1,173 entries for Abuse Events

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.

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.

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.

The 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.

The negative impact of bad Resident Managers was clearly seen in Tralee, not only in terms of the physical care of the boys, but in every aspect of life there. The quality of the food improved in the 1950s with the improvements in the kitchen and the arrival of Br Lafayette. The Christian Brothers’ Opening Statement mentioned that Visitation Reports gave the impression that clothing and footwear were generally satisfactory but, in fact, there were numerous Inspector’s Reports indicating that clothing was below standard. Boys should not have gone hungry whilst produce from the farm was sold for private profit. This situation continued for a number of years before being stopped by a newly appointed Resident Manager.

Another complainant, who attended the school in the 1950s, said that the education he received was both ‘good and poor’. He noted that ‘education in Ireland at that time actually was non existent’. Education, he believed: would prepare you for when you leave the School, but it didn’t actually enhance my situation because when I left the School I still needed help to further my education and there was no actual aftercare.

One complainant, who was in the school in the 1940s, described how he was treated by the Brothers: There was no such thing as being good to you, there was no such thing as being good to you. You were there, you were just there to be worked and looked after. I couldn’t say I ever had a kind word from a Brother.

Another complainant told the Committee that he wet the bed until he was almost 16 and he got ‘some atrocious abuse over that’. He spoke of how the Brothers, but mostly one particular Brother, Br Ansel, would hold up the sheet after he wet the bed and show it to the rest of the School, mocking him. This led to him being labelled a bed-wetter by the other boys. This was, at the time, ‘the lowest you could be’.

Another former resident said that you never went to a Brother and told him your problem. He was being severely abused by Br Marceau, who was well known to the Congregation for his excessive punishment of boys in his care, but he could not speak to the Brothers about it because he did not know if he would be believed. If he was not believed, he could get a ‘hiding’ from the Brother he told. Then Br Marceau would be told and he would get a ‘worse hiding’ from him for telling lies. ‘That’s the way it was, you didn’t go to a Christian Brother because you didn’t expect any help from him’.

A fourth complainant, who worked in the laundry, recounted what occurred when smaller boys were brought to the laundry with wet sheets from their beds. He said: Yes, I can remember it quite vividly. Any of the boys – it depended on who the Brother was. They would parade the boy with his sheets in his hands, his wet sheets, the sheets he wetted in, and this little boy would be woken up there. As I said, I was between 14 and 15, I was old enough to get a job there, and I was able to see who is able to come in the door. Quite often the boys would walk in and the Brother would follow to humiliate the boy with his wet sheets, all the other children would follow the Christian Brother laid on to humiliate this little boy there. They would all be giggling, like kind of kids would be doing, giggling there, not understanding what the nature of that was. Here is this little boy there, standing with his wet sheets and he’s terrified. The Brother would turn around and say “right, ... he has wet his sheets, you have now got to wash his sheets. Now there’s the belt, give it to him so he won’t do it again”. To look at that little boy’s eyes, to look at that little boy’s eyes ... I wouldn’t punish him, the boy was too frightened. I understood what he was going through because I was frightened that way so often. If I didn’t flog that little boy I got the flogging.

Another complainant remembered that he was always crying and so was given a nickname by Br Bevis. The Brothers and the boys referred to him by that name throughout his entire time in Tralee until he was 16. He was beaten on a regular basis, mostly for crying. Older boys picked on him and it was humiliating. Br Bevis laughed at him while calling him this name. Br Bevis did not remember a boy with that nickname but admitted that it was possible he could have called him that name. Br Bevis apologised if it caused him any hurt, but he denied being complicit in the taunts.

The witness also explained how he had been put into the small dormitory and that the boys who were put into this small dormitory were perceived as ‘pets’, i.e. the Brothers’ favourites: Being the pets you were really the worst treated because the other boys used to hate you. They used to think that you were spoiled and you were telling them information and things like that. So both ways you were caught like, you know.

One ex-Brother, Professor Tom Dunne, who left the Congregation after seven years and has written articles on his experience of being a Christian Brother, spent a short period in Tralee doing holiday relief work in 1963. He said in one of these articles that he had been shocked, while watching ‘States of Fear’, by the testimony of one man who claimed to have suffered appalling abuse whilst in Tralee. Professor Dunne said that he had spent several weeks on relief duty there in the summer of 1963, but had subsequently suppressed all memory of that time. He told the Committee he believed that he had psychologically wiped the memories of his time there from his mind because it was such a distressing experience.

He said in evidence that his memory of Tralee related mainly to the demeanour of the boys. He said that he did not beat any of the boys when he was there but, not knowing the culture that was there, he talked to them. He said that the culture in Tralee was ‘essentially you didn’t talk to them on an individual basis because that would encourage them to – that was too soft and I was going in very soft on lots of levels’.

This disturbing view of Tralee was partially echoed by Br Mahieu. He stated that, when he first went to Tralee in the early 1960s, he noticed that the children ‘seemed to be crying out for a bit of love and a bit of attention and a bit of care’. He said that he felt sorry for the boys. They were a nice, decent bunch and seemed reasonably happy.