The Curious Case of the Mayo Librarian

by Pat Walsh

  It was perhaps indicative of the pressure the government felt it was under on the religious aspect of the appointment, that Cosgrave ended this carefully drafted statement with a reference to the Catholic make-up of the interview board. Not only that, a government source also let it be known to an Irish Independent reporter that the four other successful candidates were all Catholics.15

  The language question was treated very much as a side issue. President Cosgrave hardly mentioned it at all in his statement. While there were some references to language, the religious aspect dominated public debate. The main opposition party, for instance, while making political capital in Mayo, also felt it had to tread carefully with regard to the sectarian facet of the dispute and the way it had come to dominate the debate. In its 13 December issue The Nation, Fianna Fáil’s weekly newspaper, dealt directly with the language issue in a lead editorial entitled ‘Miss Dunbar’s Case’.

  We are glad that the two Fianna Fáil TDs [P.J. Ruttledge and Dick Walsh] who are members of Mayo County Council made the republican position clear with regard to public appointments in this country. The Irish people are made up of men and women of different religious beliefs and for the majority to insist upon appointments for men and women of their faith only is unjust and anti-national.

  There must be only one test for the public service, ability to perform the work, and that can only be discovered and recognised through competitive examination or some similar method by which the best wins.

  In Miss Dunbar’s case there was obviously the fatal flaw that for a Gaeltacht appointment she had no knowledge of Irish. Our readers know how we have opposed appointments like this irrespective of the religious belief of the appointee.

  Miss Dunbar has not this essential qualification for an Irish-speaking county and therefore we believe she is not qualified to fill the position. But to declare her unfitted by religion or by the fact that she holds a Trinity degree is to re-create under the cloak of Catholicism the spirit of ascendancy which cursed this nation for 300 bitter years.16

  However, this position was too subtle for some. The Irish Independent seemed confused by it. ‘The Fianna Fáil Party,’ it wrote, ‘is apparently at one with the government in this matter. The Fianna Fáil members of Mayo County Council spoke in favour of Miss Dunbar’s appointment and the weekly organ of that party, published in Dublin [The Nation], leaves its readers under no misapprehension as to its attitude.’17

  This was a widely inaccurate representation of Fianna Fáil’s position as Seán Ó Muineacháin, editor of The Nation, was quick to point out in a letter to the Irish Independent the following day.

  The other main opposition party took a different line. The Watchword, the official organ of the Irish Trade Union Conference and the Irish Labour Party, gave qualified praise to William T. Cosgrave. ‘Whatever may be our opposition to President Cosgrave’s general policy,’ it wrote, ‘we have never denied his moral as well as his personal courage. And that rare quality was seen to good effect in the statement on the Mayo affair made by him in the Dáil before the adjournment. His statement was as good in form as it was in tone and it will commend itself to every citizen who refuses to make a candidate’s religious – or for that matter political – faith an obligatory qualification for local or national office.’18

  T.J. O’Connell, the leader of the Labour Party, failed to come out with as clear a statement on the affair, constrained perhaps by his own local role. He was a TD for Mayo South and was aware of how unpopular the proposed appointment of Miss Dunbar Harrison was with his electorate.

  On 13 December, The Connaught Telegraph revisited the language question. ‘Touching the linguistic aspect of the Mayo case, this is not negligible,’ it wrote ‘ … the Irish language is the symbol of the culture of this ancient nation. People of the younger generation enjoy abundant means to familiarise themselves with Irish. Those who neglect to do it show that they do not respect the national culture – or, in a word, that they are disloyal. If persons of foreign antecedents wish to be recognised as good Irish citizens, they ought to show themselves interested in the Irish culture and Irish ideals.’19

  By this argument, lack of knowledge of Irish was at the very least anti-national and was indeed verging on treasonable. There was a certain irony in the fact that the minister, General Richard Mulcahy, who was now defending the appointment of Miss Dunbar Harrison, was the very same minister who had been entrusted with promoting the Irish language in his role as chairman of the Gaeltacht Commission.

