On the Order Paper to day there appeared a question in the name of Deputy Thomas F. O'Higgins. The question was as follows:—
"To ask the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs if he will state his reason for appointing, to the post office in Moneygall, a person who had no service in the Defence Forces, when an ex-sergeant of the Defence Forces, with an exemplary record, was rejected for the position."
The person who directed my attention and that of Deputy O'Higgins to this transaction was not the aggrieved party at all, but a man who felt that those who had done their part were entitled, not necessarily to reward, but at least to a redemption of the undertakings given to them when they were asked to undertake heavy duties in the service of this State. Deputy O'Higgins put down that question in consultation with myself, and I trust he will feel free to participate in the discussion which is now initiated.
Some weeks ago a friend and supporter of mine wrote to me from a town in Monaghan remonstrating with me because he, having been a temporary postman in his area for a long time, now found that, when the permanent appointment fell to be made, he had not been chosen, and an ex-service man recently demobilised had been given the position. He asked me to take up that matter with the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs, to remonstrate with the Minister, and to press his claim. I do not deny I found myself in a somewhat awkward position. The complainant was an old friend and supporter of mine. The man who got the job was neither one nor the other. I wrote back to him and said—there was no use putting a tooth in it—"I am not going to make any remonstrance to the Minister for, if I had been the Minister, I would have done exactly what he did."
Those men who joined the Army during the emergency were assured, if they found themselves unemployed when they came out, if there was employment going in public offices they would get the preference, and that all of us would combine to bring what pressure we could on private employers to give a preference to the men who had served during the emergency.
The general atmosphere of corruption and fraud that is spreading through this country in connection with public appointments is common knowledge, and it is right and proper to denounce it and expose it on every possible occasion. But this particular case imports, in addition to fraud and corruption, a third evil quality, and that is repudiation of a solemn promise given. It is none of my concern to vindicate the reputation of the members of the Government benches. I do not think it comes as any surprise to the people that undertakings given by them should be repudiated when it suits them to do so. But when people sitting on this side of the House give promises, they do not like to see them betrayed—and that goes for those on the Independent, Fine Gael and other benches as well.
I went around this country with the Taoiseach in the days when the people were being asked to join the Army, the L.D.F. and the L.S.F., and from common platforms with him pledged my name that, if they would fill the gap when they were badly wanted, even at considerable loss to themselves, when they came out under the handicap of having missed those vital years in civilian employment we would stand by them and, in so far as within us lay, make up to them what they had lost by joining the Army. Deputy O'Higgins went around the country with Fianna Fáil and Labour members of the Defence Conference giving the same pledge and undertaking. I am concerned to see that the promise that was given in my name and in that of my colleagues is not betrayed.
That is my interest in the Moneygall Post Office and I am convinced that 90 per cent. of Deputies here, when they hear the facts, will agree with me that this is a dirty transaction and is one of which this House has every reason to be ashamed. The sub-postmistress in Moneygall died and, in due course, it became necessary to fill the vacancy created by her death. In the interval, between the vacation of her office and the publication of an advertisement asking for applications, a lady in the Moneygall area bought the deceased postmistress's house.
Now, any Deputy raising a matter of this kind finds himself in a delicate position when he has to draw into a discussion of this character the name of a lady. Let me say at once that, so far as the lady in this case is concerned, her personal reputation would stand as high as that of any lady in the land. There is no reflection upon her personal honour or integrity in any way. That much being said, let me add that she is a prominent, stalwart and loquacious member of the Fianna Fáil Cumann in Moneygall and, of course, the wink was tipped that sooner or later this post office vacancy would be filled and it would not be a bad thing at all if an applicant for it had the house of the lady who used to operate the post office, because that would be a grand ground for giving it to a good, seasoned member of the Fianna Fáil Cumann. The lady in question bought the house and now we have the situation in which this lady, who is a school-master's wife—a lady whose husband is in receipt of an income of £400 or £500 a year—is residing in the deceased postmistress's house.
Between 30 and 40 yards down the road there is living a man by the name of Gleeson. He has a nice little house, he has a nice little shop, too, and he has the shop in the most convenient premises that he could find, because he wants to do the best business he can. What is his record? He joined the Volunteers in 1917. He served in a flying column for 12 months prior to the Truce. He joined the National Army as a lieutenant and served therein from 1922 to 1927. He was awarded a military service pension of £70 per annum. When the emergency developed he joined the Defence Forces in 1940 and served as a sergeant until 1945. He is a widower and is living in that house with his daughter, doing the best he can by conducting a little business to supplement the pension of £70 which he inherited from his service in the National Army.
I know well—we all know—that two or three members of the Oireachtas got after the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs to give this post office to the lady whom I have described, but the Department of Defence, not actuated by any political considerations, got after the Minister also and officially represented to him that a division of that Department had been established by the Government to ensure that ex-service men would get fair treatment and, in certain circumstances, a degree of preference.
They stated without putting cap or cloak on it: "We maintain that ex-Sergeant Gleeson, with his long and honourable record in the national service is at least as deserving—we will say no more than that—than the other candidates and, on that account, we claim that ex-Sergeant Gleeson should be given the post office." I say that a man with that record in the national service, who has £70 a year pension, and who is running a decent respectable business in order to supplement that pension, has a great deal better claim to the sub-post office in Moneygall than has the wife of a national teacher drawing £400 or £500 a year, whose only recommendation is that she and her husband are prominent members of the Fianna Fáil Cumann and that a few members of the Oireachtas had salt put on their tails by the particular clique to which they belonged and were warned that if she did not get the post office they would feel it the next time there was a general election.
I want to know here and now does this House intend to redeem the promises that were made to these men when we asked them to join the Defence Forces or does it not? Are you going to betray them, to repudiate them and let them down whenever you think you can do so under the cloak of secrecy? If you are, it is the most dastardly and disreputable performance of the many dastardly and disreputable performances to which we have been witness in this country. I venture to prophesy that if that is to be the despicable performance of a Fianna Fáil Minister and a Fianna Fáil Government there will be those on this side of the House to pledge their word to these men that they will strip the cloak of hypocrisy off every member of the Fianna Fáil Party who dabbles in that kind of transaction in the future. We will keep our eye on them and their activities and, where they engage in dirt of this kind, we will apply the only effective and the only suitable instrument for their correction—the light of day.
I venture to swear that, after they have stood naked in that light before our people who, no matter what Party they belong to or support, at least have a sense of justice and decency and do not like double-crossers, do not like people who go begging favours when they are in a tight corner but are ashamed to see their friends when the danger is past—our people seeing such, will deal with them in time. It may be a slow process, it may be a tedious process, but I dare to repeat words I used recently in this House: "We shall not weary of calling to mind the promises and their betrayals" and we will depend upon the people to put a sting in the words we now employ.
