44 entries for Visitor
BackThe 1937 Visitation Report described the School as being in an appalling state. The Visitor wrote: The parts of the Institution inhabited by the boys is very badly kept. The dining room has been painted within the past month and looks now fairly well, but the table cloths on the dining table are a positive disgrace. They are torn and in a filthy condition – wet and dirty. The tin and aluminium mugs are only fit for the scrapheap, and it is a shame for the Superior to have them seem about. The knives, spoons and all things pertaining to the meals are in a very bad condition. New sets of table linen, delph, knives, spoons, plates etc. are badly needed. The bed linen is also in a dirty condition, and fleas abound. Old rags, old jerseys and discarded stockings are under the mattresses, and some of the Wire mattresses are broken. The boys Lavatories are dirty and the tiles in the boys’ bath room are broken and missing. Some parts of the bath room also requires painting. Mr Whelan reports very adversely on all these at his last inspection, and since then little has been done. All these have been again pointed out to the Superior and he has been instructed to have all put into order without delay. A detailed copy of all has been left with him. The Institution is no credit to the Congregation.
By 1968, the Visitor had commented on the general neglect in the upkeep of the premises. The boys themselves were doing the general cleaning work under the supervision of a Brother, while workmen did the general maintenance work.
In both 1954 and 1963, the Visitor noted that the frequent changes of staff had had an adverse effect on the standards. By contrast, in 1958 the Visitor said that quite a good standard was reached by the boys. Although the ‘uneven’ standard was mentioned in 1954, 1960 and 1961, the Visitor in 1960 noted that most of the boys had ‘the essentials’. The large numbers of weak pupils were mentioned in the 1964 and 1968 Reports and, in 1968, the Visitor noted that many of the boys needed individual help, which they were being given ‘as well as possible’.
In 1965, the Visitor said: The after care of the boys cannot be termed satisfactory. A number of boys go out to farmers but after a few years make their way to England. Some farmers keep them till they are 19 years of age and then let them off as they would be obliged to pay them a man’s wage.
When the Visitor called on Carriglea in 1943, he noticed that the wire fences near the trade shops were down and a little boy was sitting at a gap in the fence to keep the cows from trespassing. The Visitor was not impressed with this state of affairs, as he felt that the young boy should have been with his companions in class, at work or at play. He further commented that serious efforts should be made to keep the fences in a state of repair. Using a small boy to keep cows in because of a broken fence was a serious indictment of the way the School was run.
The following year, the Visitor recorded that the School had received a favourable report from the Department Inspector, but he found the top class weak in arithmetic, handwriting and letter writing. In addition, the Brother in charge of this class had unilaterally decided to abandon the teaching of Irish. The Visitor remarked that he ‘ought show more zeal for their welfare’. He noted that one of the other two teaching Brothers was also a poor teacher. The Visitor was critical of the boys’ clothing, some of which was simply unfit for use and should be discarded. He complained about the heavy boots the boys wore, which were badly repaired, making them ‘unsightly, unwieldy things’. He was pleased to see that the boys now had good shoes for Sunday.
In June 1940, the Visitor said that the yard was surfaced in coarse gravel which made it unsuitable as a play area. He found only one of the teachers, out of a complement of five, satisfactory. He observed, ‘the teaching staff here, as in the other industrial schools I visited this year, is weak. The type of boy in the industrial schools needs to have devoted, zealous and self-sacrificing teachers’. The treacherous condition of the schoolyard continued to receive mention in the Visitation Reports and Department Inspection Reports, but it was not until 1955 that the necessary work was undertaken.
The Visitor made similar findings as regards trades training in his Report the following year. He recorded that, despite the existence of a carpentry shop, that trade was not taught. He believed that machines rather than people were used in the trades in which the boys were instructed and jobs could not be secured for them. Boys tended to work on farms before drifting off to England or into the Army. He supported the Superior’s suggestion that a Brother who could teach arts and crafts be drafted onto the staff in order to ‘take some of the dullness out of their lives’. He added, ‘the evening is long here and occupation for the boys is necessary’.
The following year, the Visitor acknowledged that a substantial sum had been spent on updating the boys’ kitchen, but additional renovations had been put on hold pending a decision on the future of the School. The School closed in 1966.
The Visitor was critical of the overall cleanliness of the boys’ clothing and of the dormitories.
The Visitor was of the view that the situation in Salthill was so serious that a visit from the Brother Provincial would be necessary in order to drive home the gravity of the matter to the Superior.
He thought that, once the boys reached the age of 12, they should be transferred to Artane. The Visitor did not agree with the writer of the previous year’s Visitation Report that the Brothers were doing a good job in Salthill. However, he did not blame the staff, as they were doing the best they could with the resources they had at their disposal. He criticised the frequent change in staff, as just when they had established a relationship with the boys, invariably they would be moved on. He added: Perhaps we put too much stress on academic training – lessons in hygiene in personal cleaniness – in care of clothes – in polishing of shoes – in using of laces in their shoes – in combing of hair of walking without slouching are all of great importance for these boys. I thought the boys were badly clad and untidy. If we were inspected by an outside authority we would not be pleased with the report ... We need two things for this school 1) more money 2) more trained staff. We need a few nuns more so than in Artane – the boys here seem more helpless.
In 1973, the Visitor was extremely condemnatory of the School. He noted that the boys in Salthill were generally more disturbed than the boys in Letterfrack and that, by comparison, the School was understaffed. This was a disturbing comparison because Letterfrack was operated as a junior remand home for boys who had committed criminal offences. Both the age and the number of staff were concerns in this regard. He noted, ‘The lack of female assistance is apparent as well as the need for such evidenced by the way the boys flock around the assistant cook when she is cleaning around the home’.
The Visitation Reports touched on this aspect of the work of the Institution throughout the four decades that an internal primary school operated in Salthill. In general, the Visitor seemed satisfied with the standard of education provided in the 1940s, although from year to year a particular Visitor voiced a concern.