The Curious Case of the Mayo Librarian

by Pat Walsh

  Notes

  1.UCD Archives, Mulcahy Collection, P7b.

  2.Ibid.

  3. Connacht Sentinel, 15 September 1931, p.4.

  4.Irish Press, 30 September 1931, p.1.

  5.Irish Independent, 14 November 1931, p.5.

  6.Irish Press, 30 September 1931, p.1.

  7. Irish Independent, 14 November 1931, p.5.

  Chapter 19

  ‘I like the work and I love the people’

  By the start of 1932, with the dispute about to drag on into its second year, there was little sign of a resolution. An impasse had been reached. Miss Dunbar Harrison continued to go about her work in Castlebar while the vast majority of her library centres throughout the county went unused.

  P.J. Bartley was still carrying out his duties as Commissioner, but he too was hampered by a lack of co-operation. Many of the council’s sub-committees were boycotted, causing severe problems in the education and social welfare sections. The prospect of a general election in the New Year was the one possible change in the political landscape. The Cumann na nGaedheal Party were wary of fighting an election in Mayo with virtually all of their TDs and local representatives opposing their policy on the librarian issue. The cabinet decided to get themselves off the hook by offering Miss Dunbar Harrison an equivalent position in the civil service. This was little more than a flimsy fig-leaf to protect their political vanity. They tried to spin this as a promotion for her, though few people saw it as anything other than a humiliating climb-down on their part.

  This solution had been mooted for some time and had long been rumoured in Mayo. It had in fact been suggested to Sir Joseph Glynn in his meetings with members of the Catholic hierarchy as early as spring 1931. The government at the time did not come out and quash this as a possibility.

  As with every other aspect of this saga, the government’s handling of their climb-down was less than assured. On 2 January The Irish Times stated that there was a ‘possible post elsewhere’. ‘It is reported,’ wrote the newspaper, ‘that Miss Dunbar Harrison is about to retire from the post of librarian to the Mayo county library at Castlebar … In the conditions which prevailed since her appointment, the usefulness of the library has been greatly circumscribed … Our Castlebar correspondent telegraphing last night, stated that Miss Dunbar Harrison was greatly distressed at the announcement of her resignation, which she declared to be utterly unfounded. Beyond rumour that she was to be transferred, she had heard nothing officially. The commissioner [P.J. Bartley] had not mentioned it to her, and in the circumstances it was unthinkable that she should resign. She added: “I like the work, and I love the people who have shown me every kindness, and I am not likely to resign because some people think I should go elsewhere.”’1

  The Irish Press, had a different slant on the story. Its local correspondent reported a ‘sensational development in library dispute’, and that ‘a curious situation had arisen … Miss Dunbar Harrison, the Mayo librarian, was very indignant when I called on her private residence this morning to interview her about her supposed resignation. “It’s a fabrication like the silly lies circulated a few weeks ago by an English newspaper; but I don’t mind it, and will not discuss it with you,” she vehemently declared … “I have not resigned and have no intention of resigning.”’

  The Press sought a response from the Minister for Local Government. On being asked for a statement Richard Mulcahy said, ‘I cannot say whether Miss Harrison’s resignation has reached the department or not.’2 Three days later, undeterred by the denials and confusion, the Press confidently stated that a job had been found for Miss Dunbar Harrison in the civil service.

  ‘Is the protracted Mayo librarian controversy about to be ended by the transfer of Miss Dunbar Harrison to a post in the Department of Industry and Commerce?’ asked The Irish Press. ‘The recent announcement in a daily newspaper to the effect that Miss Harrison had resigned was immediately and vigorously denied by Miss Harrison herself to the Castlebar representative of The Irish Press. The secretary of Mayo County Council also stated that he had not received Miss Harrison’s resignation. It is now reported that Miss Harrison is about to be transferred to the statistics branch of the Department of Industry and Commerce at, so it is stated, a higher remuneration than the £250 per annum which she is now receiving in Mayo.