  ‘The respectable skirts of nationalism’

  On the other hand, many politicians, particularly those at local level, took a more straightforward approach. The ultra-conservative monthly periodical The Catholic Mind reserved special praise for Councillor John Morahan. Councillor Morahan had announced that he was prepared to risk expulsion from Fianna Fáil by voting against Miss Dunbar Harrison’s appointment on the grounds of her Protestantism. The Catholic Mind wrote, ‘He spurned tactics … he realised right from the beginning that Catholicity should not be smuggled in anywhere under even the respectable skirts of nationalism.’20

  Not all local politicians were as supportive of the actions of the library committee. Some doubted their motives, questioning the sincerity of their support of the native language. Ballina Urban District Council had no direct connection with the library service administered by the County Council, yet its members took it upon themselves to debate a resolution welcoming the action of the library committee. In the process they also shed some light on the attitude of some members of the library committee towards the Irish language. Chairman McGrath voiced his opinion. ‘Certainly, if ever I welcomed an action in public life,’ he said, ‘I welcome that. They should have Irish, the chief thing in every advertisement, but a funny thing is the stand taken by some of the committee who previously struck out against Irish … I am very glad they are converts to the Irish stand.’21

  Councillor Carroll disagreed. He was critical of the original decision to reject Miss Dunbar Harrison. ‘Reading the report of the library committee,’ he said, ‘it makes one sick to read some of the speeches delivered at the meeting by dignitaries of the church and laymen who don’t care a thráneen [a straw] for the Irish language. It is simply an attack on this lady because she is a graduate of Trinity.’22

  He went on to remind his fellow councillors ‘of the fact that at one meeting of the Technical Committee, Canon Hegarty described the Irish classes in the Gaeltacht as cesspools of infamy, or words to that effect, and that was one of the gentlemen who spoke at considerable length against the appointment of the gifted graduate of Trinity College. And then you talk about imperialism emanating from Trinity College. We are up to our eyes in imperialism. We were never more sunk in it … if you put this to a vote you will be beaten.’

  ‘There is no necessity for a vote,’ interjected Chairman McGrath.

  ‘One of the gentlemen who spoke in Castlebar never lifted his finger in the cause of the Irish language,’ continued Mr Carroll.

  ‘The motion does not come from that crowd in Castlebar. It is our own opinion, and what is expressed in the resolution is the view of the council. The resolution is passed,’ replied the Chairman.23

  Notes

  1.The Connaught Telegraph, 13 December 1930, p.6.

  2.Desmond Roche, Local Government in Ireland, p.124.

  3.Mayo News, 13 December 1930, p.7.

  4.The Connaught Telegraph, 13 December 1930, p.6.

  5.Ibid.

  6.Ibid.

  7.Irish Independent, 9 December 1930, p.9.

  8.Ibid., 10 December 1930, p.5.

  9.The Irish Times, 19 December 1930, p.5.

  10.Ibid.

  11.Irish Independent, 10 December 1930, p.9.

  12.Ibid.

  13.Dáil Debate, 11 December 1930.

  14.Ibid.

  15.Irish Independent, 9 December 1930, p.9.

  16.The Nation, 13 December 1930, p.1.

  17.Irish Indepen
dent, 19 December 1930, p.10.

  18.The Watchword, 20 December 1930, p.1.

  19.The Connaught Telegraph, 13 December 1930, p.4.

  20Catholic Mind, vol. iii, no. 2, February 1932, p.31.

  21. Western People, 13 December 1930, p.7.

  22. Ibid.

  23. Ibid.

  Chapter 4

  ‘The slipper lickers proceed …’

  The much-trumpeted sworn inquiry held in Castlebar on 17 December proved a tame affair. In its report the Western People seemed somewhat disappointed. ‘The inquiry into the affairs of Mayo County Council, to which the public looked forward with such interest, is over. It lasted twenty minutes, and was entirely devoid of incident, or any of that bitterness or recrimination one might have expected under the circumstances.’1

  According to The Connaught Telegraph, ‘No one in the town seemed to take the least interest in the proceedings and when the inquiry began the only non-officials present were Mr P. Higgins and Mr T.S. Moclair …’2

  Canon Hegarty from the library committee subsequently arrived at the inquiry, as did Councillors Morahan and Jordan. Mr Seán McGrath appeared as solicitor for the council. The county secretary, Mr M.J. Egan, was also in attendance.

