Chapter 9 — Tralee

Introduction

By contrast, a Resident Manager who was appointed in the 1960s was clearly unsuited to the role. This was recognised by the Visitor who came to Tralee six months after his appointment. That Visitor said that he was somewhat slow mentally and would require the advice and guidance of an alert senior Brother: Owing to his deafness, the present Sub-Superior leads a life somewhat apart but is always ready and willing to help. Nobody else on the present staff would be a good substitute.

The next Visitor said that the Resident Manager was ‘inclined to remain too much in his office and it is said that he does not visit the school’. Much of this Resident Manager’s work was left to the Brothers. The Report stated: The Superior is kind and considerate with the community but it would seem that more generosity on his part towards the boys would have a very wholesome effect ... It has been pointed out to the Superior that it is necessary for him to assert his authority more. I can see that he has a good deal of office work to do between phone calls and callers and this perhaps distracts him from what should be his chief concern – the boys.

Subsequent reports criticise his lack of support of the Brothers and his lack of engagement with the School. In the final year of his appointment, the Visitor commented: There would seem to have been a general neglect in the upkeep of the premises and rightly or wrongly I place this at the responsibility of the Superior ... I have the impression that the Superior is a lazy man; he has no school work and, as far as I can find out, very little supervision duty. This puts much extra work on the staff. In short the place has needed a leader.4

The Visitor described the School as a ‘most depressing establishment’.

During the years of this Resident Manager’s tenure, a number of serious allegations came to light and were poorly handled by him. These are dealt with in more detail later..

The post of Resident Manager was central to the functioning of the School. Brothers and boys benefited from a better quality of life under good ones, and conditions deteriorated under those who were incompetent.

Physical abuse

In their Opening Statement, the Christian Brothers addressed the question of physical punishment of the boys. Under the heading ‘Corporal Punishment’ they discussed in general terms its use in their schools, and under ‘Records of Abuse in St Joseph’s Tralee – Physical Abuse’ they detailed the cases of documented abuse in their records.

In the section under ‘Corporal Punishment’ they submitted that the system in use in the primary school in St Joseph’s, Tralee was the same as that used in all national schools at the time. They conceded that there were lapses when severe punishment was used, and they cited two examples from the Visitation Reports, one in the 1940s and one in the 1960s. Apart from these concessions, however, the Christian Brothers submitted that the corporal punishment administered was acceptable by the standards of the time. If it was not, they insisted, appropriate action was taken: Assuredly, there were occasional lapses in the administration of punishment, and the records show that when a serious breach of standards occurred, the matter was reported at the annual visitation when the Congregation authority visited the institution and reported on its functioning. On some occasions, the records show that the Resident Manager of the day secured the transfer of a brother from the staff of the institution because he, the Resident Manager, was dissatisfied with the manner in which the particular Brother in question disciplined the pupils.

Under the heading ‘Records of Abuse’, the Congregation identified two former members of staff as documented and acknowledged physical abusers of boys whilst they were in Tralee. Two other Brothers were ‘instructed to temper their teaching as there had been some reports of severity about them’. This instruction was given to the Brothers by letter at the same time as the Congregation accepted their application for Final Vows. They were later on the teaching staff of Tralee but there were ‘no records to show that they did not comply with the advice given them’.

As a further example of how complaints were dealt with, they cited a case in the late 1960s when allegations were made that a boy had been severely punished. The Opening Statement further stated that the Department of Education had taken the case very seriously and, following an investigation, it had accepted the explanation given on behalf of the Resident Manager.

Although the Congregation reiterated its apology of 29th March 1998 in its Opening Statement, the only concessions it made with regard to physical abuse in Tralee were that occasional lapses in the administration of punishment did occur and that there were five documented cases of severe punishment in the records. In four out of the five documented cases, the Congregation suggested that the matters were dealt with appropriately. Only in the case of Br Marceau, dealt with below, did the Congregation concede that his withdrawal from the School ‘was long overdue when it occurred’ and ‘the delay in taking firm action casts a shadow over the good work accomplished’ by the Brothers in Tralee.

All 15 former residents who gave evidence in Phase II made allegations of physical abuse. Some former members of staff in their evidence admitted that the rules for corporal punishment were broken in Tralee, either by themselves or by others, and that excessive punishment of children did occur. Documented cases of physical abuse: Br Eriq

Br Eriq was in Tralee in the late 1930s. Three Visitation Reports referred to difficulties with this Brother. The first Report said that he was ‘an open mouthed man and seems to be lacking in good sense’. It went on to say he was ‘harsh with the boys’, and that he ‘punishes them in ways contrary to Rule and has the unhappy knack of setting them against him’. It found him ‘the least suitable member of the staff’ on account of, amongst other things, his poor handling of the boys and his severity and his clashes with the older boys.

Despite the very clear concerns expressed in the first Report about his severity, in a follow-up letter to the Resident Manager it was recommended that Br Eriq be appointed to a teaching post and that the services of a lay teacher could be dispensed with. The lay teacher had left before the next Visitation.

The next Visitor noted that ‘instances of harsh treatment and severe punishment of boys’ by Br Eriq had been brought to his attention and that he, along with Br Beaufort, had been warned of the ‘possible evil consequences to the reputation of the school and to themselves personally of immoderate punishment of the boys’. Both expressed regret and promised to be ‘more watchful over themselves in their necessary correction of the boys’.