Chapter 11 — Glin

Evidence from representatives of the survivor groups

On 26th April he received a reply from the Secretary of the Department: The Minister is satisfied ... that he is in possession of all the facts concerning the punishment inflicted, and in these circumstances he considers that a sworn inquiry as suggested by you is unnecessary and would serve no useful purpose. In regard to your further suggestion for an inquiry into the Industrial School system and the Borstal Institution system I am to point out that the Industrial and Reformatory School system was the subject of an exhaustive inquiry in the years 1934 to 1936 by a commission appointed by the Minister for Education ... This report is now out of print, but you may be able to see a copy in a Public Library.

Physical abuse

On 26th April he received a reply from the Secretary of the Department: The Minister is satisfied ... that he is in possession of all the facts concerning the punishment inflicted, and in these circumstances he considers that a sworn inquiry as suggested by you is unnecessary and would serve no useful purpose. In regard to your further suggestion for an inquiry into the Industrial School system and the Borstal Institution system I am to point out that the Industrial and Reformatory School system was the subject of an exhaustive inquiry in the years 1934 to 1936 by a commission appointed by the Minister for Education ... This report is now out of print, but you may be able to see a copy in a Public Library.

On 9th May the Councillor replied, giving vent to his anger at the secrecy about the case: In my opinion, the useful purpose of an enquiry would be to put the public in the possession of the facts which the Minister and his officials and a few others only now possess. As the Minister refuses to give the necessary publicity, I am compelled to take other steps so that it may be procured. In your letter of the 5th January you extended to me, under the direction of the Minister, an explanation for my confidential information. As the contents of this letter were conveyed to me in substance through other sources than that of the Minister, I feel that under the circumstances I would not be justified in with-holding the information contained in this letter from the public or their representatives.

On 9th May the Councillor replied, giving vent to his anger at the secrecy about the case: In my opinion, the useful purpose of an enquiry would be to put the public in the possession of the facts which the Minister and his officials and a few others only now possess. As the Minister refuses to give the necessary publicity, I am compelled to take other steps so that it may be procured. In your letter of the 5th January you extended to me, under the direction of the Minister, an explanation for my confidential information. As the contents of this letter were conveyed to me in substance through other sources than that of the Minister, I feel that under the circumstances I would not be justified in with-holding the information contained in this letter from the public or their representatives.

The Councillor wrote to the manager of the Theatre Royal in Dublin, who had contact with Fr Flanagan6 of Boys Town in the USA. He told him: You have knowledge of this case, and I recall you saying to me some time ago, that you were approached by a prominent public man, who asked you to use your influence with me to drop this case. To your credit you used no such influence with me.

The Councillor wrote to the manager of the Theatre Royal in Dublin, who had contact with Fr Flanagan6 of Boys Town in the USA. He told him: You have knowledge of this case, and I recall you saying to me some time ago, that you were approached by a prominent public man, who asked you to use your influence with me to drop this case. To your credit you used no such influence with me.

The case, he said, was ‘this most degrading reflection on our system of detention of juveniles ... These conditions will exist as long as Industrial Schools ... remain closed boroughs to the public’.

The case, he said, was ‘this most degrading reflection on our system of detention of juveniles ... These conditions will exist as long as Industrial Schools ... remain closed boroughs to the public’.

He apparently handed all the documents, except the confidential letter sent on 5th January, to the manager of the Theatre Royal for forwarding to Fr Flanagan. They were found in Fr Flanagan’s archives, and are the sole remaining record of the case. No record of this case was found in the files of the Department of Education.

He apparently handed all the documents, except the confidential letter sent on 5th January, to the manager of the Theatre Royal for forwarding to Fr Flanagan. They were found in Fr Flanagan’s archives, and are the sole remaining record of the case. No record of this case was found in the files of the Department of Education.

While this correspondence was going on, there were other developments. On 12th October 1945, the boy’s mother received a letter saying: The Minister for Education has informed me that he has granted the discharge of your son ... Hoping he will be a success and give you complete satisfaction.

While this correspondence was going on, there were other developments. On 12th October 1945, the boy’s mother received a letter saying: The Minister for Education has informed me that he has granted the discharge of your son ... Hoping he will be a success and give you complete satisfaction.

He was discharged, despite being still only 15. In 1946, the Resident Manager was transferred to Salthill, again as Resident Manager. Br McCormack’s research paper noted: However it is also open to the interpretation that, following the publicity of October 1946, during Fr Flanagan’s visit to Ireland, the Provincial was using the first available opportunity to remove Br Delaine7 from Glin. This would have been at the New Year, a time when changes were common and would not attract gossip.

He was discharged, despite being still only 15. In 1946, the Resident Manager was transferred to Salthill, again as Resident Manager. Br McCormack’s research paper noted: However it is also open to the interpretation that, following the publicity of October 1946, during Fr Flanagan’s visit to Ireland, the Provincial was using the first available opportunity to remove Br Delaine7 from Glin. This would have been at the New Year, a time when changes were common and would not attract gossip.

Commenting on this case in a recent communication the Christian Brothers wrote: Without contemporary evidence other than the [the councillor] /Department correspondence it is difficult to piece together the full story of this incident. There is no doubt that a serious breach of regulations did take place but the identity of the Brother mentioned in the account of the beating is not clear. The account mentions the “Head Brother” but since no name is given...Boys in industrial schools could confuse the functions of responsible staff such as Resident Manager (a rather aloof figure), the Disciplinarian, who was in charge of general discipline, and the Principal, who was in charge of the primary school and classroom discipline.