  Opening the inquest, the inspector, Mr Séamus MacLysaght stated, ‘It must be well known to you all that this inquiry has been occasioned by recent developments in the county. The pivot of the inquiry hinges on the appointment of a county librarian. It would serve no useful purpose to hold a rambling inquiry …’3 He went on to say that, generally speaking, the Minister for Local Government was very satisfied with the administration of the council and for that reason it was all the more regrettable that the inquiry was necessary. However, there was a statutory obligation which the council could not refuse to discharge.

  Mr McGrath, on behalf of the council, stated that they welcomed the fullest and most searching inquiry. They were there to facilitate the inspector.

  ‘The County Council feel,’ Mr McGrath declared, ‘that they have nothing to hide, and in fact are very proud of their tradition as perhaps the one council in Ireland in the fore-front of administration.’

  Mr McGrath asked the inspector to listen to evidence about the general state of affairs in the county, but the inspector retorted that Mr Egan could give it to the press. Councillor Morahan intervened at this stage, insisting that the evidence be read to the inquiry.4

  The county secretary then read a prepared statement of evidence as regards the financial health of the council and its activities in such areas as roads, education and the Irish language.

  ‘Their motto and slogan,’ Mr Egan declared, ‘was “Economy and Efficiency”.’

  At the conclusion of the evidence, the inspector thanked Mr McGrath for the manner in which he had helped him.

  ‘Mugs and thugs’

  The Mayo News worked itself up into a fine lather of indignation over the inquiry.

  The government that has decided to dissolve the County Council is composed of some sixty persons of vapid intellect and atrophied intelligence. These persons are kept together by a lively sense of favours to come and with the cohesion of the weak witted, present a feather bag face to all attacks.

  With the fifty odd mugs and thugs who compose this group of compressed selfishness, we are not particularly concerned. But it is quite refreshing to find our local ciphers looking at themselves. The government of which the Cumann na nGaedheal deputies form part say ‘You county councillors are either rogues or fools; we must suppress you because you are also bigots,’ and the three TDs say, ‘We are all rogues or fools. Suppress us because we are bigots …’

  It would be quite in accordance with the facts if the government deputies endorsed the opinion of their own cabinet that they are weak witted or dishonest or both, but really they should draw the line before giving the opinion of self-confessed morons that the priests and people of Mayo are in the same class when they make the plea ‘We are humble liars, Sir’, the ‘we’ should not include the whole population …

  It would be ungentlemanly, rude, nay, it would even appear bigoted if Mayo representatives should protest against being kicked into the gutter with a lying label on their necks for a more subservient implement than the council succeeded in being. BUT THE COUNCIL PROTESTS AND THE SLIPPER LICKERS PROCEED [Capitals, Mayo News’s own].

  ‘From Irish pigs to Irish policemen’

  And meanwhile all the ‘broad-minded’ people were condemning the library committee. Gentlemen who can read but don’t were showing that they were not like the common ruck of papists. Some of them had read three or four books even. And from the height of their literary attainments, sneered at the bigotry of the unlettered, and after these litterateurs came the battalion of economists. They as a rule, boasted that they had never read any book but assured the world that England would retaliate. England would boycott everything from Irish pigs to Irish policemen. For the first time since 1916 we had a clear division, verminous slipper lickers on one side and the people who stand upon their feet on the other.5

  The Mayo News revealed some information from an obviously well-connected source. ‘On Thursday morning [18 December],’ it wrote, ‘it was learned in Castlebar that the government’s legal advisers had informed the cabinet that they had no legal status in their attempt to get a mandamus against the council …’ The government was now ‘taking steps to dissolve the council.’6

  The Minister for Local Government, Richard Mulcahy, was considered one of the ‘hard men’ of his party. He had been very close to Michael Collins and had delivered the eulogy at his funeral. He had been Minister for Defence in the previous Dáil but had been forced to resign for his role in the Army Mutiny in 1924. He later made his political comeback as Minister for Local Government and Public Health.

