COMMISSION TO INQUIRE INTO CHILD ABUSE PUBLIC HEARING HELD AT THE ALEXANDER HOTEL, MARRION SQUARE DUBLIN 2 ON MONDAY, 9TH MAY 2005 - DAY 86 EVIDENCE OF FR. MICHEAL HUGHES BEFORE: MR. JUSTICE SEÁN RYAN CHAIRPERSON OF THE INQUIRY and MS. MARIAN SHANLEY MR. FRED LOWE I hereby certify the following to be a true and accurate transcript of my shorthand notes of the evidence in the above-named action. ______________________ MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION PRESENT: REGISTRAR TO INVESTIGATION COMMITTEE: MR. BRENDAN REEDY COUNSEL FOR THE COMMISSION: MR. B. McGOVERN SC MR. N. McMAHON SC MS. L. RATTIGAN BL MR. P. WARD BL Instructed by: MS. F. ROBINSON FOR THE OBLATES OF MARY IMMACULATE: MR. C. MAGUIRE SC MR. C. Ó hOISIN BL Instructed by: MR. C. CAHILL SHEEHAN & COMPANY COPYRIGHT: Transcripts are the work of Gwen Malone Stenography Services and they must not be photocopied or reproduced in any manner or supplied or loaned by an appellant to a respondent or to by other party without written permission of Gwen Malone Stenography Services. INDEX WITNESS EXAMINATION QUESTION NO. FR. MICHAEL HUGHES QUESTION - THE COMMISSION 1 - 415 EXAM - MR. MAGUIRE 416 - 436 QUESTION - THE COMMISSION 437 - 464 1 THE HEARING COMMENCED, AS FOLLOWS, ON MONDAY, 9TH MAY 2 2005: 3 4 THE CHAIRPERSON: Good morning, everybody. I 5 think we have been through 6 this procedure quite a number of times so everybody 7 is, I hope, familiar with it. Yes, Mr. McGovern, let 8 us get started. 9 MR. McGOVERN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I 10 propose briefly just to 11 make an opening statement for the benefit of some 12 members of the public whom might not be aware of what 13 we will be doing here today. This is a public 14 hearing in relation to St. Conleth's Reformatory 15 School in Daingean. It was a reformatory school for 16 boys between the ages of 10 and 18. The building 17 complex was built in the middle of the 18th century 18 as a military barracks and then served as a training 19 school for the constabulary. It was later turned 20 into a prison and then it served as a reformatory 21 from 1871 to 1934, then as an Oblate house of studies 22 from 1934 to 1940. From 1940 it reverted to use as a 23 reformatory and in October 1973 the school was 24 finally closed and the premises were handed back to 25 the State. I should state that at all times the 26 history shows that it was in the ownership of the 27 State and had been leased from time to time to the 28 Oblates. 29 4 1 This hearing will follow the same format which has 2 been used in previous hearings when investigating 3 other institutions and it will be in line with 4 statements made by the Commission on the question of 5 procedures to be followed. This means that the 6 evidence regarding Daingean reformatory will be heard 7 in three phases. Phase one, commencing this morning, 8 will consist of hearing Fr. Michael Hughes, the 9 Provincial leader of the Oblates of Mary Immaculate 10 in Ireland, who will give general information about 11 St. Conleth's Reformatory at Daingean, this will 12 include the congregation's view as to how the 13 institution operated and what life was like there. 14 It is intended to search as general background 15 information on the institution. 16 17 We are very conscious of the fact that some of the 18 evidence which he will be giving and maybe most of 19 it, for all I know, will not be accepted by some 20 people who are present in this room and who were 21 present in the institution at the relevant time. If 22 there are issues raised which require resolution or 23 clarification they will be returned to later in phase 24 three. When this public comprising phrase one has 25 been completed phase two will begin. This will 26 involve the hearing of evidence from persons who have 27 filed statements with the Commission outlining abuse 28 suffered by them at Daingean. The Committee has 29 prepared a schedule of hearings involving relevant 5 1 witnesses who may have evidence to give with regard 2 to the institution and these hearings will commence 3 tomorrow, Tuesday, 10 May and are expected to 4 conclude sometime next month. These hearings will 5 take place in private. 6 7 After the Committee has had an opportunity to 8 consider the evidence given both in phase one and 9 phase two it is proposed to return to a public 10 hearing which will deal with any contentious matters 11 outstanding or any other relevant issues concerning 12 the management and operation of the institution. At 13 that stage the Investigation Committee will permit 14 such cross-examination as fair procedures require in 15 the light of the issues which have been identified in 16 phases one and two for those parties who appear to 17 have a legitimate interest in them. 18 19 A decision has been made to leave over these 20 contentious issues until phase three since, by that 21 time, the Committee will have had an opportunity of 22 hearing evidence from persons who were in the 23 institution at the relevant time rather than now when 24 the Committee can only have a limited picture as to 25 what contentious issues are likely to arise. I now 26 propose, Chairman and Members of the Committee, to 27 take through Fr. Hughes through his evidence. 28 THE CHAIRPERSON: Very good. Good morning, 29 Fr. Hughes. 6 1 FR. MICHAEL HUGHES, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS 2 QUESTIONED, AS FOLLOWS, BY THE COMMITTEE: 3 4 5 1 Q. MR. McGOVERN: Fr. Hughes, I think I may 6 have given you your wrong 7 title earlier, I think you are the Provincial 8 Archivists for the Oblates; is that right? 9 A. That's correct. 10 2 Q. You have been designated by the Provincial Leader to 11 make the statement on behalf of the Order? 12 A. That's correct. 13 3 Q. I am sorry, the error was mine. I think just to give 14 some background information to everyone present, the 15 Oblates have been involved in running Daingean 16 Reformatory for some time up until it closed in 1973; 17 is that so? 18 A. That is so, yes. 19 4 Q. Can I ask you did you yourself ever have any 20 involvement in Daingean, were you ever working there 21 in any capacity? 22 A. As a student I went there for two summers for a few 23 weeks at a time to help out in the supervision during 24 holiday periods. 25 5 Q. Yes. You have given a statement to the Commission 26 and I would like to take you through that, there are 27 some aspects of it which we might be able to go 28 through quite quickly and other aspects obviously we 29 have to dwell on some further length. You mention at 7 1 the beginning of the statement that the buildings 2 were old and unsuitable in Daingean and I just want 3 to ask you about that. We know from records that 4 have been produced that the fabric of the building 5 was old and it was criticised from many quarters, 6 indeed from the Oblates themselves, at a time before 7 it was used as a reformatory, when the Oblates were 8 using it as a place of study for their novices, what 9 was the condition of the building like then? 10 A. From what I can understand it was reasonably good. 11 When Dr. McCabe visited it in 1940 in July before it 12 was occupied again by the Reformatory she made the 13 remark in her report, 5 July 1940: 14 "The building is in a good state of 15 repair. The outside appearance is clean and colourful." 16 17 She went through the various facilities there to see 18 if they were adequate for the Reformatory and made 19 some recommendations. 20 6 Q. Would it be fair to take as a starting point then in 21 1940 when it reverted again to use as a reformatory 22 that it was in reasonably good condition? 23 A. It was in reasonably good condition but it turned out 24 that the full needs of the Reformatory had not been 25 foreseen in 1940, when the resident manager, 26 Fitzsimmons, took possession of it then in 1940 in 27 August, he very soon saw it was deficient in 28 dormitory provision and in washing facilities. He 29 produced a plan to remedy that. So that plan was 8 1 agreed upon by the State, to their credit they 2 accepted that; however, because of the war and the 3 shortage of materials it was impossible to implement 4 the plan until after the war. So it was not until 5 1951, I think it was, that the dormitory accomodation 6 was finally brought up to scratch and the washing 7 facilities and not until 1957 that the staff rules 8 were updated a little bit. Does that answer your 9 question? 10 7 Q. Yes. Yes. I am going to deal with the introduction 11 to your statement and we will then move on to more 12 specific areas dealing with the school and some of 13 the complaints about the regime in Daingean. You say 14 in your introduction that: 15 "Until the issue of abuse arose in the late 1990s there had been no question 16 mark over the school's history." 17 18 19 A. Yes. 20 8 Q. What did you mean by that? 21 A. I meant that there had been no occasion for us to 22 make an inquiry whether there had been any abuse in 23 the lifetime of the school. 24 9 Q. I see. You go on to say that: 25 "Two issues in particular seem to emerge as especially relevant to this 26 inquiry." 27 28 You describe those as follows: 29 "The first issue is one of resources and the second one was how the special 9 1 needs of some of the pupils were or were not met." 2 3 4 A. That's right. 5 10 Q. With regard to the first of these, which was the 6 issue of resources, you say: 7 8 "The root of this problem lay in the 9 poor condition of the school and partly in underfunding which made it 10 impossible to hire staff for the wider education and training programme." 11 12 When did the poor condition of the school develop, I 13 am talking now relative to the period of 1940 when it 14 was described by Dr. McCabe? 15 A. I would have to say that for the reasons I have 16 already explained living conditions for both staff 17 and for pupils were quite difficult from 1940 until 18 that plan was fully implemented by 1957 or 19 thereabouts, because the dormitories and so on were 20 inadequate, as I say, the washing facilities were 21 also inadequate. Of course the heating, the hot 22 water remained a problem right throughout the period, 23 there was never hot water there on a regular basis 24 from 1940 to 1973, there was just a geyser, I suppose 25 you call it, for warming the showers when they were 26 needed. Those were some of the things. 27 28 The other thing is that having built that new block 29 which contained the dormitories and other facilities 10 1 after the war, all the time of course the other 2 buildings were deteriorating. The fabric of the old 3 main part of the building which was 200 years old was 4 deteriorating very very considerably beyond repair 5 and this becomes very evident when you look at the 6 Department file on the matter. That is what I am 7 referring to when I say that. 8 11 Q. We know from the Kennedy Report that the buildings 9 eventually got to the stage when the Kennedy 10 Committee visited Daingean they recommended that it 11 be closed down immediately, this was around 1970? 12 A. That's right. They visited Daingean in February 1968 13 and they did not report until some time in 1970. Now 14 I would agree fully that when they visited in 1968 15 the condition of the school was such that it could 16 not be tolerated really. This had already of course, 17 prior to the Kennedy visit, been brought to the 18 attention of the State in very strong terms on many 19 occasions. It wasn't news to the State that was 20 brought by the Kennedy Daingean was in the desperate 21 state. 22 12 Q. Had it been that way for many years? 23 A. At least in the 1960s, that's the period we know most 24 about because the documentation is best from that 25 period. 26 13 Q. Did the Oblates ever make any decision as to whether 27 or not they should pull out if conditions were so bad 28 that the Kennedy Committee felt it must be closed 29 down immediately? 11 1 A. I am sure that crossed their minds quite often, but I 2 think there was a very strong feeling of loyalty that 3 they should continue and try to get things improved 4 rather than just move away from the problem. 5 14 Q. Yes. One of the things you refer to in the 6 introductory section of your statement is that: 7 8 "The evidence discloses that the school 9 was incapable of meeting the special needs of all the pupils who were 10 committed there." 11 12 Could you just elaborate on that, what you mean by 13 that? 14 A. I think this is one of the most important points 15 really, so much so that we freely say that an 16 injustice was being done to the pupils at this period 17 because pupils were being sent at that time who 18 should not have been sent there. The reason they 19 should not have been sent was primarily, I am 20 thinking of, psychologically disturbed pupils whose 21 needs had not been assessed prior to being sentenced 22 and whose needs were very specialist needs which 23 could only be met by a specialist facility which the 24 school could not provide. If I may, I would like to 25 just quote a few lines from a letter that 26 Fr. McGonagle wrote. 27 15 Q. He was a resident manager for a number of years? 28 A. He was the resident manager from 1964 to 1972. He 29 wrote this in 1969. Perhaps I should mention first 12 1 on 24 May 1966 a question was asked in the Dáil which 2 speaks explicitly of the injustice of sending some 3 boys to the reformatory where facilities are not 4 adequate. I can give you the reference if you want 5 it afterwards. 6 16 Q. Yes? 7 A. Now in 1969, Fr. McGonagle wrote this, he was writing 8 a letter to a probation officer about a particular 9 lad, he said this: 10 11 "My greatest fear is that when a boy 12 like this who is not a delinquent per se but only by accident on account of 13 his deep disturbance is not treated for his real sickness the traumatic effect 14 of his being forced to live in a delinquent environment is bound to be 15 most detrimental. And when finished here there is every possibility that he 16 will just return to his deviant behaviour immediately on being 17 released. So no one is being just and fair to anyone. Without their knowing 18 the reasons why or the wherefores such boys kick back against society for its 19 injustices towards them." 20 21 Well, as we see, he is frankly stating the situation 22 and it was his -- he was putting up a determinate 23 fight at that time to remedy it. 24 17 Q. Can we move on to the actual physical nature of the 25 buildings there before dealing with some of the 26 allegations which have been in relation to Daingean, 27 I understand for this purpose that the Oblates have 28 prepared some slides which can be shown here to 29 illustrate the nature of the buildings? There is a 13 1 picture up on the screen which I think shows the 2 front of the building; is that right? 3 A. Yes, that picture was taken fairly recently, about 4 two or three years ago. 5 18 Q. How does that compare to the condition it was in? 6 A. It looks very much the same to me. That's it. You 7 cannot see much there obviously. 8 19 Q. Can we move on through the various slides. This next 9 one, I think...(INTERJECTION)? 10 A. A historical one. 11 20 Q. A historical one, yes. 12 A. 1888, the press came down to visit the school and 13 this appeared in one of the papers, the Irish 14 Catholic, I think it says there. 15 21 Q. It would have been a reformatory at that period in 16 1871 to 1934? 17 A. Yes. 18 22 Q. Maybe we could move on then to...(INTERJECTION)? 19 A. I would just like to point out there is a lake there 20 on the right-hand side which vanishes, gets drained 21 for some reason or other. That is an aerial view 22 round about 1960, I cannot be more exact than that. 23 It pretty well shows the whole complex. 24 23 Q. There appears to be a high wall around the entire 25 complex; is that correct? 26 A. That's right, that was part of the old prison wall. 27 24 Q. Maybe we move to the next one? 28 A. This picks out the area in red and white, the gate 29 house and convent which are outside the wall, just 14 1 outside the wall. The gate house on the left was 2 occupied by a family with some responsibility for the 3 gate and facing it then was another larger building 4 known as the Convent. 5 25 Q. Why was it known as the Convent? 6 A. I suspect it was occupied by nuns at one time but I 7 am not sure. 8 26 Q. Very good. Maybe we will move forward? 9 A. The next one picks out the area in front of the main 10 building there, lawn and flower beds, there is a 11 statue of St. Conleth there in the middle. To the 12 right of that at one time there was an ornamental 13 lake but, as we saw in the other picture, that was 14 drained before our period. 15 27 Q. Was that maintained as a lawn and flower gardens 16 through the 1940s, 1950s and 1960s? 17 A. I think so. 18 28 Q. Very good. 19 A. The front, definitely yes. 20 29 Q. Can we move to the next one? 21 A. This is the core of the old building, the main block, 22 or the administration block, I call it there. You 23 see there is a front portion which we saw in that 24 first picture and then two wings. In the front 25 portion, you have the administration basically, the 26 resident manager's room, the prefect's room, the 27 school office, the prefect's office, the community 28 dining room and kitchen, the infirmary and two 29 parlours. Then in the left wing, east wing -- no, 15 1 the west wing on the left, the west wing there was a 2 boys' kitchen and dining room. Then in 1940 a 3 dormitory was on the top floor until the new 4 dormitory could be built. 5 30 Q. Very good. 6 A. On the right-hand side there was a dormitory on the 7 ground floor again until the new dormitories were 8 built. There were other rooms there in the 9 right-hand side, school rooms and recreation rooms. 10 31 Q. I think the following the slide shows a theatre? 11 A. That's right. 12 32 Q. Was that used? 13 A. It was a very fine room and it was built in the 1940s 14 and it was used -- well for all kinds of recreation, 15 I suppose. I mention in particular it was there that 16 they had the dances that were introduced as a feature 17 of the programme in the 1960s. 18 33 Q. Who would come to the dances? 19 A. This was a programme that Fr. McGonagle interested 20 the ICWA in, the Irish Country Woman's Association, 21 and these great ladies would come along with their 22 daughters and dance with the lads. 23 34 Q. I see. The next side shows the technical school and 24 dormitories block which is behind the administration 25 block? 26 A. That's the new block that I was telling you about, it 27 could not be build during the war but it was built 28 post war and in fact was a pretty school building. 29 There you have on the upper floor the dormitories, 16 1 two L shaped dormitories, the junior, I think on the 2 left, and the senior on the right. They could have 3 the whole of that area. Underneath it on the left 4 were the technical schools rooms, metalwork and 5 woodwork. Down on the right on the ground floor 6 there was a recreational hall. Joining the two 7 wings, the long line underneath the dormitories, was 8 a washroom with hand basins for the boys. 9 35 Q. If we move to the next slide I think it shows a 10 playground area and square -- the chapel? 11 A. You see the chapel there behind that block. It was 12 there before our period and continued to be used as a 13 chapel. 14 36 Q. Was that used by the...(INTERJECTION)? 15 A. By everybody. 16 37 Q. I see. The following ...(INTERJECTION)? 17 A. I should say at the back of the chapel, the little 18 annex at the back of it, was a tailor's shop and also 19 a dairy in early years but later became the print 20 shop. You can't quite see it from this angle. 21 38 Q. If we move on to the next slide it shows the 22 playground square? 23 A. That's right, that area there are two sections, one 24 for juniors; one for seniors. 25 39 Q. What surface was on those? 26 A. Pardon? 27 40 Q. Was it grass or was it concrete? 28 A. Concrete. 29 41 Q. What facilities were there? 17 1 A. Nothing. Ball alleys, you see a ball alley in both 2 squares, in both playgrounds. Can you see them 3 there? 4 42 Q. I will take your word for it. I think I do, over 5 near the wall, is it? 6 A. That's right. There is one kind of in the south west 7 corner of the right-hand square, the white square. 8 43 Q. What about football, was football played there? 9 A. No, football will come up shortly. 10 44 Q. We will move on to that. The next slide shows 11 outbuildings? 12 A. In those outbuildings there, you have the piggery, 13 you have a chicken shed and a slaughter house, that's 14 the row you see there. Then after that you have the 15 -- if you change the slide now. You have the laundry 16 there. Change it again, you get the bakery. 17 45 Q. Yes? 18 A. Those are the outbuildings. 19 46 Q. The next slide shows farm buildings? 20 A. That's right, the farm. 21 47 Q. Outside the walls? 22 A. The next slide shows the football field up there. 23 48 Q. Yes. A slide to follow which shows staff residence? 24 A. That's the residence that was completed in 1957. Up 25 until then the brothers had, most of -- a large group 26 of the brothers had lived in an old building more or 27 less where the senior boys were. It was demolished 28 in order to make that square. 29 49 Q. Can we move on then to another part of your statement 18 1 which deals in a general way with allegations made 2 against the school, I will be coming back with more 3 particularity to these issues in the statement. On 4 page 4 of your statement you say that: 5 "Allegations of sexual abuse have been 6 made to the Commission in relation to Daingean. There is no evidence to 7 suggest that responsible persons or any section of staff tolerated sexual abuse 8 of the pupils at St. Conleth's." 9 10 When you say any section of the staff, have you taken 11 into account the fact that some of the allegations in 12 this area relate to...