Chapter 11 — Dundalk

Background

In her report of March 1958, however, a more critical tone emerged. She remarked that the School was well run but not as efficient as it could be. Again, she made reference to the lack of initiative on the part of management in making changes in the School. She referred to the children using the field from the national school for play and not having facilities on their own premises. The Department Inspector, Mr Sugrue, visited the School in September 1958, and wrote a report. The main purpose of his visit appeared to have been the lack of recreational facilities in the School. He stated that he was ‘quite satisfied with the general catering for the children’s welfare apart from recreational facilities’, adding that, ‘There is a great need for a Recreational Hall and for better facilities for outdoor games and pastimes’. He went on to say that he had discussed this need with the Reverend Mother and the other nuns in charge of running the Industrial School, including the Resident Manager and the Sister in charge, pointing out to her that such improvements in recreational facilities had not been pressed upon the School greatly, due to the low level of the grant, but now that the grants had been increased substantially, he was insisting on efforts being made to remedy these defects. He suggested converting part of the old vacant national school buildings into a recreational hall, and the playground attached to the national school could be made available as a playground. He also pointed out that the children could use two tennis courts adjacent to the School. Having discussed these ideas with the nuns in question, he found them to be enthusiastic about carrying out his suggested improvements.

After Mr Sugrue’s visit, Dr McCabe inspected the School in October 1958, and found that there was great activity going on in the School, with many of Mr Sugrue’s suggestions being rapidly put into practice. She noted that the new Reverend Mother was very enthusiastic and co-operative. Also, she noted that an opera was being organised for Christmas.

The year 1959 saw three inspections of the School by Dr McCabe, in March, May and June, although she issued just one report. In it, she stated that the School was very well run and that many improvements had been made and continued to be made.

Again on 29th and 30th April 1960, Dr McCabe referred to continued improvements but was characteristically vague. For example, she said that much needed to be done, but it was hoped that changes would be carried out in time. She felt that the Resident Manager and staff were willing and co-operative and she found the Resident Manager kind and attentive. The same comments were made in January 1961, that the School was well run and that improvements had been made and continued to be made. In 1962, she considered the School was still well run. Redecoration had been completed. She noted again that the Resident Manager was very kind. After a second inspection in September 1962, she again said the School was being very well run and the Resident Manager very capable. The falling numbers were of concern to the Resident Manager. Dr McCabe also remarked that she had visited the sea-side residence of the School and found ‘all very well and enjoying the holiday’. In 1963, there were four visits by the Medical Inspector to the School. After these visits, she found the School again to be very well run, with the Resident Manager being very capable and kind and interested in the children, and noted that she had done her best to make any improvements that were suggested.

Following Dr McCabe’s departure from her post in 1965, Dr Lysaght carried out a full inspection on 24th March 1966. In his lengthy report he remarked that: There is a kindly & intimate atmosphere in this comparatively small school which makes up for its old fashioned & rough furniture and equipment. The fact that the numbers are low and the buildings not fully occupied tend to make it feel bland by comparison with more compact building or one in which all the rooms are occupied. Much could be done to bring it up to date by way of say modern beds.

The next inspection, by Dr Lysaght, did not take place until November 1971. The state of affairs existing in the School at that time are outlined with some acerbity as follows: Two elderly nuns are mainly responsible for the running of this school, both spent practically all their religious life in this one school on this same work ... It seems as if the school staggered on for years with little interest or encouragement from the Department. It was left to the Sisters themselves to make a break-through when, in 1967, they embarked on major works of alterations and improvements. I understand that was primarily sparked off by the election, in 1966, of a new Reverend Mother, who has given this work her whole-hearted interest, sympathy and practical support. Until her arrival, (two sisters) admitted to me that they felt this school was virtually a barracks!

In April 1973, the Inspector noted the change in the type of child who was resident there, remarking in his report on the fact that ‘Dundalk seems to have more than its quota of slow learners and retarded pupils’.

The report of March 1976 is very complimentary of the work of the Resident Manager, in achieving a high degree of stability for the children and in creating a warm and friendly environment for them. Interestingly, the Department Inspector noted: This establishment is a text book example of the people playing the more important role than the building. The children were all very happy and relaxed with their staff both Lay and Religious – they were able to talk and play freely without any inhibitions.

Contrasting views were expressed by Department Inspectors. Dr Lysaght amended his 1976 report in complimentary remarks: This was a worthwhile and valid visit where one could state objectively that the present Child Care practices are geared towards the interest of the children, there is a healthy happy atmosphere ...

However, when the School was next inspected by Mr Graham Granville in February 1977 he was very critical: the Resident Manager ... has endeavoured to operate a residential children’s home for a very long time now under extremely exacting and formidable conditions within her own community ... is now showing signs of being a sick person and tired. The children are not suffering unduly at present, nevertheless, the future is very uncertain, and I would see a grave risk to the children’s safety if there were to be fire, and combine this lack of enthusiasm towards the children’s social and academic development and one has certain crucial problems, that cannot be over looked.

The Department’s view of the School in an internal memorandum dated February 1977 considered the School to be inadequate on a number of fronts. It listed the concerns of the Department, namely the condition of the outside of the building; the need for decorating the inside; the inadequate maintenance of health records; contact with local schools; assessment procedures; co-operation with social workers; contact with parents; and the very inadequate fire precautions. The list of requirements was considered formidable, and the Department saw it as a matter of urgency to decide what had to be done with the School. Because of these factors and the falling numbers, the eventual decision taken was to close the School, which came about in 1983.

Elaine, a witness who spent her entire childhood from aged three to 16 years in the Institution in the 1940s and 1950s, was able to recall the living conditions. She was born in a home for unmarried mothers in Dublin and, at the age of three, transferred to St Joseph’s as a voluntary admission. Her earliest memories of the School were from age seven. She described life in the School as being ‘dull ... grey. Nobody cared ... The food was awful’. She said there was very little meat and the dinners consisted mainly of soup and potatoes.

She criticised the clothing. She was given a set of summer clothes in April that had to last right through until September and October, with the result that she was often frozen. Her dress was made of calico. All the children suffered from chilblains. The jumpers and stockings which the children knitted themselves did not keep them warm in the outside yard where they spent a lot of time. They wore their winter coats only when they went for walks on Sundays.

She described the daily chores that the children were required to do. She explained that every child was given a chore that was her special responsibility: There was two lasses looked after the kitchen ... Other girls would ... look after the convent ... There was one lassie that had the laundry ...We all had chores. Some had the kitchen duties, some was cleaning up the pantries and things like that. Mine was the youngsters, there wouldn’t have been many, not in today’s terms. It seemed an awful lot then and it seemed a big chore. You had to look after them. You combed their hair, you fine combed their hair and make sure there was no nits and things like that. We didn’t have any toothbrushes so we didn’t have to look after our teeth ...

She began this ‘child minding children’ from the age of about 10 or 11. She went on to explain the system: We would have lived on landings. Well there was the first landing, second and third landing. Mine would have been the charges on the third landing, they were the younger people ... They would have been maybe two to seven.