W1A-016 Clontarf-0.txt
REASONS FOR ANNEXATION

There were a number of reasons put forward to explain the annexation of the above townships by Dublin Corporation, with the primary reason being to increase their financial returns, by about 1/3. This would have resulted as all the rates that were being paid to the respective township commissions would have accrued to them. Increases in returns were necessary because the Corporation faced insolvency on a number of occasions in the late nineteenth century and it was for this reason they had to cut back on public projects such as the main drainage scheme in 1877. Staff cutbacks occured shortly afterwards. Such actions underlined the need for increased funds and it was by no coincidence that calls were made for a revaluation at this time. The calls went unheeded however, and the poor financial situation worsened in the 1880's and 1890's. Dublin Corporation showed intense interest in annexing only a few suburbs like Pembroke and Rathmines for the same financial reasons. These highly urbanised suburbs would have yielded revenue that greatly exceeded that of their counterparts of Clontarf, Drumcondra and Kilmainham.

Yet the arguments of Dublin Corporation on these grounds were perfectly plausible. In 1877 The Royal Commission on Municipal Boundaries made this quite clear. Details were given by the Corporation to the Commission on what services were provided in the city, who benefited from them and who paid for them. Almost every township resident benefited in some way from these Corporation services. The township residents used roads maintained and improved by the Corporation, Public institutions like prisons, workhouses and asylums, and emergency services like hospitals and fire brigades were relied upon by those outside of the city boundary. Dublin Corporation also supplied most of the townships with domestic water supplies. Those residing outside the jurisdiction of Dublin Corporation contributed nothing to the provision of these services despite the fact the vast majority of the suburban residents earned their incomes in the city. These were the primary reasons for the virtual financial insolvency of Dublin Corporation in the late nineteenth century. This situation clearly had to end.

The second significant reason for the annexation was the need for working class housing in the city. Large numbers of workers lived in squalid tenement housing throughout this period and this problem had to be tackled. The Corporation claimed in order for them to provide the required accommodation it was necessary to move outside of the city as the availability of building land within its pre 1900 confines was limited. This point was contested by many opposed to the annexation who claimed ample space existed within the city in which working class dwellings could be erected, rendering annexation unnecessary for this purpose. This argument gained credability following the examination of the extent of Public housing in the suburbs. An unwillingness was shown by the Corporation to move the working class housing to the suburbs throughout the early years of the twentieth century. Only in 1920's did this end with erection of a large amount of working class housing in Marino.

An acceptable reason was put forward by Daly, (Mary E.) who claims that the annexation took place purely on Nationalist grounds. The Nationalist Corporation of Dublin were incensed with the demise of the City of Dublin and its replacement by Belfast as the first City of Ireland. Dublin in the late nineteenth century had a smaller population, acreage and valuation than its northern counterpart. However annexation (of all the townships, especially the populous and wealthy townships of Rathmines and Pembroke) would have changed this. Therefore it can be interpreted as a natural reaction by the Nationalist Dublin MPs to try to reinstate their own city to its former position of the Capital of Ireland, and annexation could have accomplished this. But as the townships of Rathmines and Pembroke were not included in the annexation, the exercise did not have the desired effect. It did however increase substancially in acreage, but not to any great extent in population or valuation.

THE IMPACT OF ANNEXATION ON CLONTARF

The annexation of Clontarf was seen by some who inhabited the area as being desireable desirable, indeed the township had submitted a petition in favour of annexation containing 400 signatures. This was possibly the same lobby who had attempted to have Clontarf annexed in 1893. Although, this was said to be a small number of publicans who wanted to avail of the more liberal licensing hours in the city, this is somewhat doubtful. There existed in Clontarf a number of property holders who were anxious to see their property retain or even increase in value, and had been intensely frustrated by the obstacles that the township Commission, under the leadership of Vernon maintained and erected to urban development within the township. The same group of property holders doubtless came to the conclusion after almost 25 years of inactivity that if development was to occur in Clontarf, it would do so only in the absence of John E. V. Vernon and C. U. D. C. This led to a petition to the Corporation in favour of annexation in 1893. This did not occur. The Corporation ruled that the township having one mile of agricultural land between it and the city boundaries was not a valid case for annexation. No doubt, the impoverished state of Clontarf due to decades of inactivity made the area a very unattractive proposition as its rateable valuation would fall very short of the costs it would impose on the Corporation.

Despite, having a number of residents within the township in favour of annexation, there were not surprisingly an equal number opposed to the exercise. Many large land owners in Clontarf threatened to pull out of the area should annexation occur. These landowners included a number of Commissioners from C. U. D. C. Yet this did not occur. Following annexation, a number of interested property developers and speculators entered Clontarf. It is highly likely the lobby who threatened to leave were merely a group of disgruntled Conservatives angry that the more Unionist Township of Clontarf was annexed whilst the less Unionist township of Rathmines and Pembroke were allowed retain their independence. Yet real fears existed amongst some residents that Clontarf would be transformed. Many feared large public housing schemes would be erected in the former township. It was also feared that an increase in rates would occur. Yet, neither did.