(INTERJECTION). 13 A. To be more precise...(INTERJECTION). 14 50 Q. ...members of staff? 15 A. To be more precise, I am talking here about 16 contemporary documents. 17 51 Q. I see. When you refer to the fact that there is no 18 suggestion, you mean no documentary evidence? 19 A. Yes. 20 52 Q. Was there any anecdotal evidence or verbal evidence 21 to suggest that something was going on in the way of 22 sexual abuse? 23 A. Only I think, if I may say so without causing 24 offence, the abuse that sometimes took place between 25 inmates. 26 53 Q. I see. As I say, I will come back to this in more 27 detail later, you have clarified that, by evidence 28 cleared you mean documentary 29 evidence...(INTERJECTION)? 19 1 A. That's right. 2 54 Q. ...in that section of the statement? You go on to 3 refer to an examination of school files and 4 interviews with surviving staff members revealed only 5 two incidents of sexual abuse? 6 A. That's right. 7 55 Q. One when you referred to those, we do not need to go 8 into the particulars of those now. You go on to talk 9 about allegations of physical abuse and you say that: 10 "The Oblate management file shows two 11 complaints of excessive corporal punishment in the lifetime of the 12 school. The school files shows five complaints in the lifetime of the 13 school of pupils being struck by staff members." 14 15 Was there any general information in the Oblates on 16 the issue of physical abuse and complaints about 17 physical abuse other than what you say there? 18 A. No, I don't think there is no. No. I would like 19 maybe to point out a letter dated 4 April 1968 which 20 I found in the material made available by the 21 Department of Education. 22 56 Q. Yes? 23 A. 4 April 1968, the secretary of the Kennedy Committee 24 wrote to the secretary of the Department of Education 25 asking for details of all complaints in all the 26 schools over the past five years, the nature of the 27 complaints and how they were dealt with. Now that 28 was, as I say, in April 1968 after they visited 29 Daingean. After several reminders the Department 20 1 finally responded on 22 May 1969, this is what they 2 said: 3 4 "No complete record of all complaints 5 received is available since many of the complaints received are of a trivial 6 nature, but the following are representative of those received over 7 the past five years." 8 9 Then there follows some examples. 10 "None of the representative complaints put forward seems to refer to 11 St. Conleth's." 12 13 14 57 Q. I see. 15 A. I think one might venture a conclusion there that it 16 shows there was not a heavy incidence of complaints 17 of abuse relating to the school. 18 58 Q. Were you and were the Oblates surprised to find 19 numerous complaints of very significant physical 20 abuse emerging in the past few years? 21 A. Yes. Yes. 22 59 Q. Were the Oblates aware that the -- after the Kennedy 23 Committee had visited Daingean that they had some 24 concerns about punishment? 25 A. Yes. 26 60 Q. When would the Oblates have become aware of that? 27 A. Fr. McGonagle, the resident manager, was informed 28 immediately. I have it indicated in my document 29 somewhere. This Committee wrote in June 1968, 21 1 Ms. Kennedy herself wrote to the Department, on a 2 number of issues, one of which was this concern that 3 was raised about the administration of corporal 4 punishment on the bare buttocks and asking, I think, 5 if I remember right, that that practice be stopped, 6 that corporal punishment should not be given over the 7 bare body. They did not ask for it to be stopped but 8 simply there would be a change in the way it was 9 administered. I would go on to tell you the 10 response, if you like. 11 61 Q. I will come to that in more detail later. Were you 12 aware that there was some controversy among the 13 members of the Kennedy Committee as to whether a 14 report could be signed off without some reference to 15 the situation about punishment in Daingean? 16 A. Yes. One of the members was very concerned about 17 that and made an allegation that Fr. McGonagle, more 18 or less, accepted that this was a valid way of 19 punishing boys because it humiliated them. 20 62 Q. I understand that he rejects that? 21 A. I would like to point what hasn't come out until I 22 received the Department documents that the Department 23 was made aware that Fr. McGonagle denied that in 1968 24 immediately and was given a fresh life later on. 25 63 Q. Just to be clear...(INTERJECTION)? 26 A. In 1968 Fr. McGonagle denied that he ever said 27 whatever that man said he said. 28 64 Q. I think what he denied was that he said that it was 29 more humiliating that way, is it fair to say that he 22 1 did not deny that boys...(INTERJECTION)? 2 A. No. No. 3 65 Q. ...were sometimes naked...(INTERJECTION)? 4 A. Well maybe...(INTERJECTION). 5 66 Q. ...when they were punished? 6 A. Well naked I think he would quarrel about. They 7 weren't naked, they were -- their backsides were 8 revealed, yes. 9 67 Q. We can go into this in more detail in due course. 10 A. Yes. 11 68 Q. What the documents show and I just want to know what 12 the position of the Order is that Fr. McGonagle's 13 quarrel was with the words ascribed to him, namely 14 that ...(INTERJECTION)? 15 A. Exactly. 16 69 Q. ...he had said they are flogged or slapped or 17 whatever term one wants to use in this way because it 18 is more humiliating, he denies that he said that? 19 A. That's right. 20 70 Q. Am I correct in suggesting to you that he did not 21 deny that boys were naked or had their nightshirts at 22 least...(INTERJECTION)? 23 A. That's right. 24 71 Q. ...pulled up? 25 A. That is accepted, yes. 26 72 Q. Just dealing with the Kennedy Report for a moment, 27 just following on that there was -- around the time 28 of the report, there was a document which was sent by 29 Mr. Barry who is secretary of the Department of 23 1 Justice, it was sent to the secretary of the 2 Department of Education, it was 16 April 1970. In 3 this letter he says: 4 "To sign a report which made no 5 reference to the situation about punishment in Daingean would, in the 6 absence of evidence that the practice had ceased to be to appear to acquiesce 7 in a practice which is indefensible and for the continuance of which the 8 Minister for Justice could not avoid some official responsibility arising 9 out his having registered Daingean as a suitable place of detention under the 10 Children's Acts." 11 12 He goes on to say: 13 "On the other hand, to make any 14 reference, however oblique, to this particular method of punishment in 15 Daingean would be likely to lead to a disclosure of the situation and in this 16 way to cause grave public scandal. When the problem was explained by 17 telephone to your department it appeared that the request of the 18 Committee about punishment had been overlooked. It was confirmed that 19 punishment of this kind is contrary to the policy of the Minister of Education 20 and an assurance was given that subject of course to any limitation there maybe 21 on the Minister's power action will be taken to stop it in Daingean." 22 23 I think you are probably aware there was controversy 24 about how the Kennedy Report should be signed off if 25 this issue was not resolved; do you recall that? 26 A. The documentation, yes. 27 73 Q. Was this known by the Oblates? 28 A. I don't think so, no. 29 74 Q. You do not think that information was ever passed on 24 1 to them? 2 A. Not to my knowledge, no. 3 75 Q. Do you have any comment to make on the fact that this 4 kind of punishment, namely punishment on their bare 5 buttocks, is contrary to the policy of the Minister 6 for Education? 7 A. Well I have no documents that would support that. 8 Clearly -- if that is what the question is, I have no 9 knowledge to what the Minister of Education, the 10 Department of Education thought about it at the time. 11 76 Q. Would the Oblates not have considered this in the 12 light of the discovery they were given as to what 13 their view was on this issue as to whether it was or 14 was not contrary to the policy of the Department? 15 A. I am sorry, I do not follow the question. 16 77 Q. The Oblates would have received the discovery from 17 the Department of Education? 18 A. Yes. 19 78 Q. One of the issues which you have to deal with here 20 and which is very much a live issue before the 21 Commission is the issue of physical punishment, I am 22 just wondering in the light of the documentation that 23 would have been furnished, would they not have worked 24 out what the position was and whether it was or was 25 not contrary to policy? 26 A. I am quite sure that the school was under the 27 impression that it was acting quite legitimate, up 28 until the time the Inspector came to Fr. McGonagle, 29 after that letter I referred to in June 1968 written 25 1 by Ms. Kennedy, an Inspector brought that message to 2 Fr. McGonagle and because he was rather -- he 3 understood from the Inspector that it was illegal, 4 that is what the Inspector apparently told him. 5 79 Q. Had the Oblates ever considered that before somebody 6 from the Department had approached them? 7 A. No, I am quite sure they hadn't, no. 8 80 Q. THE CHAIRPERSON: Could I ask, Fr. Hughes, do 9 you accept on behalf of the 10 Oblates that that punishment was abusive or is that 11 something we have to debate? 12 A. Well I think it is something obviously the Commission 13 has to decide upon, yes. 14 81 Q. THE CHAIRPERSON: No, no. Sorry. I can 15 understand you might say 16 you deny -- it is a matter for us. I appreciate your 17 position that you do not know any direct knowledge of 18 this, so you might say whether it happened or not is 19 an issue for us to decide, you might say that, it 20 would appear that Fr. McGonagle accepted that it 21 happened? 22 A. Yes, we would accept that. 23 82 Q. THE CHAIRPERSON: All right. My question is 24 would you contend that that 25 behaviour was not abusive? 26 A. I would contend that it was done in good faith. In 27 other words, that the people at the time obviously 28 didn't think it was abusive otherwise they would not 29 have done it. 26 1 83 Q. THE CHAIRPERSON: If you like, you can say 2 that you take up no 3 position, I quite understand that, I don't want to 4 corner you or trap you in any way. 5 A. Yes. 6 84 Q. THE CHAIRPERSON: Am I understanding that the 7 Oblates -- you make the 8 point, which is I suppose a slightly different one, 9 that whatever was done you contend was done in good 10 faith, that is something we have to look into, 11 assuming it was done in good faith and that it was 12 done, are you saying that the Oblates have no 13 position on the question as to whether or not that 14 was abusive? 15 A. I would agree that the punishment was very very 16 severe. I think I would be doing an injustice to the 17 men of that time if I took it upon myself to say that 18 they were abusive. 19 THE CHAIRPERSON: That's all right. Thank 20 you very much. 21 85 Q. MR. McGOVERN: There is a memo in 1945, on 22 11 July 1945, from 23 Mr. O'Shiocragla (?) who says that he visited 24 Daingean on 25 and 26 June 1945 and he said: 25 "I looked at the corporal punishment 26 book, there was no entry from the beginning of this year, that would be 27 1945, because for the past half year the stick has been dispensed with as a 28 means of punishment and in its place is a system of allocating marks for good 29 behaviour and marks for bad behaviour and the bestowing or withdrawing of 27 1 little privileges as it result. The resident manager was happy with that 2 system. " 3 4 5 A. Yes. 6 86 Q. Are you aware that there had been significant 7 complaints of physical punishment of the sort just 8 discussed a moment in the 1940s, 1950s and 1960s, 9 1940s and 1950s certainly? 10 A. No. The only ones that I come across, the ones I 11 mentioned earlier -- which if you want to go back to 12 that. 13 87 Q. We do not need to go back. You are not aware that a 14 lot of complainants have complained...(INTERJECTION)? 15 A. Is there documentary evidence, I have not come across 16 that? 17 88 Q. They will be giving evidence to the Commission. You 18 received statements from the complainants? 19 A. I am talking all the time about contemporary 20 documents. 21 89 Q. I see. The position you are taking is based on 22 documentary evidence? 23 A. Yes. 24 90 Q. To what extent do you take into account or has the 25 Order taken into account the statements made by 26 complainants? 27 A. Obviously we take them very seriously and we would 28 see that as being -- it is obviously the matter for 29 the next phase. We have responded in writing to each 28 1 one of these complaints and to be -- the evidence has 2 yet to be heard and adjudicated upon, yes. 3 91 Q. Mr. O'Shiocragla looked at the corporal punishment 4 book, are there any corporal punishment books in 5 existence now? 6 A. Not to my knowledge. 7 92 Q. I don't think we ever received any documents among 8 the discovery of the nature of corporal punishment 9 books, they appear to have been present certainly 10 when Mr. O'Shiocragla visited there in July 1945, do 11 you know what happened to those punishment books? 12 A. No, I would be very surprised if they were any such 13 books. As you probably know when the school closed 14 the documents passed out of the Oblate custody and 15 were given to the Department and thankfully they kept 16 -- a lot of them have survived, but they were no 17 means complete. Amongst those that have survived 18 there is no punishment book. 19 93 Q. There were rules and regulations for the certified 20 industrial schools in Saor Stáit Eireann which were 21 approved by the then Minister for Education, do you 22 know at that time did similar rules and regulations 23 apply to the reformatories? 24 A. The only rules we know are the ones that apply to the 25 industrial schools, whether there were any special 26 ones made for the reformatories I have not been able 27 to find them. 28 94 Q. My understanding is that these rules that apply to 29 the industrial schools were also applied to the 29 1 reformatories, is that your understanding? 2 A. I would imagine so. 3 95 Q. We do not have specific -- a specific document naming 4 Daingean, we have one in relation to another 5 industrial school in Upton, County Cork, the main 6 printed text would be the same for the reformatories, 7 I just want to put this up on the screen and ask you 8 to comment on one or two matters. On the subject of 9 discipline, what these rules said was: 10 "The manager or his deputy shall be 11 authorised to punish the children detained in the school in case of the 12 misconduct. All serious misconduct and the punishments inflicted for it shall 13 be entered in a book to be kept without purpose, which shall be laid before the 14 Inspector when he visits." 15 16 It appears from that that there was an obligation on 17 industrial schools and, I am suggesting to you, also 18 reformatories to keep a punishment book? 19 A. I am quite sure that a punishment book would have 20 been kept and I am sure the Inspector would have 21 asked for it, the Inspector visited the school pretty 22 often I believe. I am sure there was such a book. I 23 am only sure in the sense that there must have been. 24 96 Q. But what...(INTERJECTION)? 25 A. As I say, none have survived. 26 97 Q. One of the major issues that the Oblates have to deal 27 with and confront in this Commission are serious 28 allegations of physical abuse? 29 A. Yes. 30 1 98 Q. By that you know from the complainant's statements 2 they mean, by and large, the types of punishments 3 that were administered to them? 4 A. Yes. 5 99 Q. I assume that you and the Order have given serious 6 consideration to this issue and you have tried to 7 find out everything you can about it, have you come 8 any punishment books? 9 A. No. 10 100 Q. None at all? 11 A. No. 12 101 Q. You haven't seen any in the Department of Education 13 discovery, I suggest? 14 A. Not that I am aware. I must make it clear, we have 15 no documents for the school, they are all in the 16 possession of the Department. The only independent 17 documents we have are the visitors book and the 18 school journal. 19 102 Q. Are there surviving members of the Oblates who have 20 seen your positions of responsibility in Daingean, 21 for example, former resident managers who are compos 22 mentis and could be asked about these matters, or 23 could have been asked about these matters? 24 A. The only surviving resident manager is Fr. William 25 McGonagle who is now in his 80s, he is certainly 26 compos mentis, he can be asked about things 27 certainly. 28 103 Q. Was he ever asked, you were asked to prepare this 29 statement on behalf of the Order and I know it is a 31 1 somewhat invidious task you had very little time 2 there other than one or two summers, did nobody ask 3 Fr. McGonagle, for example, were there punishment 4 books or anything of that nature? 5 A. I did ask some of the men and it was always very 6 vague responses. 7 104 Q. I see. Moving on to the next paragraph in this 8 serious of rules is the issue of the punishment and 9 it says: 10 "Punishment shall consist of (a) forfeiture of rewards and privileges or 11 degradation from rank previously obtained by good conduct; (b) moderate 12 childish punishment with the hand; (c) chastisement with the cane, strap or 13 birch." 14 15 They are referring to (c) which was the last item 16 itself: 17 "Referring to (c), personal 18 chastisement may be inflicted by the manager or in his presence by an 19 officer specifically authorised by him and in no case may be inflicted upon 20 girls." 21 22 That doesn't apply here. 23 "Over 15 years of age." 24 25 Again it refers to girls and I can pass on that. 26 27 It says: 28 "Caning on the hand is forbidden. No 29 punishment not mentioned above shall be inflicted." 32 1 2 What's your reading of that paragraph about 3 punishment and where do you think the punishment by 4 punishing boys with a strap on their bare buttocks 5 fits into that? 6 A. If those rules apply -- I can't see them from here, I 7 am sorry. 8 105 Q. I'm afraid it is not terrible clear. 9 A. Would you repeat that? 10 106 Q. Yes, certainly. It says: 11 "Referring to (c) that is chastisement 12 with a cane, strap or birch, a personal chastisement may be inflicted by a 13 manager or in his presence by an officer specially authorised..." 14 15 16 A. Can you stop there for a moment. As I understand it, 17 the practice always was that the brother, prefect 18 would be the one who would do it, the manager never 19 did it himself. 20 107 Q. It says: "Caning on the hand is forbidden"? 21 A. "Caning on the hand is forbidden." I presume caning 22 -- or strapping, would that apply to the strap as 23 well? 24 108 Q. If one looks further up you will see apart from 25 forfeiture of rewards, et cetera: 26 "Moderate childish punishment with the 27 hand and then chastisement with the cane, strap or birch." 28 29 If you read that, do you think it -- would you 33 1 suggest it does or does not permit strapping on the 2 bare backside? 3 A. I would think it certainly permits the use of the 4 birch, which of course was never done in our time. I 5 would imagine normally the birch wasn't done on the 6 hand, it is always on the body that people in penal 7 institutions got beaten. So it is a matter of 8 interpretation on that. I would not think it is 9 ruling out beating people on the buttocks. 10 109 Q. Other than that, I think one of the early documents, 11 I think, the memo from Mr. Barry indicated that it 12 was against the Department's regulations, he was 13 suggesting that? 14 A. I think they would have to show that was so. 15 110 Q. I see. 16 A. I am quite sure the Inspector knew what kind of 17 punishment was being administered because they must 18 have if they were doing...(INTERJECTION). 19 111 Q. If they were doing their job? 20 A. I would say it was brought up as an issue in 1968. 21 112 Q. You do say at the bottom of page 4 of your statement: 22 "The Oblates do not seek to defend the use of excessive corporal punishment." 23 24 I take it that is the position of the Oblates? 25 A. Obviously, yes. 26 113 Q. We are talking here what is or is not acceptable 27 punishment? 28 A. That's right, in the context of the times. 29 114 Q. You say it had to be judged in that context and the 34 1 large numbers and the limited facilities and so on? 2 A. Yes. 3 115 Q. I want to move on from -- pass beyond the history of 4 the school, I think in my very brief summary of the 5 history of the school I mentioned the various phases 6 it went through and I don't think, Chairman, unless 7 you or the Members of the Commission wish me to go 8 through all that. 9 THE CHAIRPERSON: No. 10 MR. McGOVERN: Thank you. 11 THE CHAIRPERSON: I don't think it is 12 necessary. I am grateful 13 for the fact that we have the information in 14 documentary form but I do not think you need to list 15 in it oral evidence, unless anybody thinks there is 16 any specific points. 17 116 Q. MR. McGOVERN: I will go on to deal with 18 another part of your 19 statement. 20 THE CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, just one second. 