Chapter 3 — Ferryhouse

Sexual abuse

Counsel for Fr Valerio did not accept or reject the allegations but, in his statements to the Gardaí, Fr Valerio accepted abusing other boys in this fashion.

This man served as a Prefect in Ferryhouse for four years until he left to study for the priesthood. He exploited his position for the purpose of sexual abuse. In Ferryhouse the system allowed individuals to gain absolute control over large groups of children so that they could do what they liked with little risk of detection.

Mr Tablis was another outsider who worked in Clonmel and who had easy access to the boys in Ferryhouse. He does not seem to have had quite the same access to the dormitories as Mr Garnier had, but there are allegations against him in respect of sexual impropriety. Mr Tablis was a friend of Fr Lucio, the Resident Manager before Fr Stefano. Fr Ricardo described the situation as he recalled it: Mr Tablis , to my understanding, again was involved with [local club] and they used to bring the boys to ... a daily outing, where they would collect them in the cars and bring them to ... Mr Tablis would call alright, but I think he was a friend of Fr Lucio’s, he got to know the boys, but I think it was more got to do with the ... He wouldn’t be playing cards so much, I wouldn’t recall him being up in through the school generally.

Fr Antonio recalled that Mr Tablis ‘was very friendly with Fr Lucio, he might take two or three of the lads off for a spin in the car and all that kind of stuff, but ... didn’t have any specific role’.

Fr Paolo, who was a Prefect, was uneasy about Mr Tablis, just as he was about Mr Garnier. His determination to keep outsiders away from the boys in his group extended as much to Mr Tablis as it did to Mr Garnier.

A witness who was present in the School from the latter half of the 1970s alleged that he was sexually abused by Br Bruno and Mr Ducat. Mr Ducat was a local man who used to visit the School regularly, doing odd jobs. Fr Antonio gave evidence that Mr Ducat would regularly drive the boys to concerts. The witness alleged that, on one occasion, Mr Ducat asked him if he wanted to go for a drive in his car. He said that he would like to and they went for a drive around the football field. They then left the School grounds, and Mr Ducat stopped the car on the Waterford road: He pulled his car in and he tried to get me to commit a sex act for him ... I opened the door and ran back towards the School but to my surprise I was told I won’t be going home again because I had tried to run away. Ducat had gone back and told whoever was in charge that I had tried to abscond. In fact I didn’t try to abscond. There was no point reporting the matter because there was never anything done about the matters when you reported them.

Fr Stefano was asked about Mr Ducat. He said that he had never received a complaint about him, but that, in the late 1970s: I was tipped off by a detective in Clonmel that they were worried about him, you know, and I sent for him immediately and he was never allowed in the gates of that School after that again.

Br Gilberto served in Ferryhouse as Assistant Prefect in the mid-1940s, and he returned there as a student from the early to the mid-1950s. He was sent to Upton in the mid-1950s and, shortly afterwards, it was discovered that he had been sexually abusing boys there. A fuller account appears in the Upton chapter.

Br Emilio joined the Rosminians in the late 1940s, but left the Novitiate at Kilmurry after only three months ‘against [the] counsel of [his] Novice Master who thought his decision to leave imprudent and his judgement premature’. He returned to the Rosminians three years later and was re-admitted to the Novitiate in the early 1950s. He was sent to Ferryhouse in the mid-1950s, and he remained there until he was dismissed by decree of the Superior General some three years later.

The reasons for his dismissal appears from the correspondence. In a letter to Fr Lucca,33 the Superior General in the mid-1950s, the Provincial wrote: I regret that there is another Brother Emilio who is stationed at the Clonmel house and who is very unsettled in his vocation and desires a dispensation from his triennial vows, which he took on the [two years ago]. His reasons for desiring the dispensation are that he cannot remain until his vows expire as he feels unhappy and discontented – feels keenly the restrictions of obedience and has reasons for fearing that contact with boys would be a danger to him. This brother is very faithful and conscientious in the office entrusted to him at Clonmel and his external behaviour is good ... I offered him a change to another community but he would not accept that. I am satisfied that it is a case for a dispensation ...

Fr Lucca replied: As regards Br Emilio try to encourage him to be faithful to his vows until their expiry next September.

The Provincial, Fr Placido,34 was unhappy with this response and wrote again, setting out different reasons why he felt Br Emilio should be dispensed. Br Emilio was ‘of good character but somewhat unbalanced’, ‘self willed, obstinate’, he had ‘an intense antipathy to the Prefect of the boys ... and caused great deal of trouble influencing unduly two other members of the Community against the Prefect’, ‘he is a trouble maker’. Fr Placido concluded: I think it is urgent to obtain a dispensation from him since he is so unhappy and so unspiritual in his outlook and his presence at Clonmel would endanger still more the peace and happiness of the Community.

Fr Lucca replied: In view of the explanation you now give me regarding Br Emilio, I believe it is better that he goes. I am dispensing him from his Triennial Vows according to the faculties given me by Canon Law. I am very sorry but it is better for himself, and for the community that he goes. Send him home straight away, and may the Lord protect him and accompany him.

Despite the fact that the correspondence implies that the Brother was granted a dispensation, his personnel card records that he was dismissed. The full details of this case remain uncertain.

The fact that the Brother had ‘reasons for fearing that contact with boys would be a danger to him’, were not sufficient for the Superior General to grant dispensation. The Provincial then sought the dispensation on the ground that the Brother was disrupting the community and this did persuade the Superior General. The primary concern was about managing the Brother’s case. The safety of the boys was not a consideration.