Chapter 11 — Glin

Neglect and emotional abuse

In 1938, the Visitor commented on the boys’ appearance: Nobody can fail to remark the contrast between an Industrial School boy in his everyday rig and the appearance of even the poorest boys attending our Day Schools. The Industrial School boy seems to have no appreciation of personal cleanliness and tidiness of dress.

The following year, the Visitor recorded that the School had received a favourable report from the Department Inspector, but he found the top class weak in arithmetic, handwriting and letter writing. In addition, the Brother in charge of this class had unilaterally decided to abandon the teaching of Irish. The Visitor remarked that he ‘ought show more zeal for their welfare’. He noted that one of the other two teaching Brothers was also a poor teacher. The Visitor was critical of the boys’ clothing, some of which was simply unfit for use and should be discarded. He complained about the heavy boots the boys wore, which were badly repaired, making them ‘unsightly, unwieldy things’. He was pleased to see that the boys now had good shoes for Sunday.

In June 1940, the Visitor said that the yard was surfaced in coarse gravel which made it unsuitable as a play area. He found only one of the teachers, out of a complement of five, satisfactory. He observed, ‘the teaching staff here, as in the other industrial schools I visited this year, is weak. The type of boy in the industrial schools needs to have devoted, zealous and self-sacrificing teachers’. The treacherous condition of the schoolyard continued to receive mention in the Visitation Reports and Department Inspection Reports, but it was not until 1955 that the necessary work was undertaken.

The 1941 Visitation Report listed repairs and improvements that were necessary, including the faulty hot water and heating system, the play hall was ‘cold, unsightly and dilapidated’ and needed to be replaced. The teachers, once again, came in for criticism, with only one of them regarded as satisfactory. Br Young was not impressed by the standard of work in the two trades being taught, namely boot-making and tailoring. The workshops were unsuitable and, in some instances, dangerous.

In 1942, the Visitor approved of the new spacious play hall which had been built for the boys. Water pipes continued to present problems, resulting in an insufficiency of water to the boys’ lavatories. The teacher in charge of the two junior classes had 59 pupils in his class, which made it very difficult to teach effectively.

Two years later, the Visitor found that ‘the literary side of the boys’ education is somewhat over emphasised to the neglect of practical work’. He drew attention to the fact that the only trades taught were tailoring and shoemaking. He noted that the boys’ sanitary facilities were ‘entirely inadequate’ and he was also critical of the laundry which required renovations.

The boys’ lavatories came in for criticism once again during the Visitation in 1945. The Visitor noted that the ‘Boys lavatories and bathroom are very primitive; there are no cisterns in the lavatories and boys have to carry water three times a day to flush them; I found a bad smell from them, they had not been flushed the morning I saw them; it was about 11am. It would be advisable to attend to both lavatories and bathroom in the near future’. Of the overall population of 214 boys, there were 190 on the School register. The remaining 24 boys were employed for more than six hours each day on the farm or in the workshops. This group received 30 minutes of instruction in religious doctrine daily. He advised: It is desirable that an hour a day extra should be afforded these boys to continue their education, especially as some of them had very little at the age of 14 years when they left off school work. Subjects such as English, Private Reading, Arithmetic, etc should interest and be useful to such boys.

In May 1946, the Visitor observed that the premises were badly laid out for the purposes of an industrial school, and that many repairs and alterations were necessary. The boys’ bathroom came in for particular criticism, as it was too small and badly fitted. The yards and approaches to the Institution were in very bad condition and posed a hazard. Some of the wire mattresses required overhauling, although he appreciated the difficulty in obtaining wire. He predicted that a sizeable sum of money would have to be expended on the School before long. The recurring theme of the inadequacy of trades training and education was once again aired. He observed: It is very difficult to place boys in the trades when they have to go out and many who have been trained to shoemaking or tailoring have to go to farm work. These are much handicapped and are not a success. The trades or farm boys do not receive any education when once they begin their respective trades. This is unfortunate, as they soon forget much of what they have learnt.

He noted complaints that the School was understaffed, and recommended that a Brother who could undertake some school work would be useful.

In December 1946, Dr McCabe visited the School and recorded that the premises were clean and in good condition and that the children were well cared for and happy.

However, she noted a major deficiency which was subsequently set out in a follow-up letter from the Department to the Superior in December: It is reported, however, that a number of the boys have not gained in weight and that a few have actually lost 2 or 3 lbs during the year. These boys who do not put on weight normally should be specially watched and they should be given such additional or special food as the School Medical Officer may prescribe. 1.Porridge should be served at breakfast. Each boy should be allowed at least a quarter of a pound of meat at each meal at which meat is served. 2.The boys everyday clothing should be improved. 3.The sanitary annexe should be kept in better order. 4.Rubber aprons and wellington boots should be provided for the boys in the laundry. 5.There is need for the provision of a new bathing annexe. 6.The dampness in the walls of the dormitories should be attended to. It is understood that you will arrange to have this matter attended to during the summer of 1947.

Additional points in her original report were that the dormitory walls had not been re-plastered as promised and remained damp, and there also remained room for improvement in boys’ clothing. She noted that the outdoor sanitation annexe was better kept than previously. Overall, she noted a general improvement in all departments.

In May 1948, the Visitor noted that the damp walls in the boys’ dormitories remained untreated, as did the play yard: The surface of the playground is completely gone and the rough stone foundation revealed and in dirty weather the surface must be something approaching a morass and as in this establishment, owing to the fact that the various sections are completely cut off from one another and that the boys have to go out into the open air when passing from one to the other this mud is carried on their boots into all departments and particularly the chapel.

He drew attention to a pattern he had noticed from visiting other institutions, which was the lack of facilities for the boys’ recreation: During the recreations there seems to be a universal tendency to just turn the boys loose in the playing field or to herd them into an empty hall and then to let them fend for themselves. A lot of them seemed to just loll around. Obviously such boys should be kept well occupied in an interesting manner. There seems to be a very great need for a much more generous supply of apparatus for games both outdoor and indoor. Very little seems to be done in the matter of supplying suitable reading material for them. Physical training is only carried out in a rather haphazard manner if at all.

Although the deteriorating condition of the premises was noted in various reports, the Congregation was reluctant to invest in repairs and renovations when the viability of the School was very much in question.