21 MR. MAGUIRE: Sorry, Chairman, I agree 22 entirely with your approach 23 but I just think in the circumstances if that is the 24 approach that the statement would be accepted 25 nonetheless as being evidence. 26 THE CHAIRPERSON: We propose to treat -- 27 historical material is very 28 useful for us obviously because it fits into the 29 context. Subject to anything or any submission that 35 1 may make afterwards, we propose to approach it on 2 that basis. 3 MR. MAGUIRE: That the statement will be 4 accepted. 5 THE CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Subject to what 6 anybody else says about the 7 whole or part and if we need assistance we will ask 8 for people to make submissions to us. That's the way 9 we propose to do it. 10 117 Q. MR. McGOVERN: Can I move on, Fr., to an 11 issue which is obviously 12 very relevant and that is the problems with the 13 school buildings, you refer to the fact that these 14 were substandard in many cases and you quote from a 15 report that Dr. Lissard (?), who was an Inspector, 16 gave? 17 A. That's right. I do not actually quote from it. 18 118 Q. Sorry, I think you...(INTERJECTION)? 19 A. I refer to it. 20 119 Q. You refer to it and you quote from Fr. McGonagle, who 21 in the course of a statement you outline there says: 22 "Heat is provided by this present heating system, rarely reaches the 23 halls where the boys spend so much of their time in winter and wet weather." 24 25 Would it be fair to say that that paints a fairly 26 dismal picture in terms of the 27 conditions...(INTERJECTION). 28 A. Definitely. 29 120 Q. ...for the boys there? 36 1 A. Not only for the boys but for the staff as well. We 2 all lived in the same place. 3 121 Q. Were the conditions of the buildings used exclusively 4 by the staff, were they any different to the 5 buildings used by the boys? 6 A. No. 7 122 Q. Fr. McGonagle's statement, which you quote, goes on 8 to say that: 9 "The Board's own architecture has 10 condemned the present day hall over five years ago as being unsafe." 11 12 Without labouring the point, I think it is fair to 13 say, it seems to be accepted by the Oblates, that the 14 fabric of the buildings in Daingean was in a pretty 15 deplorable state; is that fair? 16 A. It is very very fair. We would insist that that is 17 so in fact. 18 123 Q. What you say is that responsibility for this, for the 19 conditions of the school and its lack of facilities, 20 must lie primarily with the State; is that fair? 21 A. Yes. As you mentioned in your opening statement, for 22 centuries, since the 18th century, it had been in the 23 hands of State bodies and it was only leased to the 24 Oblates for the use of a reformatory and they were 25 their buildings then. 26 124 Q. The next part of your statements deals with the 27 vision or philosophy of the school, I do not want to 28 go through that because I do not think it is 29 necessary for the purposes of the Committee to deal 37 1 with that, it may arise when we are discussing some 2 of the further issues which I will go into in more 3 detail about the allegations. 4 5 If we move on to school finances for a moment, your 6 statement indicates that the Order was relying on 7 State funding and on the public, were they the sole 8 sources of income for the school? 9 A. Yes, apart from the income that was generated in the 10 premise themselves, from the farm and possibly 11 sometimes that ministry that various members of the 12 community might have done...(INTERJECTION). 13 125 Q. Yes. 14 A. ...pens and things like that. 15 126 Q. You go on to deal with -- well you make a comparative 16 study of the cost of maintaining a child in some 17 institutions now with the period back in 1970 and 18 these are quite stark, for example, you say in 19 Trinity House in 2002 it would cost for each person 20 €246,752 and the comparable figure for 1970 was 21 €23,183 and you give other examples which show a 22 similar pattern and then you go on to deal with 23 capitation grant which was given by the State for 24 each pupil in Daingean and you point out the 25 following figures: 1940 less than £52; 1950 it was 26 about £52; 1960 £124.80; 1970 £449.80. How realistic 27 were these figures when you produced them, you say 28 about £52 in one year? 29 A. Because I know that the capitation grant was about 18 38 1 shillings, I think, per week in 1940. 2 127 Q. Yes, I follow that. 3 A. I think it is in the table at the back of the report 4 which the Commission has, I do not have a complete 5 table of capitation grant for every year but I did 6 have it for those particular years, I derived it from 7 the Department of Education reports. 8 128 Q. Very good. You do make the interesting observations 9 on page 17 of your statement that the State didn't 10 finance the school on the basis of any annual school 11 budget but they apparently fixed a sum which was a 12 capitation grant for each pupil? 13 A. That's right. There was no -- no one looked at the 14 school and said what are the needs of the school, 15 what are the goals of the school, what do they have 16 to achieve, for this they need so much money so we 17 budget for that. 18 129 Q. Yes? 19 A. It was simply this capitation grant and how it was 20 arrived at, how the figure of 18 shillings a week per 21 boy was arrived, what relation it had to the needs of 22 the school does not appear anywhere. 23 130 Q. You say that this put a great strain on the ability 24 of the Oblates to manage Daingean in the 1950s and 25 1960s? 26 A. Yes. 27 131 Q. That suggests that there were two decades of 28 significant deprivation in the funds available to 29 manage and run the reformatory? 39 1 A. Yes, I would say particularly in the 1960 because, as 2 I say before, we do not have much documentation about 3 the 1950s so it is hard for me to talk about the 4 1950s. I think there is evidence that the managers, 5 not just of Daingean but all the other schools, were 6 right through the 1950s as well asking for more 7 money. It becomes more extreme in the 1960s. 8 132 Q. Yes. You rightly point out that the Kennedy 9 Commission made an explicit finding that the 10 capitation grant was inadequate? 11 A. Yes. 12 133 Q. You refer to a quote that in 1965 the then Minister 13 for Education, Dr. Hilary, said that: 14 "Evidently the government has got away with murder for the past 40 years." 15 16 17 A. That's right. 18 134 Q. Can I ask you again, was there any consideration 19 given by the Oblates as to whether they should say 20 enough is enough and go back to the State and we 21 cannot and we will not run this institution on this 22 basis? 23 A. Well looking back with hindsight one would wish we 24 had perhaps. On the other hand, I would say not, I 25 think the attitude was always that it is best for 26 society that we would try to get the system improve 27 rather than simply run away from the problem. I 28 would maintain, the Oblates would maintain, that 29 ultimately they succeeded because ultimately all 40 1 this, the Kennedy Commission and all that went on 2 after that, lead to the setting up of a new facility 3 in Scoil Ard Mhuire which was relatively successful. 4 135 Q. But the Kennedy Commission was not something 5 instigated by the Oblates, with respect. What I am 6 asking you, when the Kennedy Commission reported I 7 think Daingean was unique in its report in that it 8 said that this place must be closed down and closed 9 down now; do you agree with that? 10 A. I would agree that in the state that it was in in 11 1968 when the Kennedy Commission visited in February 12 it was an intolerable situation for the school to be 13 in, I would also point out that nothing that the 14 Kennedy Committee said about the school had not 15 already been said to the State very clearly by the 16 Oblates in proceeding years. 17 136 Q. You have indicated earlier that the Oblates felt that 18 they had a duty to the boys and you also had a duty 19 to society as well, how did you reconcile this duty 20 to the boys with the conditions in which they were 21 confined in Daingean? 22 A. I can only surmise of course, I would think that the 23 attitude was that it was better to do the little you 24 can than to throw up your hands in horror and just 25 walk away from it. That's all. 26 137 Q. I see. The next part of your statement is with the 27 categories of pupils who have attended St. Conleth's 28 in Daingean and you point out that the vast majority 29 were young offenders between the ages of 12 and 18? 41 1 A. Yes. 2 138 Q. They would have been sent there by the juvenile 3 courts and you say that a few boys sent would have 4 been there on remand and there would have been very 5 few voluntary, what you describe as voluntary? 6 A. Very very very few, yes. 7 139 Q. Could you just tell the Committee the nature of 8 offences that these boys would have been in for, 9 generally? 10 A. Well they range from very petty offences, petty theft 11 and so on, to quite serious offences, more serious 12 theft and assault and things like that. In all cases 13 that you know, legally, they had to be an offence 14 that was punishable, in the case of an adult with 15 penal servitude or imprisonment. I think it is worth 16 pointing out also that the tendency in the Dublin 17 courts and in the other cities as well, I think, was 18 not to send a boy to the reformatory until there had 19 been quite a number of convictions against him and 20 the probation was applied quite liberally in the city 21 courts. In the country courts, the rural districts 22 tended to be different, a boy tended very often to be 23 sent of to the reformatory even though it was his 24 first offence. There is that quite clear difference. 25 I think it is accepted that in the majority of cases 26 the pupils were sent to Daingean were the more 27 difficult kind of boys as the care memorandum wrote 28 in 1972, the more serious and refractory boys are 29 sent to St. Conleth's, Daingean. 42 1 140 Q. Was it felt that there was any hope of reforming 2 these boys? 3 A. Yes, but as I mentioned earlier on, the big issue for 4 the reformatory, as it emerges especially in the 5 1960s, was that there was no assessment of the boys 6 taking place prior to sentencing, the school would 7 have -- felt able to do something very useful for a 8 boy who was not psychologically disturbed and who had 9 some degree of amenity to living there, despite the 10 big wall that was around the school, in many ways an 11 open school it was not a secure unit. What the 12 school could not do anything for was the 13 psychologically disturbed children and it is, I 14 think, accepted by experts that more and more of 15 these were appearing in the 1960s. 16 17 You asked me what -- I think I should point out that 18 Fr. McGonagle did in fact try to do something about 19 that, he started to refuse boys unless there was an 20 assessment. He got into trouble about that because 21 the courts felt that he should accept everybody but 22 he stuck his heels in and insisted an assessment 23 being made and especially towards the end of the 24 1960s and into the 1970s he was refusing boys whom he 25 did not think could benefit from the school 26 programme. 27 141 Q. Would it be fair to say up until Fr. McGonagle's more 28 enlightened view it was really an issue of 29 containment or keeping the lid on everybody in 43 1 Daingean, the trouble that might arise if they did 2 not? 3 A. It is tempting to say that but I think that change 4 did take place in the 1960s. 5 142 Q. There is a document up on the screen, which I am 6 afraid like the last is not terribly clear, I will 7 try and highlight the relevant portions. It appears 8 to be a document dated 1 March 1972, it has a 9 Department of Education stamp on it, it was received 10 by them, it says: 11 "St. Conleth's School, Daingean, County Offaly, outline of reception policy." 12 13 It appears to come from St. Conleth's because it 14 says: 15 16 "Our policy is to accept only those 17 boys who will benefit..." 18 19 20 A. That's right. 21 143 Q. "...from our treatment programme"? 22 A. That's what I was saying. 23 144 Q. Indeed it does deal with mode of selection at the 24 beginning and you will see there it refers to the 25 necessity for having reports from the Gardaí 26 probation officers, psychological reports and so on, 27 as you were suggesting? 28 A. Yes. 29 145 Q. If we look further down, it says: "Why we adopted 44 1 this policy", is the next heading there, it is up 2 there now. You see: 3 "Up to November 1970 to accept anyone and everyone was the rule, to decline 4 to accept was very much the exception." 5 A. Yes, I guess that would probably be true. 6 146 Q. Then moving further down, the author of this deals 7 with the frustrations that this involved and then 8 says, you see at the bottom of the screen there, this 9 is dealing with pre-1970: 10 "The large numbers in such a custodial 11 situation with declining staff members, not only rendered meaningful 12 relationships between staff and boys unattainable but repressive measures 13 for the purpose of containment were the order of the day." 14 15 What do you think the author meant by that? 16 A. Well it goes back to the question of corporal 17 punishment that we were talking about earlier, in 18 1968, as we saw, the Department Inspector came along 19 and told Fr. McGonagle that he should stop that 20 practice of administering corporal punishment, 21 certainly on the bare buttocks. Fr. McGonagle took 22 him to be saying that he should phase out corporal 23 punishment altogether and that is what he started to 24 do. That created a very serious disciplinary problem 25 in the school actually, the boys became very unruly, 26 I understand. 27 147 Q. When was corporal punishment stopped in the school, I 28 know he was ahead of the State in doing so, 29 A. That's right. Fr. McGonagle always maintains that he 45 1 started to phase it out or even that he stopped it 2 immediately on hearing from Inspector McDermott that 3 he should not do what they have been doing in the 4 past. 5 148 Q. Yes. But this memo that is on the screen suggests 6 that pre-1970 there was a process of repressive 7 measures and containment was the order of the day? 8 A. I think they -- I cannot be absolutely sure what it 9 is talking about there. It could be referring, for 10 example, to appealing to the Gardaí as they did on a 11 number of occasions to -- when there was trouble they 12 brought in the guards to help them to keep order. 13 149 Q. You think that is what that means? 14 THE CHAIRPERSON: I do not think it is what 15 it means. 16 A. Well...(INTERJECTION). 17 THE CHAIRPERSON: I don't know what my 18 colleagues think but I do 19 not think that is what it means. Is it not saying, 20 we had declining staff, we had a custodial situation, 21 relationships were unattainable and we had to put in 22 place repressive measures in order to have a policy 23 of containment. That's what it says. That does not 24 mean sending for the guards. 25 A. I think maybe I should...(INTERJECTION). 26 THE CHAIRPERSON: I don't think it means 27 that. 28 A. I did put that question to Fr. McGonagle and that is 29 what he answered to me. 46 1 150 Q. MR. McGOVERN: Was this a document from 2 Fr. McGonagle, it appears 3 to have come from quite high up because it -- it 4 would be during his period, but it is dealing with 5 outline of reception policy, let me put it this way, 6 it would have been Oblate reception policy, presuming 7 this was the policy document produced by the Order? 8 A. Yes, but I cannot be entirely sure, but I think what 9 was being debated there was the policy for the 10 future, especially in the light of the opening of a 11 new facility in Oberstown, which happened as you know 12 in 1973, and there was a considerable debate going on 13 between the Department and the Order as to who should 14 be admitted into reformatories in present day 15 circumstances, that's the context I think of this 16 document. 17 18 If I may say, the Oblates were taking the stance that 19 the manager's right to refuse should remain and that 20 the categories of boys who would be accepted should 21 be clearly marked out as those who did not have 22 serious problems and so on and the Department however 23 still maintained that the new school, wherever it 24 was, should accept all pupils and this was a bone of 25 contention. 26 151 Q. I understand that, but you were offering as an 27 explanation for keeping the lid on things and 28 repressive measures and containment being the order 29 of the day as probably relating interventions by the 47 1 Gardaí from time to time. Could I invite you to look 2 at the last paragraph which is on the next page 3 there, it is on the screen, it says: "This would be 4 impossible ...", this is after dealing further 5 reasons for policy of stricter selection. 6 THE CHAIRPERSON: The second last and last 7 paragraph. 8 152 Q. MR. McGOVERN: To be fair to you the 9 second last paragraph. 10 "Nobody, least of all of the Department 11 of Education, gave a second thought to the problem as long as we took in 12 everyone. Now the general public is worried and becoming vocal, not quite 13 as vehement yet as it was in its condemnation of those managing the 14 institutions after the publication of the Kennedy Report. The Minister is 15 embarrassed and would like us to take him out his difficulty. In other 16 words, take everyone again. This would be impossible for it would mean 17 returning to the old iniquitous system of breaking boys and breaking staff." 18 19 What do you think that meant? 20 A. It means, I think, that the presence in the school of 21 a significant number of disturbed boys gravely 22 disrupted the discipline of the school, caused great 23 stress to the staff and caused great stress to the 24 boys. 25 153 Q. What do you think the result of the great stress to 26 the staff was? 27 A. You mean was it punishment? 28 154 Q. Do you think it impacted on the nature and level of 29 punishment? 48 1 A. To be honest, I would not think so but I would not 2 think that the -- the time that was written was 1972, 3 you say. 4 155 Q. This was 1972, I think is the date. 5 A. I would very much doubt if the kind of complaints 6 about corporal punishment that have been laid would 7 have related to that time. 8 156 Q. I can tell you that I found the note, the corporal 9 punishment was abolished in Daingean in 1969 which, 10 as I say, was ahead of the State, I think? 11 A. That's right. 12 157 Q. This memo, I think you have to realise, this memo is 13 talking about what was the position before 1970 or 14 1972, whatever the date is, and contrasting that with 15 the situation that the author hoped would obtain if 16 they had a more selective process of admission? 17 A. Yes. 18 158 Q. THE CHAIRPERSON: What it sounds like, Fr., 19 is this that the author is 20 saying these are the problems we had before? 21 A. Yes. 22 159 Q. THE CHAIRPERSON: Up to 23 1970...(INTERJECTION). 24 A. That's right. 25 160 Q. THE CHAIRPERSON: Even if it means taking the 26 Minister out of a 27 difficulty, we are not going back to the bad old 28 times, we were under terrible difficulties, that's 29 what it seems to me to be saying? We were having all 49 1 those old difficulties and there is no way we are 2 going back to an open admissions policy, we are going 3 to have a very specifical policy which they set out 4 in the paragraph at the start, reports and details 5 and so on, I think that's what it sounds like? 6 A. I accept that completely. 7 161 Q. THE CHAIRPERSON: I think where Mr. McGovern 8 is going is saying, in 9 making it clear what is not being done the author is 10 acknowledging situations unacceptable practices that 11 went on though the past, perhaps as he would contend 12 by dint of necessity or whatever it was, things that 13 happened in the past in order to have containment 14 because he had an open access policy. If I 15 understanding that is what Mr. McGovern is asking you 16 about. Does that analysis accord with your 17 understanding? 18 A. Certainly but just precisely what he means by 19 repressive measures is what I -- I could not be too 20 clear about. 21 THE CHAIRPERSON: Yes. 22 162 Q. MR. McGOVERN: You indicate in what is 23 page 22 of your statement, 24 that the statistics show that a lot of the boys who 25 would have gone into Daingean had problems with 26 literacy and IQ problems in some cases and if you 27 took a normal cross-section of the society there 28 would have been a lot of problem boys there and that 29 is one of the factors you mention, you deal with the 50 1 length of the time in the school which I don't think 2 is an issue that the Commission are too concerned 3 with, I may be wrong, they can deal with that if they 4 want, I think it is fair to say that the statistics 5 show that there were a lot of difficult children in 6 Daingean; is that what you are trying to convey? 7 A. Definitely. 8 163 Q. Indeed it comes across in the memo which is something 9 of a desperate cry, I suppose, to the Minister to 10 change the policy. Can we move on to another part of 11 your statement which deals with...(INTERJECTION)? 12 164 Q. MR. LOWE: Sorry, I just want to 13 clarify one thing. Are you 14 saying that there were more difficult troubled boys 15 in the state and therefore more coming to Daingean or 16 are you saying Daingean's policy of taking everyone 17 had led to more and more of these boys being selected 18 for Daingean even if they were not more in the state? 19 Just looking at the end of the previous paragraph 20 there, a reference to Marlborough House and people 21 roaming the street, that seemed to be saying that 22 Daingean had become the centre for these trouble 23 children to be sent there? 