Chapter 11 — Glin

Evidence from representatives of the survivor groups

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.

Physical abuse

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.

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.

Fr Flanagan made no mention of the Blake case while he was in Ireland, although his attacks against the punishment regime in Irish penal institutions which received widespread publicity. In a public lecture in Cork’s Savoy Cinema he told his audience, ‘You are the people who permit your children and the children of your communities to go into these institutions of punishment. You can do something about it’. He called Ireland’s penal institutions ‘a disgrace to the nation’ and then issued a public statement saying ‘I do not believe that a child can be reformed by lock and key and bars, or that fear can ever develop a child’s character’.8 His resolute and vociferous stand against the corporal punishment of children led him to speak out against the Glin case when he received a letter from one of his contacts in Ireland, Walter Mahon Smith.9 It stated, ‘As regards the Glin case none of the Daily papers would investigate or publish this for me’.

Fr Flanagan made no mention of the Blake case while he was in Ireland, although his attacks against the punishment regime in Irish penal institutions which received widespread publicity. In a public lecture in Cork’s Savoy Cinema he told his audience, ‘You are the people who permit your children and the children of your communities to go into these institutions of punishment. You can do something about it’. He called Ireland’s penal institutions ‘a disgrace to the nation’ and then issued a public statement saying ‘I do not believe that a child can be reformed by lock and key and bars, or that fear can ever develop a child’s character’.8 His resolute and vociferous stand against the corporal punishment of children led him to speak out against the Glin case when he received a letter from one of his contacts in Ireland, Walter Mahon Smith.9 It stated, ‘As regards the Glin case none of the Daily papers would investigate or publish this for me’.

When he got back to America, Fr Flanagan spoke about it to the American Press. The matter was raised in the Dáil in a debate on 23rd July 1946.

When he got back to America, Fr Flanagan spoke about it to the American Press. The matter was raised in the Dáil in a debate on 23rd July 1946.

Mr Seán Brady TD asked the Minister for Justice, Mr Boland: whether his attention has been drawn to criticisms of the prison and Borstal systems in this country reported to have been made by Monsignor Flanagan during his recent visit and published in the Irish newspapers, and to similar criticisms made on his return to the United States which were published in the New York Press on the 17th July, 1946 and whether he has any statement to make.

Mr Seán Brady TD asked the Minister for Justice, Mr Boland: whether his attention has been drawn to criticisms of the prison and Borstal systems in this country reported to have been made by Monsignor Flanagan during his recent visit and published in the Irish newspapers, and to similar criticisms made on his return to the United States which were published in the New York Press on the 17th July, 1946 and whether he has any statement to make.

Mr Boland replied: My attention has been drawn to the criticisms referred to. During his recent stay in this country Monsignor Flanagan did not see and did not ask to see any of the prisons or the Borstal institutions. I am surprised that in these circumstances an ecclesiastic of his standing should have thought it proper to describe in such offensive and intemperate language conditions about which he has no firsthand knowledge.

Mr Boland replied: My attention has been drawn to the criticisms referred to. During his recent stay in this country Monsignor Flanagan did not see and did not ask to see any of the prisons or the Borstal institutions. I am surprised that in these circumstances an ecclesiastic of his standing should have thought it proper to describe in such offensive and intemperate language conditions about which he has no firsthand knowledge.

Mr Flanagan TD asked if the Minister was ‘... aware of the fact that Monsignor Flanagan did not make these statements without very good foundation and very good reason for them’.