  ‘The decision to transfer Miss Harrison was made a month ago, after preliminary local soundings … a difficulty arose as to the post which would have to be given to her, as in the circumstances she could not be asked to resign … There is no intention as yet to restore the County Council but such a step may be hinted at in the election campaign.’3

  On 6 January the Irish Independent’s banner headline read, ‘New Post for County Mayo Librarian’. The same day The Irish Press reported that Miss Dunbar Harrison had left Castlebar for Dublin. The prevailing local opinion was that the government, in order to relieve the crisis created by Miss Dunbar Harrison’s appointment following the abolition of the County Council, were arranging to transfer her in order to regain the confidence of the Mayo clergy.

  The Irish Press also recounted that it was rumoured locally that Miss Dunbar Harrison was to be offered the post of librarian in the Dáil. This yarn seems somewhat mischievous as it is very unlikely that the government would have even contemplated such a move. One can only imagine Letitia Dunbar Harrison working in the same building in which she had been the subject of so much debate the previous June and meeting in the corridors so many of the deputies who had been critical of her, her background and her education. Not only that, one could foresee the Fianna Fáil Party making much political capital of her acknowledged inability to speak Irish.

  Confusion reigned for a number of days. It is difficult to believe that the Department of Local Government would decide to move Miss Dunbar Harrison without first discussing it with her, but initially she seemed genuinely unhappy with the announcement in the newspapers. It would seem that some pressure had to be applied to get her to comply with their suggestion, if suggestion it was, perhaps threatening to forcibly transfer her if she did not agree to go of her own accord. The initial intention may have been to move her to the Department of Industry and Commerce, but the Department of Defence was where she ended up. But as luck would have it, at the same time as the Government was looking around for a position in the Civil Service in Dublin for Miss Dunbar Harrison, the person responsible for the Department of Defence’s Military library Mr R.J. Flood, an inveterate memo writer, had been making numerous submissions to his superior officers. He declared that, owing to the shortage of staff and the enormous number of books purchased, he was unable to keep up with his duties. Urgent representations had been made to the Department of Finance in September 1931 ‘for the provision of badly needed additional staff to cope with essential library work’.

  On 8 January The Irish Press announced that Miss Dunbar Harrison had returned from Dublin and disclosed that she had accepted a post in the capital. She declined to make a statement but when asked was she satisfied with the change she replied, ‘I am delighted with it.’ This was, if not quite the end, the beginning of the end. On 16 January The Irish Press, which seemed to have very good sources both at a local level in Mayo and at civil service level in Dublin, reported that the Mayo library committee, at a special meeting convened by Commissioner Bartley, had accepted Miss Dunbar Harrison’s resignation. She was to hand over her keys to Mr Egan, the County Secretary, on the Tuesday when her resignation took effect, but on the Sunday, ‘she became the victim of influenza and was unable to be present’. No date had been given for when she was to take up her duties at the Department of Defence, though it was confidently stated that ‘her appointment there will not entail the displacement of any present official of the library.’ The Press went on to add that ‘apart from some works of reference, the library is purely composed of military works.’4

  Chapter 19

  1. The Irish Times, 2 January 1932, p.7.

  2. Irish Press, 2 Ja
nuary 1932, p.1.

  3.Ibid., 5 January 1932, p.1.

  4.Ibid., 16 January 1932, p.4.

  Chapter 20

  ‘A rout, not a retreat’

  The Irish correspondent of the Round Table claimed that the outcome was ‘fair to the lady, soothing to the Mayo bigots and good for the government.’1 This was not a view shared by all. The Catholic Bulletin was disapproving of the government’s actions. Under the headline ‘The Mayo Collapse and its Sequels’, it argued, using an extended martial metaphor; ‘With his usual ineptitude and even more than his usual clumsiness of procedure, the politico-military bully has evacuated the Mayo front … So a new post was created: that eminent literary man, Minister Fitzgerald, had to develop a need for a librarian. The pretence of unbending firmness was kept up to the last moment, for with the usual tenacity of the politico-military bully, it was denied and delayed until it was clearly a rout, not a retreat.’2