  Fianna Fáil tended to avoid direct attacks on President Cosgrave, preferring to concentrate their criticisms on Richard Mulcahy. As Minister for Local Government he was the main target of the political opposition to Miss Dunbar Harrison’s appointment. However, Edward P. McCarron, secretary of the department, also became embroiled in the dispute. Mr McCarron was a career civil servant who had worked for the British administration in Ireland pre-1921 as a local government auditor, class 1, and had continued his career in the Free State in the Department of Local Government. In 1922 his appointment to a senior post in the Free State civil service had been controversial. The following excerpt from the Dáil gives a flavour of the proceedings:

  Deputy Joseph McDonagh asked the Minister for Local Government, ‘Is it a fact that Mr McCarron offered his services to the British military in Drogheda in Easter week?’

  To which the Minister for Local Government replied, ‘I cannot say whether it is a fact. I was not in Drogheda in Easter week.’7

  This was hardly a ringing endorsement for Mr McCarron. He was greatly distrusted by many local authorities as the Cosgrave government strived to re-assert central control over some of the wayward county councils. Having worked for the British administration in Ireland, Mr McCarron was in many ways a convenient whipping boy; he was seen as a remnant of colonial rule and was cordially detested, especially by Fianna Fáil and Sinn Féin. Another rumour that was circulated about him was that he had tried to enlist in the British army during the First World War.8

  The Mayo News devoted an impressive amount of venom to Mr McCarron and his perceived role in the Mayo affair. ‘And now we come to the hero of the piece, Mr E.P. McCarron,’ it wrote. ‘He is the great little council smasher of the decade. For his English masters during the late Redmondite period any council that was not sufficiently pro-British was smashed. After the 1916 War of Independence, any council that dared to employ Irish rebels was smashed (signed E.P. McCarron). During the aftermath of the war any public body that did not hunt out those with Irish leanings got their quietus signed E.P. McCarron.

  ‘During the Black and Tan terror the councils that were not pro-British and Tan had to go into hiding per orders
signed E.P. McCarron. After the Treaty, councils that worked to bury the hatchet of civil war had their pro-Irish officials hunted, signed E.P. McCarron. What is the secret behind all this? That E.P. McCarron will serve anyone who pays his salary?’9

  Meanwhile there was unrest in the county. The Leitrim Observer reported a ‘protest by peasants’. ‘At a meeting at Louisburgh on Sunday thousands of peasants protested against the appointment of an official lacking an adequate knowledge of the native tongue.’10

  The report submitted to the department by Mr Séamus MacLysaght was short and to the point. Save for their action in refusing to sanction the appointment of Miss Dunbar Harrison, Mayo County Council was given a clean bill of health.

  ‘Personal pecuniary responsibilities’

  Richard Mulcahy ensured that the results of the inspector’s inquiry were published in the national and regional newspapers. In a government notice, a copy of the letter to Mayo County Council signed by E.P. McCarron, secretary of the Local Government Department, was published in full. The report commenced, ‘The Minister for Local Government and public health directs me to state, for the information of the Mayo County Council, that he has received the report of the local inquiry held on the 17th …’ The conclusion of the report is as follows:

  This evidence shows conclusively that the council acting with full knowledge refused to give effect to the appointment of Miss Dunbar, a person recommended by the Local Appointments Commissioners to fill the vacant post of county librarian for Mayo. The recommendation was made in accordance with the provisions of the Local Authorities (Officers and Employees) Act, 1926. The council, therefore, had no function in this matter other than to invite Miss Dunbar to take up duty. In refusing to do so the council has failed to give effect to a statutory duty.