The contract gives us a lot of information but leaves two mysteries (hopefully to be solved)
Robert Corkill
We know that in 1779 he has a wife Jane. By the time he dies in 1807 he has a wife Catherine (probably Catherine Kelly nee Callow m 06/08/1786 Maughold).
There are three potential marriages to Jane
25 Jan 1772 CORKIL Robert COLLISTER Jane
15 Feb 1772 CORKIL Robt SCOTT Jane
23 Nov 1776 CORKIL Robert CALLOW Jane (on this one Robert is a widower)
There are five potential deaths linking to these marriages
Burials
CHRISTIAN, Jane Maughold 9 Oct 1773
CHRISTIAN, Jane Maughold 27 Mar 1774
CHRISTIAN, Jane Maughold 22 Oct 1774
CHRISTIAN, Jane Maughold 13 Aug 1776
CHRISTIAN, Jane Maughold 23 Jan 1786
Manx Notebook tells us that Jane Corkill als Callister is the one dying in 1776 (see her will summary)
This gives us two theories
1. Robert Corkill (Ballasloe) marries Jane Callister in 1772. She dies in 1776. Later in 1776 he marries Jane Callow who dies in 1786. Later in 1786 he marries Catherine Kelly als Callow
2. Robert Corkill (Ballasloe) marries Jane Scott in 1772. She dies before 1786 when he marries Catherine Kelly als Callow
Both theories work but which is correct – or neither?

John Corkill
We know that John Corkill Ballasloe dies in 1821 and it is reasonable to conclude that this is the John Corkill who aquires Ballasloe through the contract. BUT is this as suggested previously John son of James and Catherine? James has a son John mentioned in his will but is this him buying Ballasloe. My reading of the contract is that John already has £240 loaned to James Corkill Ballasloe at the death of sd James in 1779. As Frances said previously £300 is a very large sum for a Manx farming family in 1779 and £240 is a very big loan. If John is the son of James he is under 35 (the eldest son Robert is 35) Where does a young man get £240 to loan to his father? The size of this loan means that the lender is by the standards of the times a very wealthy man. There is another possibility (but a dearth of supporting evidence). James’ father Edward dies in 1734 and we know from his will James is the only son mentioned. We also know that it is not unusual to have an eldest son inherit at law and not be mentioned in a will. However we also know that James ends up in Ballasloe albeit with a massive mortgage. If there was an older brother who died leaving Ballasloe to a young son (John) that would explain how John ends up with a £240 sum secured by mortgage on Ballasloe. Total conjecture!!!
These Corkills in Maughold have baffled me for years. James Corkill (1707 to 1779) is my 1st cousin 9 times removed) so this is pretty interesting.