24 A. Yes. 25 165 Q. MR. LOWE: That you were trying to 26 change that? 27 A. Yes. 28 166 Q. MR. LOWE: Is that in fact what was 29 going on? 51 1 A. Yes. 2 167 Q. MR. LOWE: So Daingean's policy of 3 taking everyone and made 4 it, if you like, a sink to which children would be 5 sent who would not be take elsewhere? 6 A. Daingean's policy but also the court's policy. 7 168 Q. MR. LOWE: There was no other place 8 for these children, they 9 would have gone wandering the streets, if you like? 10 A. That's right. 11 MR. LOWE: Thank you. 12 169 Q. MR. McGOVERN: Can we move on to the 13 section of your statement 14 which you describe as life of the school? 15 A. Yes. 16 170 Q. Just I think it is worthwhile getting a general 17 picture of what life was like for boys who were 18 there, the first section deals with arrival and 19 reception of the boy, could you just deal with that? 20 A. Yes. 21 171 Q. Please? 22 A. This is again linked up with this issue that we are 23 talking about, before Fr. McGonagle started to insist 24 on assessments, boys could and did arrive, as you 25 read there, at any hour of the day or night simply 26 accompanied by the Gardaí with a committal order and 27 nothing else in the way of information about the boy. 28 172 Q. Yes? 29 A. So he just arrived. Then he would be received into 52 1 the school. 2 173 Q. Did you know anything about the boy, would you have 3 any psychological assessment about the boy or 4 anything of that nature? 5 A. No, that was precisely what Fr. McGonagle was 6 insisting. 7 174 Q. The daily programme is then set out and you record 8 one of the pupil's accounts of the daily programme in 9 the late 1940s, he says: 10 "The day for the boys begins at 6:45. 11 They rise at this time and go in double file to the ablution house." 12 13 Which I think is a quaint way of saying they go to 14 wash; is that right? 15 A. That's right. 16 175 Q. 17 "There they wash and go to mass. After mass they return to their ablution 18 house and clean their teeth." 19 20 Can I ask you on that, were there toothbrushes 21 available, do you know, for the boys? 22 A. I guess there must have been. 23 176 Q. I know in some of the institution we have heard there 24 had been complaints that there weren't but you say 25 there were? 26 A. Yes, they are referred to in some of the Inspector's 27 reports, sometimes there is a statement that maybe 28 they should be renewed more often than that. They 29 seem to have existed all right. 53 1 177 Q. I will continue with this quote: 2 "After this there are 15 minutes for recreation and then at 8:20 breakfast. 3 At nine o'clock there is a half an hour recreation and at 9:30 they fall in and 4 divide or split up into their respective groups ready to go to work. 5 They are either boot makers, carpenters, printers, refectory 6 workers, then the boys who work in the farm, garden, bog, laundry, kitchen, 7 dormitory and band. The band is a tradition at St. Conleth's. There is 8 one other group, the boys who are not so well educated, they go to two 9 classrooms under the care of two lay teachers who are very capable and well 10 educated men having a lot of experience. The boys worked until 11 11:45 when there is recreation until noon. 12 Some groups go back to work at this 13 time and more stay in the playground and dinner is at one o'clock and from 14 1:30 there is recreation until 2:30 when work begins and continues until 15 4:00. After that there is recreation until 6:00 when there is supper. There 16 are two hours recreation when supper is finished and then the bugle calls the 17 boys to bed at 8:30. In the winter they go to bed at 8:00." 18 19 Is that a pretty typical day in the 1940s as you 20 understand it from looking at the archives? 21 A. I accept that, that is the only statement I have 22 describing it. 23 178 Q. What about the 1950s and 1960s? 24 A. It went on much the same obviously, as I say, in the 25 report there would have been differences in times of 26 getting up and going to bed, I would imagine, and 27 there were some differences in routine when different 28 programmes came in, like the technical school and so 29 on, basically that was the kind of programme that the 54 1 boys lived, yes. 2 179 Q. I see from about 1965 mass became optional and boys 3 could rise later? 4 A. That's right. 5 180 Q. Would it be fair to say that in three decades there 6 was relative little change in the regime there? 7 A. Until the latter years of Fr. McGonagle, I think then 8 there were very significant changes made. 9 181 Q. Yes. You then describe how the large school 10 population was divided into different groups and then 11 you go on to deal with leisure activities and you 12 talk about drama and musical entertainments, sporting 13 activities and the band, and there was a LDF unit set 14 up? 15 A. These things are all -- you will find them in the 16 school journal, a lot of newspaper cuttings and so on 17 which give you details of these things, I am sure the 18 Commission has seen those. 19 182 Q. On the issue of visits and holidays, I think visits 20 from families were allowed every first Sunday, that's 21 once a month, is it? 22 A. That's right, yes. 23 183 Q. Then in 1969, in September, there was a new 24 regulation made only parents or guardians would be 25 allowed to visit on the first Sunday, do you know 26 what the reason for that was? 27 A. The impression I got from talking to Fr. McGonagle 28 about this is that visiting days could be very 29 disorderly, 100 boys, a lot of parents and a lot of 55 1 friends and relatives, the extended family. If you 2 have a very large group of people arriving on the 3 Sunday afternoon and it was too difficult to cope 4 with it so they needed to curtail it a little. 5 184 Q. How easy was it for people to get to Daingean, say 6 from Dublin where a lot of boys would have been from? 7 A. I gather that it wasn't too difficult for Dubliners 8 because there was a bus organised by a lady that came 9 down on the visiting day so that they not too badly 10 off. It was much more difficult for people from Cork 11 or from Limerick. 12 185 Q. I see. There seems to be a big change in 1972 when 13 family members were allowed to visit at any time or 14 invited to a meal in the general dining room? 15 A. I would like to expand on that a little bit. In 16 1968, as a result of the Kennedy visit, the State was 17 induced to spend some money on the kitchen and a 18 radical change took place around this time. When the 19 new equipment came for the kitchen, for the boys' 20 kitchen, Fr. McGonagle decided that he would no 21 longer have two kitchens but just one kitchen and the 22 old staff kitchen was closed, there was just the one 23 kitchen and the one dining room. But simultaneously 24 with that he introduced this new policy of sections 25 of kind of house units, it would be very hard to 26 bring that in that environment in that school -- in 27 the physical environment of that school, he had the 28 upper wing of the main building, the west wing, 29 adapted as three rooms for three groups of the 56 1 juniors and he had a similar thing later on for the 2 seniors over in the east wing somewhere. So he set 3 up basically for them, what you could call, living 4 rooms or common rooms for these groups of 20 to 24 5 boys. It was the practice then, I understand from 6 him, that the boy would eat in their own living room. 7 They still slept in the dormitory, that big 8 dormitory, but they now had a base of their own, as 9 it were, which was much more friendly to them than 10 simply being left on the square. Also, as I say, it 11 involved a change of meal habits too, that they had 12 their separate -- the groups had their separate 13 dining hall and all the food was coming from the same 14 place. 15 186 Q. Did this lead to any improvement in behaviour of the 16 boys, was there anything recorded about that? 17 A. Well judging from that documentation that you have 18 there, I do not have that documentation except in the 19 discovery from the Department, I do not have it in 20 the Oblate documents. Did it bring any improvement 21 in the boys? 22 187 Q. Yes. 23 A. Improvement, I couldn't make a general statement like 24 that. I think I should say one thing more since I 25 was talking about that issue, at that same time in 26 1968, the practice of having brothers cooking was 27 dropped and they succeeded in getting ladies to come 28 in from the town to do the cooking, so that was 29 another change. 57 1 188 Q. I think also you refer to the fact there was a system 2 developed of giving boys one day's leave and a system 3 of honour, they were honour bound to return and this 4 worked quite well? 5 A. That was in the 1940s, that was in 1941. 6 189 Q. I am sorry, yes. Because it is coming sequentially 7 after the other records for 1972, that had been back 8 in 1941, as I say, by Fr. Fitzsimmons and that 9 seemingly worked well? 10 A. Yes. 11 190 Q. Was that then changed and it would appear that for a 12 period of time they were not allowed out on one day's 13 leave? 14 A. That is my impression, yes. Until in 1959 when a 15 regular pattern of pattern or programme of holidays 16 at home was introduced. 17 191 Q. Yes. That was for times like Christmas and Easter? 18 A. That's right. I think they were allowed 30 days a 19 year or something like that and it was split up 20 between the different seasons. 21 192 Q. You have a paragraph dealing with the level of 22 violence and you say, as indeed is the case, a number 23 of complaints speak of a high level of violence in 24 the daily life of the school, school pupil files, 25 management files, and some other sources of documents 26 various incidents of violence, you give an example of 27 a riot at the reformatory which is spoken of by 28 Inspector Reynolds, when exactly was that riot; can 29 you remember? 58 1 A. I could not say offhand. 2 193 Q. Fr. Mahon was the resident manager, would that help 3 you? 4 A. It would have been between 1955 and 1964. 5 194 Q. There was a major riot at one point and maybe this is 6 the same one, was there more than one major riot? 7 A. I see in the Department discovery there were two at 8 least that I saw, one in Fr. Mahon's time and one in 9 -- was it in 1968, was it? 10 195 Q. Do you know what provoked those riots? 11 A. Frustration I guess. 12 196 Q. Frustration at what? 13 A. I could never see any -- looking at the -- they were 14 investigated by the Gardaí the riot that Fr. Mahon 15 was engaged in. It was investigated by the Gardaí 16 and they do not come up with a very clear reason as a 17 cause for it. I think the impression that one gets 18 is that it would be put down to the activity of some 19 ringleaders who were causing trouble and who were 20 then charged and sent away from the school to St. 21 Patrick's Institution. 22 197 Q. My colleague, Mr. Ward, points out here there is a 23 letter 14 April 1956 from Fr. Mahon referring to the 24 trouble they had yesterday and I think that is 25 the...(INTERJECTION)? 26 A. That could be it, yes. 27 198 Q. The next section of deals with the staff numbers, you 28 say in the period from 1940 to 1973 there were a 29 total of 77 Oblates attached to the school? 59 1 A. Yes. 2 199 Q. That would be some 19 brothers plus five or so 3 priests? 4 A. Yes. 5 200 Q. I think the position was that a priest had to be the 6 resident manager and the person in charge, that was 7 the way things worked; is that so? 8 A. That's right, yes. 9 201 Q. You go on to deal with the arrival of boys, what 10 would be in the file, you say it would include the 11 committal order which was brought by the Garda who 12 brought the boy to the school and it would be 13 forwarded then by Daingean to the Department of 14 Education for registration, there would have been 15 medical reports, if they applied; is that right? 16 A. That's right. The history, the medical history of 17 the boys staying in the school was recorded on a form 18 that was printed by the Department for that purpose. 19 202 Q. Then you refer to psychological reports from the time 20 of Fr. Forde and later Dr. Hill, I think Fr. Frank 21 Forde had taken an interest in psychology, had he 22 gone to the United States to study? 23 A. That's right, he studied in North America. Prior to 24 that he studied in UCD in the Psychology Department 25 there. It was as a result of his studies in UCD that 26 he came to Daingean. 27 203 Q. What period are we talking about? 28 A. We are talking about 1963 or 1964 for about five 29 years or so. 60 1 204 Q. Then there would sometimes be details of the 2 educational achievements of the boys and maybe 3 correspondence and then you say there was a 4 brother/prefect of discipline who assigned boys to 5 their sections and work groups and he was responsible 6 for dealing with breaches of discipline? 7 A. That's right. 8 205 Q. He would be responsible for all discipline in the 9 school? 10 A. Yes. 11 206 Q. When would this take place, if boys had to be 12 disciplined would it take place during the day or at 13 night-time? 14 A. A lot of the complaints I know stressed that it took 15 place at night-time, at bedtime, and I understand 16 that that is certainly was the case on many 17 occasions. The reason it took place, I understand 18 it, at that time was that the boys had to be brought 19 up to their dormitories by the prefect and when the 20 nightmen had come and taking over then the prefect 21 would attend to the disciplinary matters. 22 207 Q. In the discovery there is a statement from 23 Fr. McGonagle dealing with the issue of punishment 24 and when it might have occurred, he would say 25 generally at the end of the day it would have to be 26 two there, never one person; is that as you 27 understand it? 28 A. I gather that is true, yes. 29 208 Q. He said he supposed it would have to be the person 61 1 available and nobody ever punished any boy except the 2 prefect, is that how you understand the position? 3 A. That's how I understand the position, yes. 4 209 Q. A person who would be appointed prefect, he said, was 5 always a man who would be -- 6 "A man who was healthy, strong and who would bear the brunt of that 7 responsibility and the work it entailed because it meant he would have to be on 8 the line at any time if there was any trouble of any description." 9 10 Would that be fair? 11 A. What are you reading from? 12 210 Q. This is something that Fr. McGonagle said in the 13 statement at some point? 14 A. In his statement. 15 211 Q. Yes. 16 A. If he says so I am sure it is true. 17 212 Q. 18 "He would have to be there, while he wouldn't be punishing people on the 19 spot he would have to be there to sort out anything that would arise." 20 21 Then he said: 22 "The place wasn't in view, as far as I 23 know the punishment was always performed in the washroom." 24 25 Would that be your information? 26 A. I have no other information. 27 213 Q. 28 "The stairs went from the washroom up to the dormitory. I am sure they could 29 hear the boys. They would know anyway, they knew what the score was." 62 1 2 I think that means he was referring to the fact that 3 he was sure he could hear the boys reacting to the 4 punishment? 5 A. I guess so, yes. 6 214 Q. I am just wondering what was the purpose of taking 7 them to a private place if it was a place from which 8 they could also be heard as they were being punished? 9 A. I do not think there was any special motivation in it 10 at all. 11 215 Q. You do, in your own statement, refer to the selection 12 of all the staff, page 30 of your statement? 13 A. Yes. 14 216 Q. You say: 15 "Resident managers were appointed by the Provincial with the consent of his 16 council and were subject to the approval of the State." 17 18 You go on to deal with resident manager requirements, 19 he had a high caliber, you give the names of some of 20 the resident managers. You then say: 21 "However while they had no special 22 training for reformatory work, it would be wrong to describe these men as 23 unprepared for the task." 24 25 What, from your information, was the level of 26 training that people had at whatever level in the 27 Oblates for the work of dealing with boys in a 28 reformatory? 29 A. There was no specific training for men who came on 63 1 the staff, those who came on learned on the job, so 2 to speak. 3 217 Q. What I am...(INTERJECTION)? 4 A. What I am saying there is they would have brought to 5 it an experience of community life which was quite 6 broad and intense in some ways, a pattern of life 7 that was very similar to that, a place like a 8 reformatory, in a sense a regular life, manual work 9 and so on and with the kind of interpersonal 10 relationships that would arise in that context, they 11 would be very familiar with all of that. 12 218 Q. What selection process would the Oblate Order have 13 used for choosing people to work in the reformatory? 14 A. They would always be on the look out for the brother 15 -- for the candidates who went into the novitiate as 16 brothers, they would have been on the look out for 17 suitable brothers for the reformatory because 18 obviously it was a place that needed staff. 19 219 Q. What other work did the Oblates do in Ireland over 20 the years? 21 A. Most of the work of the Oblate was -- one group that 22 works in Britain, all parts of Britain as well as in 23 Ireland, and most of the works were over there. It 24 consisted of missionary, of preaching missions and 25 parish work. A lot of work in the Irish centres 26 working for Irish immigrants into England, in London, 27 in Birmingham. 28 220 Q. In Ireland, what sort of work did the Oblates do? 29 A. In Ireland, they tended to be -- I guess we didn't 64 1 look upon Ireland as being a very missionary country. 2 While there was a mission band, as we call it, in 3 Inchicore that preached missions all over the 4 country, that was up until -- during this period, 5 that would have been the only external ministry that 6 we did. 7 221 Q. Would I be fair in putting it this way that within 8 Ireland, virtually all the work the office did was 9 running reformatories or industrial schools of one 10 sort of another; would that be...(INTERJECTION) 11 A. We would have placed the preaching of parish missions 12 as the principle work. 13 222 Q. What that have been the work of priests or brothers? 14 A. That would have been the work of priests. 15 223 Q. So insofar as brothers were concerned, if somebody 16 went into the Oblates and they joined as a brother, 17 would it be almost inevitable if they worked in 18 Ireland that they would end up in some role in the 19 reformatory? 20 A. No, because in Ireland we also had our houses of 21 formation and that was three communities, novitiate, 22 house of philosophy and a house of theology and in 23 each of these places there was a large community of 24 student Oblates and they would always be supported by 25 a farm. In each of these three places there was 26 always a strong team of brothers managing the place 27 and supporting it in that way. From some aspects it 28 was -- obviously what they had to do in Daingean was 29 much more demanding. 65 1 224 Q. They would have been sent there by a decision of the 2 Provincial? 3 A. Yes. 4 225 Q. You say that when men came to join the Oblates as 5 brothers they were normally between the ages of 17 6 and 30? 7 A. Yes. 8 226 Q. Who sort of background would they have, educationally 9 and otherwise? 10 A. From looking at the records, my observation was that 11 they came with a national school education. 12 227 Q. Would many of them -- many of the brothers been at 13 the lower age of that range, you said there 17 to 30? 14 A. Well I could not say really the numbers. Nowadays we 15 would consider those...(INTERJECTION). 16 228 Q. Yes. I am just trying to get some idea from you, 17 what sort of life experiences would most of the 18 brothers have had before they would be placed in a 19 place like Daingean? 20 A. Some of them would have had some experience in a job 21 somewhere, many of them did not have much life 22 experience before coming to the school, that would be 23 true. 24 229 Q. When you say many would that be most or would it be 25 just...(INTERJECTION)? 26 A. I couldn't give -- I couldn't be specific on that. 27 230 Q. I see. You talk of the technical skills that 28 brothers would have, can you tell the Committee 29 something about those? 66 1 A. Yes. In the school there were these trade shops, a 2 carpenter's shop and a boot maker's shop and a 3 printing shop and horticultural activity, as well as 4 the farming, there were brothers who had the skills 5 to do that. 6 231 Q. You refer then to one of the priests going to pursue 7 a course in America and take his masters degree in 8 psychiatric social work? 9 A. That's right. 10 232 Q. He returned in 1970? 11 A. That's right. 12 233 Q. Another did advance social studies in Bristol and 13 returned in 1971 or 1972? 14 A. Yes. 15 234 Q. You make another observation there that most of the 16 staff were male? 17 A. That's right. Right up until the closing years it 18 was predominantly a male except for one or two 19 domestic staff. In the latter years there was a 20 matron which a big improvement, I would say, and some 21 sisters from Sisters of Mercy came and that was in 22 September 1971. There were one or two ladies as 23 teachers and a school social worker who was -- she 24 was a teacher actually but she functioned very much 25 as a social worker. 