However, change was inevitable. At the same time the Boundaries Extension Bill passed into law, the Clontarf Improvements Bill was also enacted. This bill included provision for the modernisation of Clontarf. It gave commitments by Dublin Corporation to provide the area with all the services it was lacking under the control of C. U. D. C. An enormous task faced the Corporation following annexation. The township of Clontarf was by far the largest of those annexed. Its territory of 1295 acres was more than a third of the former area under the jurisdiction of the Corporation. The infrastructure of the area needed a complete modernisation. Everything from the areas 13 miles of road to the domestic water system needed major reconstruction and improvements. Initially the Corporation appeared zestful with the appointment of a new sanitary officer to maintain and improve the level of public health in the area. The former township was also divided into two wards (East and West) to facilitate the improvements. A boundary was fixed by the Clontarf Urban District Council at Saint Lawrences Road, this was later approved by the Local Government Board. In 1901 the work continued with inspections into the domestic water supply and the leasing of a site from Colonel Vernon for the erection of workmens dwellings. Plans were also laid for a main drainage scheme.

Despite this zealous beginning, little followed. The investigations carried out by the Corporation illustrated the severity of Clontarf's problems. Domestic water supplies of the area were delivered through piping of two and four inches in diameter. Piping that was not only too limited in capacity but suffered greatly from corrosion through years of neglect. It was proposed by the Corporation to completely replace the system with nine inch diameter piping which was deemed more suitable. Problems were also realised with the main drainage scheme. The sewage system that according to C. U. D. C. was far more efficient than that of Dublin Corporation merely deposited crude sewage into the foreshore of Clontarf or into cesspools in Clontarf itself. Therefore the expense associated with modernising this existing scheme was considerable. As a result no work was carried out in the earlier years regarding drainage. Dwellings for the working classes were delayed in the early years due to disagreements between a local Committee and the Corporation about the number and type of houses to be constructed.

Throughout the earlier years of the century progress remained slow. Some improvements were realised such as the construction of new roadways in Philipsburgh Avenue and actions taken to reclaim the slobs. From this period onwards, the Corporation came under increasing criticism from Clontarf residents and Committees. Questions were asked as to why no work had even begun on the projects promised to them under the Clontarf Improvements Bill. Five years after it was enacted, Clontarf's water supply, drainage and overall dilapidated state remained unchanged. Calls were also made to improve the Clontarf foreshore. The sea shore once popular with bathers from the North City had become polluted to an alarming extent. Raw sewage from virtually all of the populous Dublin suburbs, Drumcondra (via the tolka), Rathmines, Pembroke and Clontarf itself was released into it. Before the completion of the main Dublin Drainage Scheme in 1906, the crude waste of the city of Dublin also found its way here via the Liffey, whose disgraceful state is described below. "On the state of the Liffey, we held an enquiry which showed that it is polluted to a fearful extent......experiments.... showed that the water was in places so filthy as to cause almost instant death to fish, and the fishermen of the estuary gave us evidence which proved that numbers of salmon have this year been killed by it........ To anyone who had passed along the quays at low water, the poisonous smell of the river, must have proved the absolute necessity of some remedy being quickly applied to this gross evil."

The health hazards created by this pollution were well known by this time and yet little was done by the Corporation to remedy the situation. Repeated calls were made to connect up both Drumcondra and Clontarf to the city scheme following its completion by to little avail. Yet it must be admitted that following the diversion of the city sewerage to Ringsend away from the Clontarf foreshore, the foreshore improved notably. This in turn led to calls for changes to be made to the foreshore in the form of grass enclosures, drinking fountains, public conveniences, footpaths and lighted roadways to derive the full potential from this valuable resource. However the appeals went unheard and no improvements were made.

Clontarf drainage remained a contentious issue. In 1904, Alderman Tickell reminded the Corporation of their obligation to Clontarf of providing a main drainage scheme. A reply was made stating that research into the geological structure was necessary and was at the time being carried out. In 1905, Dollymount Improvements Association adopted a resolution intimating that a main drainage scheme be adopted immediately. When an advertisement was drawn up by the Corporation seeking tenders for the provision of a main drainage scheme in Clontarf, it appeared that combined efforts of Tickell and Dollymount Residents had proved effective. This was not to be. Despite repeated offers from firstly a Kilkenny builder in 1906 and a Dublin Company in 1907, the Corporation withdrew the advertisement and stated that the work would be carried out by they alone. It was stated that they were unhappy with the low numbers of Irishmen and materials employed by the outside contractors and they refused their services. It would appear that the Corporation were purposefully delaying the project. In 1908, it was disclosed that the main Dublin Drainage Scheme had run into financial difficulties. The cost of the project designed to process all of the sewage generated in the city of Dublin had exceeded the half million pounds allocation. Therefore if finance was unavailable to complete this project, the plan to link up the suburban system of Clontarf and Drumcondra was now out of the question.
