462 entries for Historical Context

At least £13,600 was paid by the school into the Building Fund, including £2,000 as late as February 1966. It is not known how much of this sum or the rest of the monies in the Fund were used for the purposes of effecting improvements in Tralee or for the benefit of the pupils there.

The annals disclosed certain irregularities that took place on the farm in relation to the disposal of produce and the ‘irregular use’ of income, which occurred during a period of severe deprivation for the boys. The annals report that the farm ‘appears to have been run on the lines of a Limited Company – between the Brother-in-Charge thereof, [a local businessman and a workman] – but with the liability on the Monastery’.

The annals go on to report that: In November 1950, about half of the livestock, valued at about £1,000, housed on the farm, belonged to [a local business man and a workman], from whom only £566 was received for them. ‘When a beast was killed neither the cutlets nor the offals was cooked for the boys. These portions appear to have been taken by the butcher and the plates (of beef) or the boney inferior parts of another beast (presumably the butcher’s) substituted. Even the first fruits of the vegetable garden were sold or rather given free at the butchers (greengrocers) shop while the boys could not be supplied’. The income on the vegetables for the six months ending 31st December 1949 was almost £53. The income for the six months ending 31st December 1950 was £200, which was spent on potatoes, which should have been retained, making the real income ‘nil’. The income for the six months to 31st December 1951, immediately after the Superior Resident Manager took control, was over £700. Monies were recovered, following the threat of legal proceedings. About one-third of the money taken in the sale of vegetables went to the boys. The farmyard was a ‘semi-hucksters shop’ and the boys were unable to weigh the potatoes and ‘gave bargains for a “tip”’. This state of affairs was being continued under two farm Brothers, until the Superior was compelled to intervene and have the second Brother removed, the first having already sought a change ‘before the improper transactions were known’. The Superior felt that it was an understatement to say that hundreds of pounds were lost over a period of three to four years, and wondered whether it could be counted in thousands. He noted that the boys were under-fed and denied vegetables whilst, at the same time, vegetables were on sale in the market and shops. The medical officer had noted that the vegetables were obtainable in town, but the boys could not get any.

The Visitation Report for 1951 refers to a want of agreement on the question of running the farm. The Report noted: It would appear that Br Christien’s predecessor on the farm was allowed a great deal of freedom in the handling of money and in the buying and selling of stock etc. There also appeared to be a lot of uncontrolled selling of vegetables both by boys and employees on the farm nor was there any proper check on the man that brought vegetables to the market or delivered them to various customers in the town. There was undoubtedly great need for a tightening up of these matters.

At the Visitor’s suggestion, a procedure was agreed between the Resident Manager, the bursar and the farm Brother that would rectify these matters. This plan did not work out as well as anticipated, but the farm Brother’s removal enabled the Resident Manager and the bursar to get proper control of the farm finances. Physical care: food

Some complainants who gave evidence to the Committee said that the food in Tralee was very bad, both in terms of quality and quantity. The 1940s was a period of food shortages everywhere, and Tralee would have had some difficulty in meeting all the dietary requirements of the boys, although it had the advantage of a farm that could have provided fresh vegetables and meat, and it had a bakery that provided all the bread consumed by the boys.

In this regard, the Resident Manager’s comments in the early 1950s regarding dealings on the farm and the disposal of produce were of particular interest. The Resident Manager felt that it was an understatement to say that hundreds of pounds were lost over a period of three to four years, and wondered whether it could be counted in thousands. He noted that the boys were underfed, and were denied vegetables whilst at the same time vegetables were on sale in the market and shops. According to the annals, the Medical Officer had noted that the vegetables were obtainable in town but the boys could not get any. The level of deprivation emerged in the evidence heard by the Committee: two of the boys who were in the school in the 1940s spoke of taking food prepared for the pigs.

As was confirmed by one complainant, the situation improved in the mid-1950s with the appointment of a new Brother to the kitchens, Br Lafayette, and the Visitors and Department of Education Inspector were generally satisfied with the quantity of food provided.27 As the Committee has seen in other institutions, the Inspector who visited industrial schools in the 1940s and 1950s was not slow to criticise the diet if she felt that the food was inadequate. Similarly, the Visitation Reports have also commented on inadequate food when they found standards were low. For example, the 1953 Visitation Report recorded complaints by Br Kalle and Br Montaine that the boys were not getting enough to eat. The Resident Manager denied this was so.

Br Lisle, who was in charge of the kitchen in the mid to late 1960s, told the Committee that he did not get a budget for the kitchen, and he had to make the best of what he got. He did not order what came in, but instead he cooked whatever food was there.

The lack of proper cooking facilities was criticised in the 1940s and into the 1950s. In the mid-1950s the Visitor referred to the kitchen Brother succeeding in feeding the boys ‘very well’ despite ‘wretchedly poor facilities in his kitchen’.28

It was not until 1957 that the Visitor recorded any improvement. Even after that date, the dining room and kitchen equipment were identified as inadequate.

Complainants who appeared before the Committee spoke of eating food from the farm to stave off hunger. This was alleged by former residents who were in the Institution throughout the period under investigation.

Two witnesses said the food that they got during Christmas was good. Physical care: the boys’ clothing

The state of the boys’ clothing varied greatly between 1940 and 1970. The poor quality of clothing was criticised by the Department of Education Inspector throughout most of the 1940s.29

It was not until 1954 that the Inspector described the standard of clothing as ‘v. good’. She noted that the quality had improved and that there were no patches. That year the Visitor reported that the boys were ‘especially well clothed’ and ‘appeared neat, tidy and clean’.