26 235 Q. Did the fact that the staff and the occupants were 27 predominantly male did that have any impact on the 28 way in which the school was run or cause any problems 29 that you are aware of? 67 1 A. Not that I am aware of but it probably have accounted 2 for the fact that maybe there was not so much concern 3 about appearance, as there would have been if there 4 had been ladies around the place. 5 236 Q. Yes. One or more people observed on visits that the 6 boys looked very dirty, now that you mention that, 7 that they looked very dirty and unkempt? 8 A. That's right. 9 237 Q. Allowing for the fact that there was a severe 10 shortage of funds from the State, was there any 11 justification for boys being dirty and unkempt when 12 there were washrooms and showers there? 13 A. It is hard to understand, there were plenty wash 14 basins, there was a massive one...(INTERJECTION). 15 238 Q. There was a...(INTERJECTION)? 16 A. There was no hot water. 17 239 Q. There was a description somewhere, I cannot remember 18 exactly where it was, by some visitor who remarked 19 that the showers had -- I think become rusted or were 20 disintegrating and the reason they offer for this was 21 due to lack of use; do you recall that? 22 A. I do, that was in the Kennedy Report. 23 240 Q. That may well be where I saw it. 24 A. I would dispute that. I grant that they were 25 corroded and all the rest of it, but it was not 26 through ill use, it was through old age. I mean they 27 were used. I think if you look at the report of 28 Dr. Lissard, he made a very thorough inspection in 29 1966, in June 1966. He certainly inspected the 68 1 showers, he commented on their age and so on but he 2 had no doubt about them being in use. 3 241 Q. Would you agree or disagree that the lack of funds 4 should have no issue on -- no relationship to whether 5 boys are kept clean or not, or do you think it would 6 have impinged on that? 7 A. That is a difficult question. I think it is fair to 8 say that it is a pity that that situation was allowed 9 to develop. 10 242 Q. I see. 11 A. Yes. Dr. Lissard made a report there in 1966 after a 12 very careful investigation, it is a very nuanced 13 report and I think one would accept his observations 14 as being fair and just. 15 243 Q. Is there any particular reason why you would accept 16 his report and reject the one that says the showers 17 were not functioning due to...(INTERJECTION)? 18 A. It was obviously a much more careful report. There 19 is no evidence that the Kennedy Committee did a very 20 thorough examination of the premises, they descended 21 on it as a group, there is no evidence that they made 22 a very careful examination of everything, whereas 23 Dr. Lissard went there specifically to do an 24 investigation. He did a very careful and very honest 25 and objective report which is far from being totally 26 favourable but at the same time it has its nuances. 27 I think one would have to accept it. 28 244 Q. Did you think there was something different in 29 Dr. Lissard report compared to many other reports 69 1 which have been furnished by people from the 2 Department of Education over the years? 3 A. Well it is much fuller. 4 245 Q. Yes? How would you compare some of the other reports 5 that emanated from Department of Education officials 6 over the years? 7 A. They were generally favourable, they were not very 8 critical. 9 246 Q. When you say they weren't very critical, did they 10 suggestion a thorough inspection in your view? 11 A. I could not say. They say, as you know, they itemise 12 different aspects, I am quite sure that they denote 13 an inspection was made. 14 247 Q. Yes? 15 A. I am sure that Dr. McCabe, is it? 16 248 Q. Yes. 17 A. Went and looked at these things. 18 249 Q. The Kennedy Report at paragraph 629 states that: 19 "The kitchen and refectory are situated in what were formally the stables and 20 are depressing and decayed. On inspection the toilets were dirty and 21 insanitary, the showers were corroded through lack of use and the hot water 22 system was so inadequate that the boys seldom, if ever, washed in hot water." 23 24 Would there be anything you would agree with in that? 25 A. Well basically except for what they say about the 26 showers. I also point out, as I have earlier, that 27 these things had been brought to the attention of the 28 State previously. 29 250 Q. What source of fuel was used to heat the boiler in 70 1 Daingean? 2 A. I think it was oil fire, I think it was but I am not 3 sure of it. 4 251 Q. They never used turf, for example, I know that a lot 5 of the boys would have been...(INTERJECTION)? 6 A. I am sure they did. 7 252 Q. ...working on the bog? 8 A. I am sure they did. 9 253 Q. I am just wondering if they ever 10 used...(INTERJECTION)? 11 A. I think there was a comment somewhere that they would 12 prefer an oil. 13 254 Q. I am not suggesting it is one of the other, I can't 14 recall. 15 A. No. 16 255 Q. There was an adequate supply of turf close by and the 17 boys did work on the bog? 18 A. That's right. 19 256 Q. The toilets were dirty and insanitary, according to 20 the Kennedy Commission, is there any reason why that 21 should have been so if there was a large force of 22 boys there who were available to do cleaning work? 23 A. No. Again I would look at the Lissard Report which 24 did not make that kind of a comment. It did comment, 25 I think, that the toilets in the junior section were 26 a little bit messy but the ones in the senior section 27 were in better shape. 28 257 Q. I want you to comment, one might understand why 29 toilet facilities might be inadequate due to lack of 71 1 funding, the issue of whether they were dirty or 2 insanitary doesn't seem to be...(INTERJECTION)? 3 A. That's true. 4 258 Q. ...something that should be affected by funding? 5 A. That's quite true. 6 259 Q. Are you saying you reject that finding or not? 7 A. I make no comment on it. 8 260 Q. I see. 9 A. In the sense that, for instance, when they talk about 10 the dining room and that and they -- what were the 11 words they used? 12 261 Q. They say: 13 "The kitchen and refectory are situated are what were formally the stables and 14 are depressing and decayed." 15 16 17 A. That's right. Decayed, the point is that the 18 infrastructure or the buildings had got to this stage 19 where they were beyond repair and beyond being able 20 to be kept clean. It is specially said by 21 Dr. Lissard when he talks about the floor of, I 22 think, the kitchen of the boy's refectory, I am not 23 sure which, it got to such a state that there is 24 nothing you can do with it, you cannot keep it clean. 25 Now it is -- I am just thinking, it might have been 26 the same with the toilets, I don't know. 27 262 Q. I am just trying to put things in context, in other 28 institutions where there were, for example, girls 29 many of the complaints have been that they had to do 72 1 an excessive amount of cleaning and polishing but 2 certainly lack of cleanliness in the facilities does 3 not appear to have been a problem? 4 A. Yes. Well, no, I mean that's something the 5 Commission has to decide on obviously. I mean, lack 6 of cleanliness is not something that you can accept. 7 263 Q. THE CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, that is not 8 something you can accept? 9 A. That one can accept. 10 264 Q. THE CHAIRPERSON: Can I go back a little more 11 fundamentally for a second 12 because I think a lot of this may make sense, correct 13 me if I am wrong. My understanding, Fr., is that -- 14 obviously you appreciate that we have had people in 15 here speaking for the Order or the community and 16 sometimes they said, here are the facts, sometimes 17 they say here are concessions that we are prepared to 18 make, we accept this happened, that happened, the 19 other happened, then there comes a point and they 20 say, we are not making concessions it is a matter for 21 the Commission to decide. If I am understanding what 22 your position, I do not want to be unfair to you, you 23 are the archivist in the community; is that right? 24 A. Yes. 25 265 Q. THE CHAIRPERSON: You have very helpfully 26 produced a historical 27 material, a huge number of documents which you refer 28 to here, and obviously that's very important for us 29 to know what the background is and what the 73 1 statistics are and the facts and figures and so on, 2 as I say, thank you very much. Am I understanding 3 that you are not really in a position to express on 4 behalf of the Order any particular concessions; is 5 that a fair way of describing your position? 6 A. I think so, yes. 7 266 Q. THE CHAIRPERSON: So for instance, if 8 Mr. McGovern presents you 9 with the document -- again so we do not misunderstand 10 each other, if Mr. McGovern presents you with a 11 document, you may well say it may be fairly obvious 12 what it means but you are conscious of your position 13 that you are not really here to say, I accept that is 14 what it says and therefore it must be true; is that a 15 reasonable way? 16 A. Yes, I certainly done my work on the basis of what is 17 in the documents. 18 267 Q. THE CHAIRPERSON: I understand. Was there a 19 discussion in preparation 20 for you giving evidence? Was there a discussion in 21 the Order or was any decision made as to whether you 22 would make any concessions or not? Or did that issue 23 arise? 24 A. Yes. 25 268 Q. THE CHAIRPERSON: What was the result of it? 26 A. The result of it is, I think, we feel that 27 adjudication on matters belongs to the second phase. 28 269 Q. THE CHAIRPERSON: All right. I understand. 29 I just wanted to clarify 74 1 what the position is, you are here to produce 2 documents, as I say, you have produced a very 3 extensive range of documents. 4 A. Yes. 5 270 Q. THE CHAIRPERSON: There is a limited -- you 6 yourself feel that your 7 role here limits you in the comments that you are 8 making? 9 A. In that sense, yes. I do not think I can, as you 10 say, make concessions, I don't know how anybody 11 could. 12 271 Q. THE CHAIRPERSON: I understand. Let me put 13 it this way, if the Kennedy 14 Report says the material that Mr. McGovern quoted 15 you, it would seem a little eccentric to say, I 16 disagree with that because a report of Dr. Lissard in 17 1966 said something different. As far as it goes, if 18 we are battling documents you are entitled to say, if 19 this document says this I have another document that 20 says something else, that is the extent of it? 21 A. Yes. 22 THE CHAIRPERSON: All right. I don't know 23 whether that is of any 24 value, Mr. McGovern. I hope, Mr. Maguire, you don't 25 consider that unfair, it is useful to clarify exactly 26 where we are going and how far Fr. Hughes can go and 27 how far he can't go. 28 MR. MAGUIRE: It is safe to say, 29 Chairman, that he did give 75 1 a reason as to why he says he prefers 2 the...(INTERJECTION). 3 THE CHAIRPERSON: I agree with that, but I 4 think that is a fair point 5 to say that he is not here to speak -- he is speaking 6 about documents and he is as good as anybody -- in 7 fact he is better than anybody else to speak about 8 the Oblates documents. 9 272 Q. MR. McGOVERN: Yes. If I might bring you 10 forward to pages 46 and 47 11 of your statement just to get this issue out of the 12 way. You quote in these from Dr. Lissard in one of 13 his reports and you said: 14 "Inspector's reports frequently called for improvements in clothing. I was 15 not impressed by their general appearing from the clothing aspect. 16 Looking down from a window they looked a healthy and well nourished lot of 17 boys. They presented an untidy and unkempt appearance due to the condition 18 of their clothes, mainly..." 19 20 He goes on to say it was a hot day and they may have 21 had their shirts open and that did not help. If you 22 go over the page there, in his general summing up, 23 you say Dr. Lissard went to some pains to phrase his 24 criticism. 25 "I am seeking to avoid, with 26 difficulty, comparison with the senior boys' industrial schools. It is 27 probably the case that the same care for those cannot be expected from the 28 type of boy here. In any event, they are untidy, poorly dressed, unkempt by 29 comparison with the five senior boys' industrial schools I have so far seen." 76 1 2 Dr. Lissard would have had an extensive brief and 3 would have been visiting other industrial school, not 4 reformatories, I accept but he does seem to find that 5 the boys in Daingean were in the more unkempt and 6 dirty state? 7 A. It is quite clear he says that, yes. 8 273 Q. Indeed in the next paragraph you quote from the 9 Kennedy Report, where they said: 10 "When it was first inspected the boys 11 were ill dressed and dirty and there was a general air of neglect about the 12 place. 13 To be fair, the Committee would point out again that the capitation rate paid 14 was completely inadequate." 15 16 A. That's right. 17 274 Q. I will move on from there, but it appears to be the 18 case that there may have been reasons for it but the 19 boys were seen in this light by different parties? 20 A. That is plainly stated. 21 275 Q. Going back to where we were on page 33 of your 22 statement, you deal with stress felt by the staff in 23 the late 1960s and to some extent we dealt with this 24 in that document that was on the screen earlier where 25 I was talking about the repressive regime that was 26 stated to be in place, you quote from a January 1966 27 report from the Provincial to the General Chapter 28 where he says...(INTERJECTION)? 29 A. I am sorry, there is a mistake there that I would 77 1 like to correct. 2 276 Q. Very good. 3 A. The document actually -- it is a later document, it 4 is 14 December 1969 in the minutes of a brothers' 5 meeting, sorry about that. 6 277 Q. So when you say January 1966 it should be 14 December 7 1969? 8 A. Yes. 9 278 Q. Very good. I do not think that is going to make a 10 great deal of different. You quote there, maybe you 11 would read that quote? 12 A. 13 "At present there are only nine active members of the staff who are expected 14 to cater at all times from 7:00 in the morning to 10:30 at night, come what 15 may, seven days a week." 16 17 Then it names them. 18 279 Q. Yes, we do not need to...(INTERJECTION)? 19 A. 20 "The average age of these men is over 40 and obviously increasing. The staff 21 as a whole feels that under the present circumstances they are unable to 22 continue much longer under the present system. The strain is regarded as far 23 too severe and unless something tangible is done in the immediate 24 future they feel they would be fit subjects for a special institution 25 themselves. That the strain is evident is obvious by the fact that six 26 brothers in five years are sent from here with nervous breakdowns. This in 27 itself should be a whole reminder of the seriousness of the situation of the 28 already understaffed school. At present the staff feel that they are 29 being treated very unfairly." 78 1 2 3 280 Q. Allowing for that, do you think that this strain 4 which is of a severe nature reflected in this 5 document carried with it any risks for the people in 6 the care of such people under that type of strain? 7 A. Risks, one could imagine that, yes. 8 281 Q. What do you think those risks might be? 9 A. I suppose the men under stress might snap and become 10 abusive, it is a possibility. 11 282 Q. Can I suggest to you it is a really possibility? 12 A. It is. 13 283 Q. If you have any understanding of human nature? 14 A. That's right. 15 284 Q. This appears to be a theme which is evident in 16 several reports or memoranda coming from the Oblates, 17 in the way I accept as a cry for help? 18 A. Exactly. 19 285 Q. Do you accept that this shows that there was a 20 situation which was highly undesirable, that there 21 were people working in a position of responsibility 22 over younger people who were in 23 extreme...(INTERJECTION)? 24 A. Stress. 25 286 Q. ...stress? 26 A. I accept that totally, yes. 27 287 Q. You refer to the Kennedy Report which describes 28 deficiencies in the system: 29 "Haphazard, amateurish, static, out of date, lack of professional and 79 1 courses." 2 3 Do the Oblates accept that those limitations were 4 present? 5 A. Yes, up to a point. You see, by 1970 -- they visited 6 in 1968 and they made the report in 1970, they do not 7 seem to have taken into account the considerable hard 8 work that was being done in the intervening years, 9 1968, 1969 and 1970 itself. I do not think you could 10 say then that the thing was static, for example, it 11 was very -- evolving, rapidly in fact. I do not 12 think you could say that it was out of date because 13 the outlook of the manager, the resident manager, was 14 certainly trying very hard to get into touch with 15 modern methods to bring in, in particular -- to make 16 use of psychiatrist help. He had considerable 17 difficulty in getting this because the State, for 18 some reason or other, did not think this was very 19 important but he kept on pressing. I would not say 20 that that is all together an accurate description. 21 288 Q. Is there anything in the archives which you have gone 22 through which shows that anyone in a position of 23 authority in the Oblates ever went to a facility 24 abroad or was ever funded by the Department of 25 Education, if they did not have the resources 26 themselves, to do that to see how other countries 27 were managing juvenile delinquents in their care? 28 A. Certainly the Department never funded anybody to go 29 anywhere. I know that Fr. Mahon went to America at 80 1 one stage to have a look at what was going on over 2 there, that would be in the early 1960s I would 3 imagine. Fr. McGonagle, I understand was in touch of 4 people, I don't know how much he visited, he would 5 have -- I believe he saw some places in Europe, he 6 did not go to the States I know. But apart from that 7 no, except, as you said earlier, some men were sent 8 off to study, specialised studies, one to America, 9 one to Bristol, and of course that made a tremendous 10 difference. 11 289 Q. Can we move on now to the issue of education, what 12 type of education was provided for boys who were in 13 Daingean? 14 A. The type of education. The first element was kind of 15 a remedial programme for those who were illiterate. 16 This was staffed by sometimes two, sometimes one, 17 untrained teacher but a teacher who won great praise 18 over the years for the skills he had acquired in 19 dealing with illiterate boys of this particular age. 20 We are talking about -- the main age group that we 21 are talking about was 15 to 17, when they already 22 passed the age of primary education and not derived 23 any benefit from it, and some had a very special 24 problem. The State did not recognise the existence 25 of a primary school, of a school, to deal with that 26 problem within the unit of the reformatory until very 27 late in the 1960s. It did not supply any funds for 28 teachers or for anything else, it was just left 29 entirely to the school to find its resources from the 81 1 capitation grant. 2 3 Now eventually at the very end of the school's life 4 it was finally recognised as a special school and I 5 think you will find somewhere in the text a letter 6 written by Fr. McGonagle in which he stresses the 7 importance of this, he says it is the most important 8 thing that the Department of Education has done for 9 the school since the foundation of the Department. 10 Because what it meant was now for the first time you 11 had within the school a kind of comprehensive school, 12 which embraced remedial education which was badly 13 needed by many, some technical education and some, 14 what you might call, the orderly humanities, a bit of 15 English and Irish and civic and arts and crafts and 16 things like that. 17 18 Now as well that, I would have to say, this goes back 19 to the history of it to some extent now, there was 20 always a very strong tradition in the reformatories 21 from the 19th century onwards of trades. This was 22 seen probably as being more important to the boys 23 then simply a formal education, especially the age of 24 the boy that we are talking about, it was more 25 important for them to have some hand's on experience 26 of a job than anything else. So in the heyday of the 27 reformatory in the 19th century there were very 28 active workshops producing excellent objects, high 29 quality. They were also boys working on the farm. 82 1 And the Cussen Report, the 1936 report, it stresses I 2 think, if I am right in saying, how important 3 training in that area is in Ireland, that there was 4 more people occupied in farming than anything else. 5 It was very important that they should have an 6 important in that area. It did make a complaint that 7 the -- in all the schools, not just in the 8 reformatories, perhaps I should say at this 9 particular time Daingean did not exist as a 10 reformatory in 1936, Glencree was the only 11 reformatory at that time, the situations are very 12 similar. 13 14 I was going to say, to stress that the boys should be 15 given more scientific education in farming and they 16 hoped that the State would appoint a rural 17 instructor, I think they called it, to fulfil this 18 task and this was promised, I think, at one stage but 19 of course it never happened. There should have been 20 appointed somebody who would actually introduce the 21 boys to the theoretical skills of the farm, not 22 simply to its practical aspects. 23 290 Q. Can I ask you this, Fr., the Department of Education 24 have responsibility over Daingean? 