FROM THE ARCHIVES:Before independence, Dublin city council acted as a sort of proxy parliament where the divisions between the majority nationalists and minority unionists were often played out over municipal issues. A whiff of corruption wafted around the council chamber occasionally, as in this discussion about a contract for drainage works.
A LETTER was read from Mr. Vance cautioning the Town Clerk against the affixing of the City Seal to the contract of Messrs. Crawford and Frame for carrying out the main drainage system at Clontarf . . .
A motion having been made that Mr. Vance’s letter be noted, Mr. Vance contended that the proposal to give the contract to Messrs. Crawford and Frame was carried by misrepresentations . . .
In the first place the Lord Mayor said that for reasons which it was not politic to mention there, but which might be ascertained by applying to the committee, it was decided to give the contract to Messrs. Crawford and Frame. Well, he (Mr. Vance) called on the committee, and Mr. Tobin, the secretary, told him that there were no reasons other than those mentioned in the report. That was, therefore, misrepresentation number one.
Then it was stated that the acceptance of Messrs. Crawford and Frame’s tender was recommended by the Borough Surveyor. What was the fact with regard to that statement? The Borough Surveyor denied it, and said he had never made any such recommendation. That was misstatement number two.
Then the Lord Mayor stated that Messrs. Crawford and Frame were just finishing a large contract in Manchester, and that they would be able to bring over the plant to Dublin at small expense.
The Town Clerk – In the absence of the Lord Mayor I should, perhaps, say that he said he was informed that Messrs. Crawford and Frame had finished or were finishing a contract in Manchester.
Mr. Vance accepted the explanation, and went on to state that if Messrs. Crawford and Frame signed a bond to the effect that the whole of the iron work would be done in Hammond Lane Foundry he would withdraw his opposition to their getting the contract. (Hear, hear.) He had made inquiry about the shares of the Hammond Lane Foundry and he found that Alderman Farrell had put down his name for £100 worth of shares.
Alderman Farrell – Do you insinuate that I put down my name for shares and did not put down my money?
Mr. Vance said he would come to that by and by. It was natural that a man holding £100 shares in the foundry should be anxious to get the contract for the proprietors of the foundry.
Alderman Farrell said that the Hammond Lane Foundry had nothing to do with the present contract.
Mr. Vance – The contractors undertook to do the work in Hammond Lane Foundry. They said that in order to get the contract.
Alderman Farrell – That was to give employment locally.
Mr. Vance said that he found Miss Annie E. Irwin’s name down as a shareholder, and it was natural that Alderman Irwin should wish to have the contract placed with Messrs. Crawford and Frame. Another name in the share list was that of Michael Duff, who was a workman in the Freeman Office under the Lord Mayor sometimes, and sometimes under the Lord Mayor’s son.
But only a small proportion of the shares of the Hammond Lane Foundry were held by Irishmen. The majority, in fact all but a small number, were held by Scotchmen.
Alderman Farrell said he was proud to have £100 to put into this concern, and he was only sorry that he hadn’t £1,000 for a like purpose . . . He was glad that he was in a position to assist in a small way any Irish industry. Mr. Vance was a man who never saw good in anything except Mr. Vance himself.
http://url.ie/4sah