  The Catholic Mind adopted a slightly different tack. ‘It is not putting it too bluntly,’ it wrote, ‘to state that Miss Dunbar Harrison was ruthlessly sacrificed to the interests of the Cumann na nGaedheal candidates in County Mayo … it was an act of political corruption, so clumsily performed that no one with any intelligence was fooled by it.’3 This new-found compassion for Miss Dunbar Harrison was used as a stick with which to beat the government. ‘Nobody has apologised yet to Miss Harrison for the indignities to which she has been subjected,’ continued the Catholic Mind. ‘On behalf not only of ourselves but of the Catholics of Mayo whose mind in the matter has been made clear to us by several of the most influential of the clergy of Tuam, we offer her our sympathy … may Miss Harrison’s days be long and happy.’4 Given all that had gone before one can only wonder at the sincerity of these best wishes.

  It is possible to exaggerate the sectarian element to the opposition but, as previously mentioned, a dislike of outsiders was not confined to Mayo. Kathleen White faced similar resistance in Leitrim, if on a lesser scale.

  ‘You have a Clareman’s job’

  In Clare, Dermot Foley had substantial difficulties when he was appointed county librarian. ‘In March 1931, at the tender age of twenty-three, he was recommended for the post of librarian. Initially the council refused to appoint Mr Foley, and proposed to delay his appointment for six months pending the improvement of his knowledge of the Irish language. However, under the threat of legal action from the Department of Local Government, a special meeting was called on 9 July 1931 and it was agreed to appoint Mr Foley.’5 A Dubliner, he was not exactly welcomed with open arms.6 As he described it himself, ‘An hour or so before the first meeting of the library committee, a small packet was delivered to me by post. It was a tin box marked Oxo, but when I unwrapped the rolled up piece of paper, there were no soup cubes. Instead, out fell two .45 bullets. There was a short message, headed with a skull and cross-bones. “Get out of the county,” it said, “you have a Clareman’s job.”’7

  The main reason the locals took an instant dislike to Dermot Foley seemed to be that he was taking the job of a good Clareman. This was akin to the argument used against Kathleen White in Leitrim, that by being selected as county librarian, and coming all the way from Laois, she had caused one more poor local to emigrate. This excessive regionalism was essentially a form of xenophobia. The difference in these cases from that of Letitia Dunbar Harrison, was that religion was not an exacerbating factor, fanning the flames. Miss Dunbar Harrison was seen as even more of an outsider, on the grounds of education and class as well as religion. The Irish language, the pretext for her rejection, seemed hardly relevant at all.

  Kathleen White survived in Leitrim, as did Dermot Foley, after a fashion, in Clare. He lasted the best part of twenty-three years as county librarian so he was presumably not particularly perturbed by his initial reception. Dermot Foley later moved on to Cork and eventually became director of An Comhairle Leabharlanna, the state’s library authority, which was formed in 1947. He had survived in Clare though he did not exactly thrive there, having entered into many a battle with the library committee, the County Council and a specially constituted fifty-strong censorship board.8

  Letitia Dunbar Harrison on the other hand was never going to last in Mayo. The forces arrayed against her were too strong. While maintaining a strong front publicly, the Cumann na nGaedheal government had tacitly accepted at an early stage of their private meetings with members of the Catholic hierarchy that she would have to be moved. In the transcribed memorandum of the meeting between President Cosgrave and Archbishop Gilmartin on 15 April 1931, it was stated ‘that while no promise in writing could be made, and nothing done immediately, if it were possible to do so, the government at a suitable time, would see whether a position elsewhere could be found for Miss Dunbar.’9 In other words the government was waiting for the opportune moment, when the hubbub had died down, to quietly move her on. With this strategy, as with many of their actions throughout the affair, the government proved unsuccessful. Almost every newspaper pointed out the proximity of a general election as the impetus for Miss Dunbar Harrison’s ‘promotion’ to the Department of Defence in January 1932. In fact the Catholic Bulletin insisted on taking things a step further. It accused the government of the Machiavellian policy of backing her while at the same time hoping and indeed encouraging her to resign of her own volition. This would have got them off the hook. It was only when she showed admirable stubbornness that they were forced to act themselves. The outcome of the whole affair could hardly be labelled a victory for central government.