25 A. Yes. 26 291 Q. To what extent do you and the Oblates feel you got 27 cooperation from the Department in the business of 28 educating boys, whether it be in trades or in book 29 learning, as they call it? 83 1 A. Well I wouldn't -- there is a document in the sheaf 2 of material made available by the Department of 3 Education in which somebody says the educational 4 aspect of the reformatory have been shamefully 5 neglected, I think they were talking about neglect by 6 the Department. I think one would have to say that 7 there is truth in that. 8 292 Q. Do the archives show to what extent boys achieved 9 educational standards and what happened to them 10 afterwards, was there any follow up or anything to 11 indicate how boys fared when they left Daingean? 12 A. What was the first part of the question? 13 293 Q. Do the archives show what educational achievement 14 were realised by the boys? 15 A. The only educational achievement that was open to 16 them in our period was sitting for the group 17 certificate, that started I think in the late 1940s. 18 The boys did not have a great success in getting 19 certificates. 20 294 Q. What was the reason for that? 21 A. There is a report on the dossier there from the 22 Department of Education which attributes it to a 23 number of things; one the shortness of the time 24 available because they are only there for a year, a 25 full school year, they would come any time of the 26 year but there was only one full school year that 27 they would be there. The fact that the equipment was 28 rather poor. The equipment of course had to be 29 supplied by the school, again out of the capitation 84 1 grant, it was never funded by the State. So all the 2 tools and all the rest of it had to come out of the 3 capitation grant. Another big reason for it which 4 this report named was the difficult of attracting 5 good teachers. The teachers for the technical school 6 were provided by the Offaly Vocations Committee, is 7 that what you call it? That was the only element of 8 the educational programme that was paid for, these 9 teachers were paid for, two of them usually. They 10 were -- they would come and they would not stay. I 11 do not blame them. They would come and as soon as a 12 better opportunity presented itself they would take 13 off to another school. This again is put forward by 14 a report by a man called Inspector Malally (?) for 15 the reason why the technical programme wasn't as 16 successful as it should have been. 17 295 Q. Would it be fair to suggest that the educational 18 aspect of the boys' time in Daingean was not 19 particularly enlightening? 20 A. I think one could form that impression, yes. 21 296 Q. Whether it be in book learning or in learning a 22 trade? 23 A. Yes. Again you have to remember the capacity of the 24 boys too, it would be naïve to think one could 25 achieve a great deal in that context. 26 297 Q. Just finally before lunch, you refer to religious 27 education and whether that was an intrinsic part of 28 school life, there were variations in practices as to 29 whether boys had to go to mass? 85 1 A. That's right. 2 298 Q. As time went by...(INTERJECTION)? 3 A. It was a reformatory for Catholics. 4 299 Q. As a matter of interest, what happened to boys who 5 were not Catholic, where were they sent? 6 A. I gather from Dr. O'Sullivan in his evidence at the 7 very beginning of the Inquiry that they were 8 sometimes put into the supervision of a parson or 9 something like that. 10 THE CHAIRPERSON: They were found somewhere, 11 but there wasn't a home. 12 300 Q. MR. McGOVERN: Just one final matter 13 before we break as it deals 14 with education matters? 15 THE CHAIRPERSON: Yes. 16 301 Q. MR. McGOVERN: I think you were referring 17 to a reference about the 18 shameful neglect of educational aspects, I think 19 that's to found in the statement -- sorry, in the 20 Department of Education discovery there is an 21 internal memo which states: 22 "As you are already aware, the educational aspects of this 23 reformatory," and they are referring to Daingean, "school for boys in Daingean, 24 County Offaly has been shamefully neglected over many years. The boys 25 were illiterate on entering the school were given little education during 26 their two years of normal time in the institution. As a result of financial 27 restrictions the directors have to make use of them as labourers. It is 28 proposed now to put an end to this neglect." 29 86 1 It seems to be making a step forward, would that be a 2 fair representation of the situation there 3 educationally until perhaps...(INTERJECTION). 4 A. I would not accept that they were there as labourers. 5 I do not think that lacks historical perspective. 6 THE CHAIRPERSON: Very good. Thank you very 7 much. Two o'clock. 8 9 LUNCHEON ADJOURNMENT 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 87 1 THE HEARING RESUMED, AS FOLLOWS, AFTER THE LUNCHEON 2 ADJOURNMENT: 3 4 5 THE CHAIRPERSON: Good afternoon. 6 302 Q. MR. McGOVERN: Good afternoon, Fr. Hughes. 7 Could we move on to the 8 issue of medical facilities and services, which are 9 covered at page 43 of your statement. You say there 10 was no contemporary evidence on the topic of 11 bedwetting, was bedwetting a problem, do you know, 12 did it cause difficulties in Daingean? 13 A. If it were not for the complaints, the contemporary 14 complaints and the current complaints, the word would 15 not have come up at all, in my opinion. 16 303 Q. Yes. How was the issue dealt with, do you know? 17 A. I could not find out anything. 18 304 Q. Yes. Very good. You say there was no free medical 19 service for the boys until after the Kennedy 20 Committee, that would have been 1968 to 1970, that 21 period: "Medical fees had to be discharged out of 22 school funds." What was th eimpact of that on boys 23 who needed medical care and attention? 24 A. They had the full -- they had full medical care and 25 attention. I could refer you to some -- for example, 26 in the 1940s there was some correspondence between 27 the resident manager and the Department about payment 28 for dental plates, the full treatment, because 29 frankly the manager felt he could not afford out of 88 1 the capitation grant to provide advanced dental 2 treatment of that kind. He got no satisfaction from 3 the Department and he just had to go ahead and pay 4 for the plates. 5 305 Q. The picture you were painting this morning was that 6 there was a totally inadequate system of funding for 7 the school to the point where it was in a complete 8 state of dilapidation, am I being fair about that? 9 A. That's my impression. 10 306 Q. Indeed that was the impression people commented on 11 when they visited, the poor state of the premises. I 12 am just wondering if there was no money for day to 13 day necessities like maintaining the fabric of the 14 building to a state where it was barely habitable 15 what happened when boys needed medical treatment if 16 it had to be provided for out of the school funds? 17 A. First of all, with regard to the dilapidation, a huge 18 effort was constantly being put into the property. 19 The problem was that it had reached the stage where 20 it was beyond being maintained. 21 307 Q. But you have described a situation where people were 22 cold, the building was cold, there was virtually no 23 hot water except occasionally in the showers? 24 A. The building was cold and that was for everybody of 25 course. 26 308 Q. But this suggests to me, if you don't mind me saying 27 so...(INTERJECTION)? 28 A. That was not due to shortage of money, that was due 29 to the nature of the facility. 89 1 309 Q. Are you saying...(INTERJECTION)? 2 A. There was not a heating system. 3 310 Q. Are you saying it was not a shortage of money that 4 gave rise to that? 5 A. It was the shortage of capital expenditure, I would 6 say. 7 311 Q. Was there capital to spend, if there was no shortage 8 of money, I am not saying no shortage in the sense we 9 normally mean it, if there was money available why 10 wasn't it spent on these things? 11 A. As I say, money was spent on maintenance so far as it 12 possible. With all the work in the world you could 13 not give this place a face lift. 14 312 Q. But is it the case that boys could not get medical 15 treatment unless they were in absolute need of it? 16 A. Not at all, they had full medical, in my opinion. I 17 am just going by what I see in the documents now. 18 313 Q. I see. 19 A. If you read the school files you would see -- we only 20 have the school files, as you know, from a period 21 from about 1963 to 1973. 22 314 Q. Yes. 23 A. The school pupil files, that is, in practically all 24 of them you will find the medical inspection carried 25 by Dr. McGuinness within three or four days of the 26 boy's arrival, he used to do it every Wednesday, I 27 believe. On the back of that form there would be a 28 record of weights and heights growth during the 29 period and also any medical incidence. For instance, 90 1 there was a huge amount of dental treatment and of 2 course if anything came up, well, that required 3 hospitalisation they would go to Tullamore General 4 Hospital. 5 315 Q. Was...(INTERJECTION)? 6 A. There was never a question ever, in my opinion, of 7 the boy not getting medical care that he needed. 8 316 Q. Medical treatment would obviously be something that 9 was important? 10 A. Yes. 11 317 Q. Just as the issue of, for example, discipline would 12 be very important in a reformatory? 13 A. Yes. 14 318 Q. Can I ask you how come, it appears from your 15 statement on page 44, that the medical treatment book 16 is available and the medicinal drug record is 17 available but we have no punishment book available, 18 is there some reason for that? 19 A. It is just the vagaries of what happens to documents. 20 When the school in Daingean closed down the documents 21 were transported either start to the Department or 22 straight to the -- to Lusk and from there to the 23 Department, I do not know quite which. Whatever 24 documents have come to us have come that route. It 25 is quite possible that a lot of documents have been 26 lost down through the years. These particular ones 27 which the Department have conserved. 28 319 Q. There have been complaints, I think you are aware, 29 about the food in Daingean, what do you have to say 91 1 about that? 2 A. Page 45, is it? 3 320 Q. Yes. 4 A. Again there is little contemporary documentation, 5 what there is -- I want to refer to, for example, the 6 medical records of the weight and height measurements 7 of pupils that were taken on entry and during the 8 time they spent in the school, I think that will 9 afford some evidence for your expert to make a 10 judgment on nutrition. Apart from that, there are 11 the regular reports of the Inspectors, Dr. McCabe in 12 particular, which general speaking are bland, they 13 say "food improving" or something like that. 14 321 Q. Do you think there was enough food for the boys? 15 A. From the reports there is no evidence -- how can I 16 answer except by referring to the documents. 17 322 Q. You are aware that many of the complainants say they 18 were hungry, as well as the fact that the food was 19 bad? 20 A. I am, yes. 21 323 Q. A lot of these boys would have been doing heavy 22 manual work during the day down on the farm, out on 23 the bog, wherever? 24 A. That's right. 25 324 Q. They required a fairly substantial diet 26 to...(INTERJECTION)? 27 A. That's right. 28 325 Q. ...keep them properly nourished in those 29 circumstances? 92 1 A. I can only refer you to what evidence exists. You 2 quoted it yourself earlier on what Dr. Lissard said, 3 whose report is far from blinkered, when he says as a 4 general group they looked healthy and well nourished. 5 326 Q. So do I infer from that that you would be disputing 6 any suggestion that might be made that they were fed 7 poorly and inadequately? 8 A. I would, yes. 9 327 Q. I see. Can we move on to page 48 because I think we 10 have already dealt with the issue of clothing and 11 hygiene. This is the issue of rules and supervision, 12 which is inextricably tied up with the issue of 13 punishment as well. The responsibility for 14 discipline fell upon the brother/prefect of 15 discipline; is that right? 16 A. That's right. 17 328 Q. He was responsible for dealing with serious breaches 18 of discipline, what were regarded as serious breaches 19 of discipline? 20 A. I understand that abuses would have been violence and 21 absconding, those would be the chief ones I think. 22 329 Q. I think there were a series of major and minor rules 23 which were...(INTERJECTION)? 24 A. That's right. 25 330 Q. ...promulgated at some stage? 26 A. That's right in 1960. 27 331 Q. Did you discuss with anybody in the Oblates what 28 would have been regarded as a serious breach of 29 discipline? 93 1 A. What I recall is -- from Fr. McGonagle, the things I 2 have just mentioned. 3 332 Q. We have been furnished with a list of major rules and 4 they do include such items as damage to property, 5 attacking or maiming another person and matters like 6 that, some of the matters that are referred to appear 7 to be perhaps in a different category; would you 8 agree with that? 9 A. I do not know what you mean. 10 333 Q. For example, one of the major rules is: 11 "No boy has a special claim to any place in the recreation hall, playing 12 grounds or in ranks." 13 14 They talk about: 15 "Not having the right to take over games, ball alleys, particular corners 16 of the square and hall." 17 18 It seems, if I may suggest, odd they would have been 19 major rules, would you have a comment on that? 20 A. They were rules required for good order, I would 21 imagine. I do not think you could relate major rules 22 and their breach with serious breaches of discipline. 23 334 Q. There are rules relating to friendships between 24 senior and junior boys, was that meant in a sexual 25 sense or some other sense? 26 A. What did it say? 27 335 Q. It says: 28 "Any intercourse between senior and junior sections is an offence against 29 the school rules. The forming of particular friendships between senior 94 1 and junior boys is a more serious offence and merits a severe penalty." 2 3 4 A. I would suspect it does, yes. 5 336 Q. 6 "Whistling, singing and shouting at one another is also a major offence." 7 8 9 A. It might be a major offence but I would not say it 10 would be a serious breach of discipline in the same 11 category as the other ones I mentioned. 12 337 Q. If you were found whistling or singing, I am just 13 wondering would that entitle somebody, if they saw 14 fit, to punish you for a serious offence or a major 15 offence? 16 A. I suppose it would, yes. 17 338 Q. Would you have any comment to make about that? 18 A. I would say it is the kind of thing that happens in 19 schools generally, or happened in those days I should 20 say, I do not know about now. 21 339 Q. Do you feel that there is anything haphazard about 22 the composition of that list of major rules or do you 23 think it is well thought out? 24 A. I did not really subject it to a criticism, I must 25 admit. 26 340 Q. You refer to these rules in paragraph 15.5 of your 27 statement and you say that: 28 "These rules were explicitly approved by the Minister for Education in 29 October 1960. They were introduced and explained to the boys as the need 95 1 arises and they were prominently displayed for reading by the boys." 2 3 4 A. That's right. The importance of that became evidence 5 at that time in 1960 when there was trouble and they 6 wanted to get some boys removed from the school and 7 it become apparent that in order for that kind of a 8 process to be done effectively there had to be a set 9 of school rules on display and explained to the boys 10 with an explanation that for the breach -- for the 11 serious breaches of discipline they could be liable 12 to being expelled from the school and punished by the 13 District Court by being sent to St. Patrick's or 14 something like that. 15 341 Q. You make reference to rule 10 which speaks of immoral 16 or impure conduct and there was a reference in the 17 rules to the fact that: 18 "This is forbidden by God himself and so it is no mere school rule, therefore 19 to warn boys against it is absolutely for their own good. The school 20 authorities strictly forbid it and will be helpful and watchful in preventing 21 such conduct." 22 23 Was that a problem among boys, immorality in among 24 the boys themselves? 25 A. I understand it was. 26 342 Q. I see. Was this something that was known and 27 discussed among the members of the Order? 28 A. Yes. 29 343 Q. You are probably aware that there are a great number 96 1 of complaints about serious, I mean serious, sexual 2 assaults carried out by members of the Order on boys 3 who were resident in the reformatory, you know that? 4 A. I know that. 5 344 Q. There are extensive details given by complainants of 6 these? 7 A. Yes. 8 345 Q. What was the state of knowledge of the Oblates about 9 this, of the possibility of this going on? 10 A. That goes back to what we were talking about earlier 11 this morning, if I go back to that section. It was 12 allegations against the school, was it not? 13 346 Q. Yes. It is near the beginning of your statement, 14 page 4? 15 A. Page 4. Thank you. With regard to allegation -- to 16 knowledge at the time, I am talking precisely now 17 about not knowledge at the time, not knowledge that 18 has come through the complaints that are currently 19 being made, I stress there that there is no evidence 20 of any knowledge of sexual abuse, otherwise as 21 disclosed in some particular instances which I have 22 explained. Do you want me to go through those? 23 347 Q. No. I am just wondering in the light of what the 24 Oblates know now, having seen the statements of these 25 complainants and allowing for the possibility of 26 exaggeration in some cases and so on, have the 27 Oblates reached any view as to whether or not 28 something may have been going on involving sexual 29 abuse by some of their members against boys who were 97 1 in the reformatory? 2 A. Whenever I have spoken with past members of the staff 3 they have totally and completely denied it. 4 348 Q. What do you think in the 1940s, 1950s and 1960s would 5 have been the reaction of most people if a boy 6 complained of a serious sexual assault having been 7 carried out by a religious brother or a priest at 8 that time? 9 A. I am sure it would have been investigated. There was 10 an investigation, what year would that have been, in 11 1950. It did not involve any staff member, it 12 involved someone outside the school. There was a 13 full Garda investigation and the boys were questioned 14 and answered fully and frankly. 15 349 Q. That was involving somebody outside the reformatory 16 and not a religious person, I mean a person who was a 17 brother or a priest? 18 A. I do not know how to answer that question. 19 350 Q. I am just wondering, you have seen the level of 20 detail in some of these statements and the Order must 21 be aware of the level of detail in some of these 22 statements? 23 A. Yes. 24 351 Q. You have given evidence quite candidly this morning 25 of the levels of stress and frustration and so on 26 that the staff were working under, I am just 27 wondering has the Order formed a view on whether this 28 is something they wish to have proved in each and 29 every case to the satisfaction of the Committee or 98 1 have they...(INTERJECTION)? 2 A. I am afraid it is because you talk about stress, you 3 have to remember to start with that that condition 4 that I was describing there related to a particular 5 time after the abolition, if I can call it that, of 6 corporal punishment. There was a period of serious 7 discipline in the school, that is the time of stress 8 that I am talking about there. That related to those 9 few years but now you are talking about a whole 10 period of 30 years now. 11 352 Q. Yes? 12 A. It is very difficult to make generalisations. 13 353 Q. Is there anything else you want to say about that 14 topic? 15 A. Simply to mention I think, I forget if we mentioned 16 this this morning, that the allegation during the 17 lifetime of the school were very few in number. One 18 was that case I mentioned by an outside person, fully 19 investigated by the Gardaí and a jury found the 20 person not guilty actually. The second incident 21 involved allegations of sexual abuse of a pupil by 22 two other pupils. This came to light in the course 23 of an investigation of another matter, an attempted 24 riot and again it was thoroughly investigated by the 25 Gardaí and dwelt with by the court. 26 354 Q. Could I ask you again, back in the 1940s or in the 27 1950s or in the 1960, what do you think would have 28 been the chance of a boy in a reformatory making a 29 complaint about a religious brother or priest having 99 1 committed a gross act of sexual indecency against 2 him, do you think it would have been likely that a 3 complaint would have been made to any authority by a 4 person in that position in those days? 5 A. I know there is a feeling that it would have been 6 difficulty, but I am speaking there simply what I 7 hear other people say because I wasn't around at that 8 time. 9 355 Q. I am not asking you to answer that in the context 10 merely of Daingean but in any similar institution or 11 industrial school? 12 A. I understand that more people have said that the 13 social climate would have made it quite difficult for 14 accusations of that sort to be accepted seriously, I 15 accept that, yes. I understand that that is the 16 case. 17 356 Q. Yes. Can we move back to the question of sanctions, 18 which you talk about at page 49? 