Free The Curious Case of the Mayo Librarian by Pat Walsh

Chapter 16
‘The brass-hat boyos’
    The Catholic Bulletin , never a journal to shy away from the possibility of a conspiracy theory, had strong views on the activities of the Local Appointments Commission and did not refrain from voicing them. ‘The commissioners,’ it wrote, ‘as is known, have a well-equipped office. One prominent personage therein, a Catholic, has openly taken his position. A son in Trinity College is a hostage to the new ascendancy … The unfortunate “board of selection” is really to be pitied. All these boards are known to be blinkered by the “brass-hat boyos” who first select them, then run them in blinkers and finally arrange “results” with chronic disregard of the recommendations of these truly pitiable “selection boards”.’ 1 The Catholic Bulletin was of the opinion that the ‘Free State is a happy hunting ground for pension or job-seeking masons.’ 2
    Christina Keogh, James Montgomery, Tom Gay and the other members of the Local Appointments Commission’s selection board were, by any standards, respectable members of society and pillars of the community, serious and committed public and civil servants. It seems unlikely, given their background, that any accusations of partiality aimed at the interview board could hold true. This, of course, did not stop interested parties from making such allegations.
    The ironic effect of the attacks on the LAC, such as those by the Catholic Bulletin , was that it made the Cumann na nGaedheal government more determined than ever to defend not only Letitia Dunbar Harrison but also the LAC and all of its mechanisms. Cumann na nGaedheal had emphasised all along that the LAC was not an extension of the government but a stand-alone body. In its efforts to protect the LAC, the government went to extraordinary lengths and, in the process, compromised the very reputation for independence and confidentiality they had sought to protect.
    In a Dáil debate in 1928, Minister Ernest Blythe had outlined the guarantees of confidentiality that members of selection boards had been given. ‘Further, people who have acted in selection boards,’ he said, ‘have been given an assurance that their reports would be treated confidentially. They were given a guarantee in the following terms – All communications and information which the members of the board receive as such are to be regarded as strictly confidential and the commissioners will so regard any reports or information which a board forwards to them.’ 3
    The attorney general, John A. Costello, had already given his opinion that the LAC was neither independent of the Dáil nor of the executive council. While the executive council was not entitled to control the manner in which it carried out its duties, it was entitled to obtain any information that it thought proper in order to ascertain that the Commission was carrying out these duties in a proper manner. 4 Ellen Burke, by calling into question the board’s decision, had set in motion this chain of events. In order to defend the LAC, President Cosgrave required them to furnish him with as much information as possible.
    The state papers contain documents that reveal not only the marking scheme used by the selection board but also the actual marks received by some of the candidates. Ellen Burke was the only unsuccessful candidate whose marks were publicly aired. Regardless of the rights and wrongs of Miss Burke’s allegations, having the result of her interview revealed in this way can only be described as a breach of confidentiality. Presumably, the government felt justified in doing so because Miss Burke had been the one to go public first.
    The Catholic Bulletin , in particular, published detailed attacks on the LAC and its procedures in the recruitment process for the post of librarian in Mayo. Every deviation from accepted practice was seen as part of a conspiracy