INTRODUCTION

This political survey of the Isle of Man between 1900 and 1979 has a dual focus: the political and constitutional development of the Island from strict colonial rule to self-government, and the changing role and purpose of government in Manx society. It will make only passing reference to internal political conflicts during elections and in the House of Keys, as this requires further research. Although the works of Samuel Norris and Jeffrey Vaukins throw considerable light on elections and policy-making, both focus on the Raglan era. Research in progress by the author into elections and policy-making over the whole of the century does, however, warrant a number of general observations.

First, although there were differences of opinion both during and between elections over the pace and direction of constitutional reform, there was broad support within the Keys for the leading advocates of reform. The major exceptions were where reform related to the respective powers of Tynwald and local authorities and the distribution of seats for elections to the House of Keys, which invariably polarised opinion. Second, throughout the period up to 1979, decisive majorities were generally willing to support the development of the welfare state along UK lines and major initiatives in support of the Manx economy. Third, such internal political dissent as was manifest cannot readily be explained by reference to any single set of socio-economic, religious or cultural divisions. The few political groupings or parties that participated in Manx politics were never able to make significant inroads into the independence of members of the House of Keys (MHKs). Every vote in the Keys was a free vote, and even Manx Labour Party (MLP) members frequently found themselves taking opposite sides on an issue. Different areas of controversy produced different patterns of voting. Finally, given the small size of constituencies and electorates, candidates seriously interested in being elected or re-elected could ill afford to alienate significant groups or interests. This encouraged a predominance of relatively bland manifestos, and electors were often left to choose between personalities rather than policies.

A brief word of explanation of the periodisation may be helpful. With the agreement of Alistair Ramsay, the twentieth century has been divided into five discrete periods.