19 A. Could I say one thing? 20 357 Q. Yes. 21 A. I would point out there was a complaint made against 22 a member of the staff in 1967. 23 358 Q. Yes? 24 A. It was very thoroughly investigated by the Gardaí. 25 That's documented and you have all that 26 documentation, do you not? 27 359 Q. Yes. 28 A. It was investigated by the Gardaí and dismissed by 29 them, they didn't prosecute. The resident manager 100 1 himself made -- had the brother who was accused 2 interrogated by a barrister, I believe, and again 3 found him not guilty of anything. At the time he had 4 his solicitor, that is the solicitor to the school, 5 write a letter to the Department pointing out that 6 this investigation had been carried out and that both 7 by the Gardaí and other people the brother had been 8 exonerated and asking that be put on the record. It 9 was put on the record. In a recent disclosure of 10 material from the Department you will find that 11 letter. There was in fact an investigation at that 12 time. 13 360 Q. I see. Can we move back to the issue of sanctions in 14 the context of rules and supervisions? 15 A. What page? 16 361 Q. Page 49? 17 A. 49. 18 362 Q. There were statutory sanctions, some of which were 19 laid down, the Children's Act and then there were 20 withdrawal of privileges and then the issue of 21 corporal punishment is discussed and you say again 22 there is little or no documentary evidence of how 23 this was administered. It appears from the discovery 24 that there are certain documents there nonetheless as 25 to how this would have been administered? 26 A. You are referring again to what we were talking about 27 this morning? 28 363 Q. Yes. 29 A. There is no question that that was -- Fr. McGonagle 101 1 accepted that is how it was administered, as we 2 described it this morning. 3 364 Q. You referred to Fr. Foley, the Superior, Glencree 4 Reformatory 1923, he wrote on the subject and 5 recommended that corporal punishment be used 6 sparingly, the Cussen Report in 1936 is referred to 7 and Article 12 on discipline permits, you say, 8 chastisement with a cane, strap or birch and then you 9 refer to the fact that in the 1960s Mr. James 10 O'Connor was writing that corporal punishment is a 11 controversial question? 12 A. Not a settled question. 13 365 Q. You talk about complaints of abuse or punishment were 14 made to the school authorities themselves and to the 15 Department and you talk about six incidents of 16 complaints of excessive corporal punishment. I would 17 like you to look at a few documents I want to put up 18 on the screen on this topic and ask for your 19 comments. The first one is a document which appears 20 to be dated 30 June 1952, it is a ministers' 21 conference with Fr. Reedy and there are others 22 present, who is Fr. Reedy? 23 A. He was the manager between 1949 and 1955. 24 366 Q. In Daingean? 25 A. Yes. 26 367 Q. If you look at the second page of that document near 27 the bottom, one of the parties present, Mr. Justice 28 McCarthy, asked whether corporal punishment had often 29 to be inflicted, Fr. Reedy said: 102 1 "No. Occasionally a caning on the hand but no more." 2 3 Do you see that? 4 A. Yes, I do. 5 368 Q. Do you think that that is an accurate depiction of 6 the position in 1952 in Daingean? 7 A. I am prepared to accept it, yes. 8 369 Q. Was Fr. Reedy the manager of the school, resident 9 manager, for the following few years, up to the time 10 of Fr. McGonagle? 11 A. No, to 1955. 12 370 Q. To 1955, I see. 13 A. Then there was another man for nine years. 14 371 Q. You think that that would have represented Oblate 15 policy that all that would have been happening then, 16 say, 1952 and the following years, around that period 17 would have been only occasion corporal punishment and 18 maybe a caning on the hand but no more? 19 A. On the basis of that, yes. 20 372 Q. The caning of the hand seems to have been against the 21 rules which we discussed earlier that were produced? 22 A. Possibly. 23 373 Q. I think I will get it for you in a moment, I think 24 you will find it was. Anyway, you think that Oblate 25 policy at the time would have been such that there 26 would be no more than a caning on the hand at that 27 time? 28 A. I am prepared to accept what it says there. 29 374 Q. That that would have been something that would have 103 1 been the norm in that period in Daingean? 2 A. That's what the manager said. 3 375 Q. Could I ask you to look at a document, this has been 4 redacted, Chairman, which is only a year later, it is 5 August of the following year, and it is letter from a 6 man who has a complaint about the way his son was 7 being treated in Daingean? 8 A. What year is this? 9 376 Q. 21 August 1953? 10 A. Yes. 11 377 Q. In the first paragraph of this letter, about seven of 12 eight lines down, he says: 13 "Anyway, I would like you to make 14 inquiries and let me know if flogging is abolished in those schools as my son 15 has been flogged several times and other boys also. He also tells me that 16 he has only had one change of sheets in 14 months." 17 18 That is a separate issue. There is an issue here of 19 what is referred to as flogging and he wanted an 20 answer to that. He was told by the resident -- by 21 the, I think, Department of Education wrote to the 22 resident manager in, it would have been, September, 2 23 September 1953, saying they were forwarding on a copy 24 of this letter for the resident manager's comments 25 and then there is a letter I would like you to look 26 at, it is dated 5 September 1953, and this is -- I am 27 just trying to find it. It is from Fr. Reedy, the 28 signature was well concealed at the bottom of the 29 last page, he appears to be dealing with this 104 1 particular issue which the father of this boy raised. 2 If you look at the bottom of the first page, which is 3 on the screen, it says: 4 "Flogging means that a boy is put on his knees receiving a few, five or six, 5 light strokes of a light strap on the back. This is not done except for 6 serious offences such as (a) insubordination; (b) deliberate 7 destruction of property; (c) public immoral conduct; (d) insisting others 8 to riotous conduct; (e) absconding." 9 10 Do you see that? 11 A. Yes. 12 378 Q. Have you any comment to make on the fact that 13 apparently some months earlier, a year earlier, a 14 small bit earlier, Mr. Justice McCarthy was told that 15 corporal punishment did not have to be inflicted very 16 often and occasionally a caning on the hand but no 17 more would take place, would you like to comment on 18 that, please? 19 A. It seems to be inconsistent. 20 379 Q. Seems to be? 21 A. Inconsistent. 22 380 Q. It does, doesn't it? 23 A. Yes. 24 381 Q. Perhaps I could ask you to look at another document, 25 this is a handwritten letter from Dr. McCabe, who is 26 a medical Inspector who would visit the school, in 27 the course of this document she says: 28 "The flogging referred to is only carried out for serious offense as 29 stated by the manager in his report. It consists of taking the offender into 105 1 a small room, removing his pants and administering some five or six strokes 2 on the bare posterior with a leather strap which is quite flexible about one 3 inch wide and one yard long. It resembles a strap used to put around a 4 suitcase. This punishment is administered by the disciplinary." 5 6 Then at the bottom of the page she said: 7 "When I questioned the boys about the 8 so called flogging, each and every one admitted that if they had been punished 9 they had deserved it." 10 11 Would you like to comment on that? 12 A. That's the kind of report that I would simply accept 13 as a factual statement. The assessment of how it 14 compares with other statements I would have to leave 15 to the Commission to work out. I would not dream of 16 challenging what Dr. McCabe says. 17 382 Q. Yes. If I could ask you to look at a document which 18 is appears to be an interdepartmental document 19 because it addressed to (inaudible) and it is dated 20 on the second page, 24 September 1953, it refers to a 21 complaint being received from a man in Donnycarney 22 about various matters and one of the matters which is 23 dealt with then in the third paragraph says: 24 "With regard to flogging Fr. Reedy says 25 that in this form of punishment a boy is put on his knees and receives five 26 or six light strokes of a light strap on the back." 27 28 Then he just says what it is for, as we have already 29 heard. In the second last paragraph it reads: 106 1 "Dr. McCabe is satisfied, and I agree 2 with her, that the punishment inflicted in these extreme cases is not excessive 3 and is resorted to only when absolutely necessary. This form of punishment was 4 administered when necessary during Fr. Fitzsimmons' period of office as 5 resident manager, 1940 to 1949." 6 7 This would seem to suggest that for the period 1940 8 and we are now up to 1953 or thereabouts, that 9 situation existed where this type of punishment was 10 meted out; would you agree with that? 11 A. I would accept the evidence. As you yourself pointed 12 out this morning, there was a window at any rate 13 where they experimented with the doing away with it, 14 do you remember that? 15 383 Q. Yes. With respect, you have been at pains to point 16 out that documentary evidence is what you are relying 17 on and you have been unable to comment on other 18 matters because you haven't documentary evidence, 19 that's why I am asking you to look at these 20 particular documents and invite you to comment on 21 them? 22 A. I am accepting them. 23 384 Q. Very good. 24 A. I am saying that they show a picture over a long 25 period of years. 26 385 Q. Indeed they do. 27 A. There is variations of practice possible in that 28 period and there were even variation, as you read out 29 this morning, from one document of Fr. Fitzsimmons, 107 1 where they did not have any of this kind of 2 punishment at all for a certain period. 3 386 Q. Yes. I would next like to ask you to consider part 4 of another document which is part of a report from a 5 Fr. Ken McCabe, he was doing a report on juvenile 6 delinquency, I will try and get you the date. I can 7 give you the date on that report. I will have to 8 come back to that, 1966. He says: 9 "The next point to be mentioned about 10 the treatment of delinquents is the use of punishment in schools. Recently I 11 received from the Department a copy of the rules for the use of corporal 12 punishment in industrial schools. I was very surprised to learn that they 13 are the same as those for national schools, I was surprised because I have 14 certain evidence that these rules are being widely and seriously abused. 15 Punishment is severe and in some schools very widely used. My own 16 experience from Daingean is that severe punishment is not very frequent but it 17 is used frequently. When it is used it is very severe and, in my opinion, 18 cannot, in any circumstances, be justified." 19 20 Would you like to comment on that? 21 A. Yes. The first part of the statement that you quoted 22 he was referring to schools generally. 23 387 Q. Yes. 24 A. This rule is being flouted generally, I think he is 25 saying that. 26 388 Q. Yes. 27 A. Then he speaks about St. Conleth's in particular. 28 389 Q. Yes. From his own experience? 29 A. That's right. He spent 10 days in the school in 108 1 August 1964, that is his experience. Again I am 2 prepared to accept it is an honest statement of what 3 he observed. 4 390 Q. Do the Oblates accept it or reject it? 5 A. The factual observation on corporal punishment, again 6 you are making the reservation that what you say is 7 true at one particular point in time, it is not 8 necessary true at every point in time. I am prepared 9 -- I think we would be prepared to accept that if he 10 observed that at that time I would accept that his 11 observation is an honest one. 12 391 Q. The Oblates have had all the discovery and they have 13 all the documents that I have available to me, Fr., I 14 am just wondering in the light of that fact have the 15 Oblates given you any authority to agree or disagree, 16 you do not have to agree with me by the way, have 17 they reached any conclusions on the issue of 18 punishment, the extent of it or not during these 19 decades? 20 A. Well, first of all, you are saying we have the same 21 discovery as you have, I would point out that we have 22 had this -- this has only come to our attention, this 23 particular document, in very recent weeks, maybe a 24 month. 25 392 Q. That should be plenty of time to consider it? 26 A. Well it is not a lot of time to absorb quite a lot of 27 -- quite a chunk of material. What I am saying is 28 this document that you are looking at been formulated 29 over a long period of time and it did not envisage 109 1 particularly the stuff that has been just been 2 released by the Department of Education. What is the 3 rest of the question? 4 393 Q. I am just really wondering have the Oblates taken a 5 view on this document and the other documents that I 6 have discussed with you over the past few minutes and 7 do they accept the general thrust of these comments 8 or do they repudiate them? 9 A. I think we would accept them as honest documents, 10 which the Commission is fully entitled to take very 11 seriously. We have no particular -- I have no 12 particular reason to impugn what they say. On this 13 question of whether I have the authority and all 14 that, maybe I can say this document has been prepared 15 in consultation with the Provincial and in that sense 16 the various acknowledgments that are in it would be 17 -- would have his authority. 18 394 Q. I understand that, you have been asked to speak on 19 behalf of the Order. 20 A. In the sense of this document. 21 395 Q. I understand that. 22 A. For instance, there are several things where we have 23 acknowledged quite frankly, deficiencies in the 24 buildings, in the ability to provide for the special 25 needs of pupils, the clothing and the washing and so 26 on, we are prepared to accept that those descriptions 27 would be made of these things. 28 396 Q. Does that include the type of punishments that have 29 been canvassed in these documents or not? 110 1 A. I think so, yes. 2 397 Q. What about the suggestions that there have been cases 3 of serious sexual abuse? 4 A. No, because there is no -- there isn't any document 5 such as you have there that would give any ground 6 from that, from the lifetime of the school. There 7 are serious allegations now and clearly it is for the 8 Commission has to adjudicate on those when they have 9 been heard. I could not possibly say anything about 10 those cases. 11 398 Q. I understand that. Can I ask you to look at one 12 final document on this topic? It is a letter dated 13 22 December 1966 to the then Minister for Education 14 Mr. O'Malley from Mr. Paddy Lawlor. He was writing 15 to the parliamentary secretary to the Minister for 16 Posts and Telegraphs, he says: 17 "I recently visited Daingean 18 Reformatory in County Offaly and I was conducted through it by Fr. McGonagle 19 the principle. A lot of the premises is in great need of attention and in 20 fact it is possible that about 50 percent of it needs demolishing." 21 22 He says: 23 "I understand that your department is 24 fully aware of the inadequacy of the premises and of many of its 25 shortcomings and is alive to the necessity for early and positive 26 action." 27 28 He hopes then that the plans to ameliorate the 29 situation. He then says in the last paragraph: 111 1 "I would dearly like to see you being 2 able to fit in a visit to this institution. I feel guilty about 3 suggesting this as I am fully aware of the many similar demands made on your 4 time. What prompts me to suggest it is, however, the firm conviction that 5 if you did see provision for its improvement would immediately become a 6 must. My own recent visit was a first timer and quite frankly I was appalled. 7 Great work could be done there by the Oblates if they had the proper 8 facilities." 9 10 11 A. Yes. 12 399 Q. Indeed he is making no criticism of the Oblates in 13 that, but it does again, I suggest, indicate the 14 first time and first impressions of a person who has 15 gone to this institution, never having had contact 16 with it before, he says he was appalled? 17 A. Yes. I would like to refer in that sense also to the 18 articles written by Michael Viney (?) in the Irish 19 Times in that same period, 1966, in October I think, 20 where he makes the same points, he is received by the 21 manager and brought all around and shown everything 22 and he entitled his article Dismal Daingean. 23 400 Q. Yes. 24 A. Again that is how it was. 25 401 Q. You have a section of your statement dealing with 26 release and aftercare, was there much in the way of 27 aftercare for the boys who left Daingean? 28 A. An attempt was made to keep in touch with them by 29 letter, they were required to write back to the 112 1 manager for a certain period, I forget how long now, 2 a letter to say how they were getting on. 3 402 Q. Was that only if they were on supervision licence 4 they had to write back? 5 A. I get the impression it was all of them because they 6 all went out on licence actually, they were all 7 released a little early on licence. 8 403 Q. Did many of them write back? 9 A. Quite a number, yes. These letters would appear in 10 the school pupil files. 11 404 Q. Would it be fair to say, from looking at your own 12 statement, you have a lot of voluntary societies, 13 like the Society of St. Vincent de Paul got involved? 14 A. That's right. 15 405 Q. For one reason or another, there was very little 16 contact with the boys afterwards, I am not saying 17 that as a criticism? 18 A. It is a fact, I would say that is true. There was no 19 State machinery following up the boys, no. 20 406 Q. On the issue of inspections, you refer to a quote 21 from a Dr. O'Sullivan, who is Dr. O'Sullivan? 22 A. That would be the man who...(INTERJECTION). 23 THE CHAIRPERSON: That is Dr. O'Sullivan who 24 wrote the book, gave 25 evidence first at a hearing. 26 MR. McGOVERN: The Chairperson, who is the 27 important person, knows who 28 he is. The fact that I may not is neither here nor 29 there. 113 1 THE CHAIRPERSON: It is Dr. Owen O'Sullivan 2 who gave evidence at the 3 opening of our hearings back in July 2004, before 4 your time, Mr. McGovern. 5 407 Q. MR. McGOVERN: That might explain my 6 ignorance. You quote from 7 what he says there and in the course of the quote, he 8 says that: 9 "Apart from that period when Dr. McCabe 10 was the medical inspector with the Department of Education, the paper 11 trial would suggest a very cursory inspection of the schools." 12 13 Would that be your view having seen the records? 14 A. No, it wouldn't. The record shows that a visit was 15 made and a record of that visit was kept. 16 408 Q. Yes. Do you think the records that were kept, apart 17 from Dr. Lissard's time were as 18 full...(INTERJECTION)? 19 A. Except as? 20 409 Q. Except when Dr. Lissard made some observations, do 21 you think the records that were made generally on 22 inspections were adequate? 23 A. Well I guess they showed the expectations of the 24 Inspector, maybe they knew what they could expect the 25 school to provide given all the conditions under 26 which they were working. 27 410 Q. The next part of your statement deals with 28 inadequacies of the juvenile justice system and I 29 think we have already discussed a lot of these and I 114 1 am not trying to diminish their importance in your 2 statement. I don't know, Chairman, if we need to go 3 through these? 4 THE CHAIRPERSON: I think we can take them, 5 they are telling points 6 that we have to consider, it seems to me. 7 411 Q. MR. McGOVERN: Yes. In terms of the 8 immediate investigation 9 into allegations of abuse, I think we have dealt with 10 some of the issues already. I think the main point 11 that comes out of this is that there was no adequate 12 constructive rehabilitation possible without proper 13 records and knowledge about the type of boys you were 14 getting and the numbers and so on; would that be 15 fair? 16 A. I would say it is more than that. The truth is 17 because of the presence in the school of a 18 significant number of very disturbed pupils it 19 impacted on the whole school, perhaps you meant that. 20 412 Q. That is another issue of course. 21 413 Q. THE CHAIRPERSON: There was no assessment, I 22 think is what you are 23 saying. Fr. McGonagle makes a lengthy report? 24 A. That's right. 25 414 Q. THE CHAIRPERSON: He says there is no 26 assessment of the 27 particular boys and there is no opportunity for the 28 school to say here are the boys we could most for and 29 to filter out for different sorts of treatment people 115 1 who would not be suitable; isn't that really what he 2 is saying? 3 A. Exactly. 4 415 Q. THE CHAIRPERSON: He is saying there is a lot 5 of implications about that. 6 What you may take it those are obviously relevant 7 matters for us to take into account, I am not sure 8 there is a great deal to ask you to comment on it 9 really, but if you felt like commenting on it, feel 10 completely free to do so. I think that is the 11 position. 