  While many people linked the government’s movement on the stalemate with the imminent announcement of a general election, it is difficult to gauge the electoral impact of the dispute. The Dáil was dissolved shortly afterwards, on 29 January 1932. The election was held on Tuesday, 16 February. The successful candidates in Mayo received the following first-preference votes.

  Mayo North – four seats

  P.J. Ruttledge, F.F.

  8,690

  P. O’Hara, C. na nG.

  5,853

  M. Davis, C. na nG.

  5,809

  M. Clery, F.F.

  5,443

  Mayo South – five seats

  J. Fitzgerald-Kenney, C. na nG.

  7,041

  R. Walsh, F.F.

  6,945

  M. Kilroy, F.F.

  5,589

  E. Moane, F.F.

  4,711

  M. Nally, C. na nG.

  3,414

  Fianna Fáil gained one seat in Mayo but at the expense, not of Cumann na nGaedheal, but of the Labour Party, whose leader T.J. O’Connell lost his seat in Mayo South. Thomas O’Connell, who was also general secretary of the Irish National Teachers’ Organisation, had opposed the appointment of Letitia Dunbar Harrison on the basis that his party had not agreed with the setting up of the Local Appointments Commission in the first place. He had also questioned the dissolution of Mayo County Council. There is no record of him speaking out against the sectarian element of the antagonism towards Miss Dunbar Harrison as might have been expected of the leader of the Labour Party.

  Prior to the assassination of Kevin O’Higgins, the Labour Party had led the parliamentary resistance to the incumbent government, but once Fianna Fáil had changed their abstentionist policy and taken their seats, the Labour Party found itself vying with the numerically superior Fianna Fáil to make an impact. The Watchword of Labour, the party’s weekly newspaper had, on the other hand, been broadly supportive of the government’s actions. It is more likely that Thomas O’Connell’s silence on the sectarian component of the disagreement was for purely local reasons, and that realising what a contentious issue it was, he had tried not to antagonise anybody. Overall, Labour’s nationwide performance in the election was atrocious. Of the party’s thirty-three candidates, just under half lost their deposits.10

  Moreover, it cannot be said that Mr O’Connell lost his seat in Mayo due to his actions or his inaction with regard to the Miss Dunbar Ha
rrison affair. In fact it is difficult to see what effect, if any, the affair had on the voting patterns in Mayo. The librarian issue cannot be said to have had a drastic effect on the Cumann na nGaedheal Party vote but as most of their public representatives had taken an anti-government stance on the controversy that hardly proves anything one way or the other. Mr Fitzgerald-Kenney, the outgoing Minister for Justice and the only Mayo TD to vote with the government in the Dáil debate on 17 June 1931, actually topped the poll in Mayo South.

  Nationwide Fianna Fáil won seventy-two seats compared to fifty-six seats for Cumann na nGaedheal. The Labour Party lost six seats. On 9 March Eamon de Valera was elected President of the Executive Council by eighty-one votes to sixty-eight. Mayo TD P.J. Ruttledge was appointed Minister for Agriculture in the new administration.

  It was a number of years before the new government eventually restored Mayo County Council. Commissioner P.J. Bartley maintained a good working relationship with Fianna Fáil, and at a later date he was appointed commissioner to Westmeath and to Laois. In 1942, following the Local Government (County Management) Act of 1940, he became one of the first newly created county managers for Laois where he had previously acted as Commissioner. One could argue that county managers were given many of the executive functions that commissioners had exercised in the past, so P.J. Bartley was well suited to his new role.