Chapter 10 — Carriglea

Introduction

A ‘judicious method’ was obviously found because the total of money in the Building Fund for 1954 was recorded as £16,000, together with bank credits of approximately £8,000. It does not appear that Carriglea benefited from this Building Fund over the years. Basic maintenance was paid for out of current income and, although major improvements were undertaken by the Resident Manager in 1953/1954, these were of limited value to the boys, as the School closed within months of these improvements. It continued as a residential institution and, in 1956, opened as a juniorate for young boys wishing to join the Congregation.

The Congregation have acknowledged that, at the time of its closure, the surplus funds in Carriglea amounted to £25,255. The Christian Brothers in their Submission gave a number of explanations for this surplus. First, they said that the building was not old and therefore not in need of major renovation while the school operated. It is difficult to reconcile this explanation with the fact that Carriglea Park Industrial School was a 19th century building requiring the same level of maintenance as other Christian Brothers’ schools, and the condition of the buildings was consistently criticised by Visitors from the Congregation. Secondly, they pointed to the figure for repairs and maintenance for the period 1940 to 1954 which amounted to £4,798 and was, they said, a low sum. Thirdly, the Christian Brothers pointed to the fact that the maintenance grants increased in 1947 and 1948, and this factor they attributed to the accounts moving from the red into the black. Fourthly, they said that the purchase of additional farmland at Clonkeen considerably increased the farm in Carriglea and contributed to the surplus.

Sufficient funding was provided to meet the basic needs of the children in Carriglea, but it was not entirely devoted to that purpose. The Christian Brothers spent money on Carriglea just before it closed as an industrial school and opened as a juniorate for the Order.

Br Seamus Nolan, a member of the leadership team of St Helen’s Province of the Congregation of Christian Brothers, provided the Investigation Committee with an Opening Statement in regard to Carriglea. In his statement he described life in the Institution and outlined the Congregation’s view as to how the Institution operated. Br Nolan submitted that Carriglea remained in the shadow of Artane for a significant part of its existence and was compared unfairly to Artane. He added: the strength and individuality of Carriglea Park lay in the fact that it was small by comparison with its supposed parent, and while it practiced the same type of control, the staff, mainly Brothers, were accessible to the boys, befriended many of them and remained their mentors long after their stay in Carriglea Park.

Br Nolan referred to the various inspections carried out by the Congregation and the State, which ‘brought every aspect of life under scrutiny’. He stated that Carriglea fared well in these inspections and that ‘general provision for the pupils, medical care and especially education were highly praised’. Br Nolan referred to the annual Visitations to the School by members of the Provincial Council, which he believed were the most thorough and insightful of the inspections. He stated: ‘here again satisfaction and praise were the most common outcomes of the visits but censure and demands for improvement were not spared if failures were noticed’.

Br Nolan repeated the Congregation’s apology to any person who had experienced abuse by a Christian Brother in one of their institutions, but cautioned that it was important not to forget those who did not fail in their duty and gave generously of their time and service for the children committed to their care.

The Investigation Committee heard evidence from five complainants and one respondent in private hearings held over two days on 13th and 14th March 2006.

Br Nolan gave evidence to the Investigation Committee on behalf of the Congregation at a public hearing which took place on 24th May 2006. It focused on issues that arose as a result of the private hearings into Carriglea and the documentary material furnished to the Commission.

In addition to oral evidence, the Investigation Committee considered documents received from the Christian Brothers, the Department of Education and Science, An Garda Síochána and the Archbishop of Dublin.

The Investigation Committee received a submission from the Christian Brothers on 4th April 2007, in which they adopted the General Submissions made regarding other Christian Brothers’ institutions.

Physical abuse

In any large institution, discipline and control are intrinsically linked with the quality of leadership and management. For most of the period under review, Carriglea was badly managed, with too few Brothers accepting the mantle of responsibility for running this large industrial school. Four Brothers held the position of Superior throughout the 1940s. Two of these Brothers were elderly, Brs Pryor3 and Bryant4, and should not have been appointed to manage a school of over 250 boys.

Throughout the 1940s, numbers in Carriglea exceeded the certified limit of 250 boys. Boys were admitted from the age of six and, between 1940 and 1954, 76% of the children were between nine and 12 years old.

Added to this mix of ineffectual management and the high proportion of young children was the fact that there was simply nothing for these children to do outside school hours. There were no organised games and nowhere for them to play. The gymnasium was converted to a fuel store in the late 1930s. The only trades operating in Carriglea were tailoring and boot-making, with only a small proportion of the boys involved in trades training. Woodwork training had been abandoned in the early 1940s, despite the presence of qualified teachers and a fully equipped room. Until the 1930s the School had an admirable band, consisting of some 30 boys, but by 1938 the band was no longer operating. Also around this time, the practice of sending the brighter boys to the local Christian Brothers’ secondary school, to further their education, ceased. This system had previously worked well, with the industrial school boys outshining their peers from the outside national schools, and the Congregation could not explain why this practice was discontinued.

The Visitation Report of 1936 gave an early indication of the problems that were to dog the School until its closure. The Report spoke highly of the Superior, Br Rene5, but expressed concern that he was over-burdened, as he appeared to be running the School single-handedly. Br Rene asserted that, out of a Community of seven Brothers, only two were ‘active members’. The Brother appointed as Disciplinarian was entirely ineffective and was unfit for the task. As a result, it fell to the Superior or one of the lay staff to perform this function. On the few occasions on which it fell to the Disciplinarian to perform his role, the result had been ‘incidents and acts of insubordination on the part of the boys’, which the Visitor attributed to lack of tact on the part of the Brother. Despite the lack of involvement by the majority of Brothers in the Institution, they took umbrage when the Superior appeared to attach more weight to the opinions of the secular staff.

Matters improved somewhat the following year with the arrival of a new Sub-Superior, Br Vachel6, who relieved the waning Superior of some of the daily burdens involved in running the Institution.