12 MR. McGOVERN: That's right, yes, 13 Chairman. Fr. Hughes, I 14 have no further questions to ask you. Thank you. 15 16 END OF QUESTIONING OF FR. HUGHES BY THE COMMISSION 17 18 THE CHAIRPERSON: Mr. Maguire, is there any 19 aspect that you want to 20 expand on? If there is feel free to do so. 21 MR. MAGUIRE: There are just one or two 22 matters, really by way of 23 explanation more than anything else. 24 25 26 27 28 29 116 1 FR. MICHAEL HUGHES WAS EXAMINED, AS FOLLOWS, BY 2 MR. MAGUIRE: 3 4 MR. MAGUIRE: I suppose if I do it by 5 reference to the pagination 6 on the statement which the witness is familiar with. 7 It is something that Mr. McGovern has taken him 8 through but I think it may not be entirely clear in 9 relation to it and maybe if we had the aid of the 10 slide which discloses the -- what I am talking about 11 now is the comparison between the funding of the 12 different institution and that is page 15 of the 13 statement and 16. 14 THE CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I am glad you will 15 elucidate this, 16 Mr. Maguire. 17 MR. MAGUIRE: A few simple questions 18 about it first of all. I 19 take it I can question the witness through this, if 20 that is in order with the Tribunal? 21 THE CHAIRPERSON: Please do. 22 416 Q. MR. MAGUIRE: The last box or the last 23 series of boxes which deal 24 with St. Conleth's Reformatory show on that slide 25 that is there figures which are relative to the 26 particular years that the refer to by reference to 27 the top line, in other words, you have figures of 28 66.03 for 1940; 1950 66.03 approximately; 1960 29 158.46; and 1970 571.19. They are euros in the first 117 1 instance; is that right? 2 A. That's right. In the written text that the 3 Commission has it is in pounds. 4 417 Q. It is in pounds? 5 A. Yes. 6 418 Q. I think that these figures were calculated by 7 reference, as you told us, the figures that were 8 given by the Department of Education; is that right? 9 A. That's right. The capitation rate in 1940 was 10 something less than a pound per week. In 1950 it was 11 about a pound, I think. And so on, in 1960 I 12 multiplied it by 52 to get that figure and similarly 13 for 1970. 14 419 Q. I think had those figures calculated by reference to 15 -- you asked for accountants to give the calculation 16 in relation to the comparison; is that correct? 17 A. That's correct. The figures themselves, under the 18 column 2002, they were recorded in the Irish Times, I 19 think it was, on 12 March and 19 March of this year 20 and they disclose, as you see, then the huge amounts 21 that it costs today to keep one person in an 22 institution similar to St. Conleth's. 23 420 Q. Yes. I think that the earlier figures that are above 24 those, in other words, in relation to Trinity House 25 and Oberstown Boys Centre, they are the equivalent 26 figures at the relevant by reference to the CPI 27 index; is that right? 28 A. That's right. I asked our accountant to do that, to 29 say what they would have been equivalent to in, say, 118 1 1940, 1950, 1960 and so on, so just a comparison with 2 what...(INTERJECTION). 3 421 Q. Just to take one example there, I suppose, if you 4 take the figure for 1950 for Trinity House, the 5 €10,060.79, that was the cost of maintaining one 6 person -- would have been the cost? 7 A. Yes, by today's standards. 8 422 Q. Whereas the equivalent available amount to 9 St. Conleth's at the time was €66.03 and so on for 10 the rest of that chart? 11 A. That's right. 12 423 Q. Can I refer, it is the next paragraph in fact in 13 dealing with, and a following on in a way to the 14 point, it is at paragraph 73, which is at page 16 of 15 the statement? 16 A. I have it here. 17 424 Q. Can you tell us something about the staff ratio, the 18 staff/pupil ratio? 19 A. Again, I do not have figures unfortunately for the 20 ratio that is in a residential institute today. I 21 think on common knowledge we know that it is a very 22 high proportion of staff members to residents. 23 425 Q. In the present day? 24 A. In the present day. There could be six staff members 25 for a single resident, covering of course the whole 26 shifts, the three shifts and so on. Comparing that 27 then with the situation in St. Conleth's, I give you 28 two examples there, we have a staff list of 1944 29 which shows the presence of a population, a school 119 1 population, of 236. They were 24 Oblates in the 2 school and other staff were a visiting medical 3 officer and dentist, two lay teachers, a carpenter, a 4 tailor, laundry women and two nightmen, a drill 5 instructor and farm workers. The care workers were 6 the Oblates. That would indicate there was a staff 7 ratio of one member of staff to 10 inmates. 8 426 Q. As of 1944? 9 A. Yes, to cover the three shifts. Similarly in 1968, 10 the population, the school population, of 104 shows 11 the presence of 18 Oblates which works out at a ratio 12 of one staff member to six. Whether one could 13 perhaps add in there the resident matron. Well 14 anyway it is just a general idea, Mr. Chairman, it is 15 not very scientific. 16 427 Q. Just in relation to the training that was received by 17 the pupils while they were in St. Conleth's, I think 18 you have tables attached to the document which show 19 when they were discharged, what trades that they were 20 discharged to, could you give us some indication of 21 that? I think it might be at page 12 of the tables, 22 table 14 to 17? 23 A. Yes. I think that these are interesting tables. 24 They show that in the 1940s a very high number of the 25 pupils, when they were discharged, were discharged 26 into a job that had been found for them. In 1941 to 27 1942, it was 45 out of 82. 28 428 Q. I think you give a breakdown of those and the 29 footnotes to the tables by reference to 120 1 the...(INTERJECTION)? 2 A. That's right. In that particular year 8 went into 3 boot making; 2 into carpentry; 13 went to the Defence 4 Forces; 10 went on to farms; 2 into gardening; 2 were 5 messengers; 2 were motor mechanics; and 6 shop 6 assistants. That kind of thing appears throughout 7 the decade. 8 429 Q. That would be roughly -- just taking that particular 9 year would have been roughly 50 percent of the total 10 -- of the total discharge; is that right? 11 A. Yes. 12 430 Q. If you take another year at random? 13 A. In the next decade, the period of Fr. Reedy, 1949 to 14 1955, it is still pretty good, there is a high 15 proportion of the lads being discharged into a job. 16 431 Q. I think if you take 1950/1951, for instance? 17 A. 1950/1951, that is footnote 26. Bakery; one boot or 18 shoe shop; five carpentry; one Defence Forces; seven 19 farm labourers; three gardeners; 10 general labours; 20 eight house boys; four messengers; five shop 21 assistants; one butcher; two painters. 22 432 Q. That would be something of the order of 50 percent; 23 is that correct? 24 A. Yes, it looks like it, yes. In the next period, 25 Fr. Mahon's period, 1955 to 1964, a period of nine 26 years, the position begins to get more difficult, it 27 is getting ever more difficult to find work. In 1955 28 to 1956 you still have a quite a number of lads who 29 are able to find work or were found a job before they 121 1 left but that diminishes quite rapidly as the period 2 goes on. 3 4 When we come to the last decade, 1964 to 1973, very 5 few of the pupils are being discharged into a job. I 6 don't think it is difficult to understand that, I 7 think the economic situation made it very difficult 8 to find jobs at that time, many people emigrating. 9 It just was not possible to place lads in jobs when 10 they left. 11 433 Q. If you go back, Fr. Hughes, to the introduction 12 portion of your statement, can you say in general 13 terms, I think you deal with it at paragraph 1.2, if 14 you just tell us your view in relation to that? 15 A. I would like to take the opportunity, Mr. Chairman, 16 just to repeat what the Provincial said in the 17 hearing in July 2004, when he said that: 18 "The Oblate don't wish to give the 19 impression that St. Conleth's was, in their eyes, a satisfactory institution. 20 Its buildings were old and unsuitable; it lacked facilities. It is a sad fact 21 that very many boys went on from the school to live sad, even tragic lives. 22 It should be said, however, that many also went on to live productive and 23 happy lives. 24 The reports of the Children's Court in the pages of our newspapers show that 25 the State is still grappling with the problem of children in difficulty." 26 27 So I would like to repeat that as a general 28 statement. 29 THE CHAIRPERSON: Yes. 122 1 434 Q. MR. MAGUIRE: Fr. Hughes, you have been 2 asked from time to time in 3 relation to the use of corporal punishment as has 4 been described here through the documents which you 5 have been taken through by Mr. McGovern, I think at 6 paragraph 2.3 that you deal with the attitude of that 7 in the statement; is that correct? 8 A. That's right. There is a plea there for the 9 circumstances of the time to be taken into account. 10 Society at that time still did find corporal 11 punishment acceptable. Let me say it was not 12 abolished in the schools by the State until 1984. 13 Then the special context of the school that we are 14 talking about with large numbers and limited 15 facilities and, well, quite an unmanageable group of 16 boys which made it difficult to maintain order and 17 eliminate violence among the boys themselves. 18 19 There is something else I would like to add, if I 20 may? 21 THE CHAIRPERSON: Yes. 22 A. I would like to stress how important it is to read 23 the school pupil files. Naturally in an inquiry 24 which is concerned with abuse we find ourselves 25 talking all the time about abuse. If you read the 26 school files, I would suggest that you may get a 27 picture of what normality was like in the school. I 28 think that you would get the impression -- especially 29 Fr. McGonagle's files basically, you would get the 123 1 impression of a man who is deeply caring for his 2 chargers amidst a lot of very serious difficulties. 3 I think you might get the impression also that while, 4 as I have said, there were incidents of violence in 5 the life of the school it would not be right to take 6 these as being the norm. They were there but they 7 were not happening every day. 8 9 When we think of corporal punishment, which of course 10 today would be anathema, certainly could not approve 11 of it today, when we think of it though it was, I 12 think it would be fair to say, the means by which in 13 a very difficult period in the 1960s some -- a 14 relative degree of calm was kept in the school. When 15 it was removed in 1968 a very serious difficulty of 16 discipline arose until the staff learned how to cope 17 with it, with a new system of rewards and punishment 18 -- rewarding good behaviour, which is I think 19 documented in the text. That's a general remark I 20 would like to make. 21 22 Maybe one final remark which I think is significant, 23 that when St. Conleth's was closed Scoil Ard Mhuire 24 was opened and it was the staff of St. Conleth's who 25 went on as the founders of that new facility, Scoil 26 Ard Mhuire and who were able, from all their efforts, 27 to produce a new type of institution then which went 28 on for a number of years. I think that's a 29 significant point. 124 1 435 Q. MR. MAGUIRE: Of course the funding 2 arrangements had changed 3 substantially at that stage? 4 A. Completely changed. The State was very generous 5 financially in Scoil Ard Mhuire, very generous. The 6 place where we parted company with the State in Scoil 7 Ard Mhuire was that ultimately they would not -- they 8 were not prepared to sanction a sufficient number of 9 staff members to cover all the responsibilities and 10 we felt at that stage that we should withdraw. 11 436 Q. Just finally, Fr. Hughes, in relation to the 12 allegations that -- considerable allegations of 13 serious sexual and physical abuse have been made by 14 various individuals and I think that these have been 15 responded to by statements in each and every case 16 dealing with the matters that have been set out by 17 the complainants to the best of your information, 18 knowledge and ability? 19 A. That's right. There is a special response for each 20 complaint and we know that the arduous duty awaits us 21 now of looking into those in -- over the next month. 22 MR. MAGUIRE: Thank you, Fr. Hughes. 23 24 END OF EXAMINATION OF FR. HUGHES BY MR. MAGUIRE 25 26 THE CHAIRPERSON: Now, Mr. Lowe, you wanted 27 to ask something. 28 29 125 1 FR. MICHAEL HUGHES WAS QUESTIONED, AS FOLLOWS, BY THE 2 COMMISSION: 3 4 437 Q. MR. LOWE: Just a very few questions 5 on the business of 6 punishment. Am I right in saying that the school 7 rules which separated offences into major and minor 8 were drawn up, as opposed to evolved over time? 9 A. Were drawn up? 10 438 Q. MR. LOWE: Were drawn up by someone 11 rather than evolved over 12 time? 13 A. From what I have seen, they seem to have been drawn 14 up in 1960 to meet that particular need, which I 15 mentioned earlier, of having a set of rules that 16 could be clearly identified and appealed to in the 17 case it was necessary to bring a boy to the court to 18 have him removed from the school for breach of school 19 rules. That's my impression. 20 439 Q. MR. LOWE: The boys knew of these 21 rules, they were posted, 22 were they? 23 A. They were because it had been made very plain to 24 them, to the staff, in that case of 1960 that if 25 there were no school rules and if they weren't 26 clearly known by the boys there could no question of 27 them being expelled from the school for breach of 28 school rules. One of the prefects told me that they 29 were displayed on a window of a recreation room that 126 1 opened on to the playground and he maintained that 2 they were explained every month. 3 440 Q. MR. LOWE: Am I right in taking from 4 what you said that the 5 major offences did not necessarily warrant corporal 6 punishment? I am just wondering in what sense there 7 was any necessity to have major and minor offences? 8 A. I think the major and minor rules are more like 9 something you would say -- you have by-laws, you have 10 kind of different categories of rules, some are 11 simply by-laws and some are -- whatever, statute, 12 say. 13 441 Q. MR. LOWE: But the severe offences 14 were something separate? 15 A. Pardon? 16 442 Q. MR. LOWE: The severe offences were 17 quite separate. 18 A. I don't think they relate to that distinction between 19 major and minor rules. 20 443 Q. MR. LOWE: How did the boys know what 21 was a severe offence? 22 A. From the point of view of corporal punishment, you 23 mean? 24 444 Q. MR. LOWE: Yes. How did they know 25 that they had 26 incurred...(INTERJECTION) 27 A. I guess by practice. From the point of view of 28 receiving corporal punishment, I believe, the 29 impression I get is that they knew they would be 127 1 punished with corporal punishment, for absconding and 2 for those other things. 3 445 Q. MR. LOWE: They knew that from custom 4 and practice? 5 A. Yes. 6 446 Q. MR. LOWE: Last question. Did these 7 rules impose an obligation 8 on the disciplinarian to impose punishment? 9 A. I think it was at his discretion. 10 447 Q. MR. LOWE: It was not like a red card 11 in football, it was 12 something that was imposed at the discretion of the 13 disciplinarian? 14 A. I think it was at the discretion of the 15 disciplinarian, but it seems to have been a pretty 16 established rule. Again, I am influenced here by the 17 complaints more than anything else, that whenever 18 anyone absconded they were punished in that way. 19 448 Q. MR. LOWE: One of the severe reasons 20 was insubordination, that 21 could cover a whole range of things, that was totally 22 at the discretion of the disciplinarian? 23 A. I would think so, yes. I do not really have much to 24 go on there. When you are talking about 25 insubordination there, I would think it is talking 26 about something like a riot but I am not sure. 27 449 Q. MR. LOWE: All I am angling at is how 28 much the boys would know 29 how far to go before they incurred more severe 128 1 penalties? 2 A. I can only say by what you say is custom and 3 practice. 4 MR. LOWE: Thank you. 5 450 Q. THE CHAIRPERSON: Before I ask Ms. Shanley, 6 so as I understand this 7 because I thought I had it, I am not certain I do 8 now. Whether a boy would get punish, forgive my 9 grammar, whether a punishment would follow from a 10 particular act, you say people knew by custom and 11 practice? 12 A. Yes. 13 451 Q. THE CHAIRPERSON: Presumably the same would 14 be true of whether there 15 would be severe or less severe punishment, again 16 custom and practice would dictate that, this is what 17 you have said? 18 A. I think so, yes. 19 452 Q. THE CHAIRPERSON: The document Major and 20 Minor Rules is an entirely 21 separate piece of work? 22 A. I think that is it, yes. 23 453 Q. THE CHAIRPERSON: If I am understanding your 24 evidence, Fr., it is to say 25 that an issue arose as to whether a boy could be 26 expelled from the institution and somebody pointed 27 out in order to have him expelled from the 28 institution there had to be a breach of some rules 29 and therefore somebody better devise some rules and, 129 1 not alone that, somebody better pin them up somewhere 2 and say what they are so that if somebody was tempted 3 to engage in that particular activity which might or 4 might not expose to expulsion, so these rules were 5 devised specifically for the purpose of answering a 6 need to have some rules which would -- I am not being 7 critical about this, I am just trying 8 to...(INTERJECTION) 9 A. No. No. 10 454 Q. THE CHAIRPERSON: In order so that if the 11 question came up whether 12 somebody should be expelled, somebody here point out 13 that he is in breach of the rules, the rules were 14 published on such a day and they are stuck up on a 15 wall somewhere; is that the position? 16 A. That's the impression I get from reading that -- the 17 incident in the material disclosed by the Department 18 in 1960. 19 THE CHAIRPERSON: Yes. 20 A. Which lead specifically to the approval of those 21 rules. However, I think it is pretty clear that 22 there were, at different times, rules earlier than 23 that but I do not know much about them. 24 455 Q. THE CHAIRPERSON: You don't have knowledge? 25 A. For example, there were rules for the section 26 leaders, you will find it in your documentation 27 there. It is only a partial documentation we have 28 available. 29 THE CHAIRPERSON: But specifically the major 130 1 and minor, Mr. Lowe 2 clarified something and I just wanted to make sure I 3 had it there. Now Ms. Shanley would like to ask you 4 something. 5 456 Q. MS. SHANLEY: Yes, just very briefly, if 6 I may, plesae. I wanted to 7 ask you about the buildings, if you could cast your 8 mind back to it, we were talking about it much 9 earlier on this morning. There were two buildings, 10 there was the original administration building and 11 then there was the second -- the dormitory? 12 A. The dormitory. 13 457 Q. MS. SHANLEY: When you say -- you 14 describe the buildings as 15 being old and dilapidated, presumably you are not 16 referring to this new dormitory block? 17 A. No. You will find in the documentation, I think 18 Dr. Lissard, I keep quoting because he wrote what I 19 thought was significant reports, he wrote three 20 reports. One was a very detailed report on his visit 21 on 3 June 1966, that is a detailed handwritten 22 report. He also wrote a general report on all the 23 schools to the Department secretary. Then another 24 shorter general report to the Minister. In one of 25 them he says the only good things in the reformatory 26 are the new block, that you are talking about, and 27 the manager who was full of very good ideas and 28 should be encouraged. 29 458 Q. MS. SHANLEY: That's the new block there. 131 1 I am just trying to work 2 out, how was there no hot water? If you have a new 3 block built in 1946, during that period, how were 4 there no showers and how were the showers dilapidated 5 by 1968? 6 A. There were showers, the showers weren't actually in 7 that block. 8 459 Q. MS. SHANLEY: Were they not? 9 A. They were in the corner of the old block that adjoins 10 the dormitories. 11 460 Q. MS. SHANLEY: So when you describe the 12 long washroom? 13 A. The long washroom was not the shower room. 14 461 Q. MS. SHANLEY: I see. It had not hot 15 water either? 16 A. No. 17 462 Q. MS. SHANLEY: This new building was no 18 better than the old one in 19 terms of...(INTERJECTION). 20 A. In that respect. 21 463 Q. MS. SHANLEY: Why was that? 22 A. It had not been provided for. 23 MS. SHANLEY: It hadn't been provided 24 for. I see. That's all. 25 Thank you. 26 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Is that 27 everything? 28 464 Q. MR. McGOVERN: There is just one matter? 29 I am sorry, Chairman, for 132 1 coming back on this. It might be of benefit to have 2 the witness comment on it. In the schedule of the 3 back of your report at pages 14 and 15 you show the 4 number of boys who absconded and you go through the 5 1950s and 1960s, the numbers seem to have risen 6 dramatically in the second half of the 1960s, there 7 was one year, I accept, there were none, but 8 1966/1967, 1967/1968, 1969/1970 there were large 9 numbers absconding then compared to other years, is 10 there any explanation for that, I wonder? 11 A. I think it was simply that it was probably easier to 12 run away at that time. 13 MR. McGOVERN: Thank you very much. 14 15 END OF QUESTIONING OF FR. HUGHES BY THE COMMISSION 16 17 THE CHAIRPERSON: Very good. Thank you very 18 much. Tomorrow we start 19 our private hearings and we anticipate they will take 20 some four or five weeks. Very good. Thank you very 21 much. 22 23 THE HEARING THEN CONCLUDED 24 25 26 27 28 29 133