

position in the enlarged list sent to Charles I in the Isle of Wight inOct. 1648: C.S.P.D.. 1648-164<J, p. 304.

107 Almost certainly the second son of Deemster George Stanley of Ballakeighan, Arbory (d. 1635): M.M.L.. Lib. Scacc. 1650, inter 10-11.

108 M.M.L.. Lib. Scacc. 1644, inter 29-31.109 M.M.L., Lib. Scacc. 1643, 39.110 M.M.L., Lib. Scacc. 1644, 17.111 Ibid.. 15.112 M.M.L., Lib. Scacc. 1645, 54-55.113 C.S.P.D.. 1649-1650, p. 6.114 M.M.L.. MS. 236A, Derby to Henry Ireton. 12 July 1649.115 B.L. E566. Cf. Knowsley Hall, MS.' H/137: .1 Declaration of the Right

Honourable James, Earle of Darby, Lord Stanly, Strange of Knocking, and of the Isle of Man, Concerning his Resolution to keep the Isle of Man for His Majesties service, against all force whatsoever (1649), p. 4.

116 C.S.P.D.. 1650, pp. 272-273.117 J. R. Dickinson, 'Aspects of the Isle of Man in the seventeenth

century' (unpub. Ph.D. thesis, Liverpool Univ., 1991), chapter 5 and appendix IX.

118 M.M.L., Lib. Scacc. 1650, 45.119 R.C.P., p. 131.120 M.M.L., Lib. Scacc. 1650, 83.121 C.S.P.D., 1644-1645, pp. 137-138; Seacome, Memoirs, p. 101.122 E. Hyde, earl of Clarendon, The history of the rebellion and civil wars in

England, ed. W. D. Macray (6 vols, Oxford, 1888). II. pp. 470-471.123 Perfect Diurnal. 30June 1643, in C.W.T.. p. 146.124 Blundell, History, II, p. 46.125 D. E. Underdown, Royalist conspiracy in England, 1649-1660 (New

Haven, Conn., I960), pp. 46-47, C.S.P.D., 1651, pp. 86, 88. In Mar. 1651, five Parliamentary ships were beaten off from the Calf of Man by Derby's forces: Derby, Diary, p. 3.

126 M.M.L.,' Lib. Scacc. 1651, inter 19-20.127 Ibid., 20.128 Derby, Diary, p. 4.129 B. Whitelock, Memorials of the English affairs (4 vols, Oxford, 1853),

III, p. 338.130 Harrison, Illiam D/ione, pp. 4-27; Moore, History. I, pp. 265-270.131 Newman, thesis, passim.

76 J. R. Dickinson

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to thank Dr B. \V. Quintrell of the University of Liverpool for his helpful advice and criticism in the preparation of this article.

The editors would like to thank Mr P. Robinson who re-drew the maps for Transactions.