FR. JOSEPH O'REILLY WAS EXAMINED, AS FOLLOWS, BY MR. McCULLOUGH:
Q. MR. McCULLOUGH: I represent a number of complaints, Father, and I want to ask you in the first instance about corporal punishment in Ferryhouse and in Upton. One of the things...(INTERJECTION)
THE CHAIRPERSON: Mr. McCullough, sorry, I am finding it a tiny bit difficult to hear.
MR. O'BRIEN: I can't hear, I have a hearing problem.
THE CHAIRPERSON: Mr. O'Brien, give me a chance to -- Mr. O'Brien, stop for a second.
MR. O'BRIEN: We want to hear what's going on.
THE CHAIRPERSON: I'm trying to tell you. I know Mr. O'Brien has just indicated to me that he can't here. I am having a slight bit of difficulty.
MR. O'BRIEN: Here's the proof I can't hear, I have a hearing aid and I can't hear with that. Will you please -- we are the people who want to know, not these people who are getting paid.
Q. MR. McCULLOUGH: One of the things you said, Father, in September 2004 was that you couldn't say how much corporal punishment was meted out, but that it was probably not worse than most homes. You have heard a lot of evidence since then. Do you want to add anything to those comments?
A. Can I just clarify, was I covering the entire period of Ferryhouse? Is your question in relation to the entire period of Ferryhouse?
Q. I think, Father, in fairness you are covering the period largely up to 1970?
A. Certainly, I think, on reviewing whatever documentation we have and having consulted again with people, I would say that corporal punishment in Ferryhouse was at times excessive.
Q. Yes.
A. Perhaps it wouldn't be fair -- the comments I made at that time in regard to a comparison with a home perhaps wouldn't be fair. That said, I'm sure that there were many homes in which corporal punishment was also excessive.
Q. Can I look back, Father, at some of the evidence we have heard, without naming the names of any people who gave evidence. I think it is clear from the history of both of the institutions, but in particular for the period prior to 1970, that there was a great deal of corporal punishment in both institutions?
A. I think there was a considerable amount of -- great deal, yes. Yeah.
Q. It is also clear that that corporal punishment took place all over the premises and not simply in the prefect's office?
A. Corporal punishment was generally supposed to be administered in the prefect's office and from what I can ascertain, I would say that it did happen there for the most part. I would accept also that it happened in many other places in both Ferryhouse and Upton.
Q. Yes, you have heard a great deal of evidence which I think you don't doubt, Father, that it happened spontaneously, in quite a number of locations outside the prefect's office?
A. Yes, I would agree with that, yes.
Q. And that everybody, every member of the community who had any contact with boys, was entitled and felt entitled to administer that corporal punishment as he wished?
A. No, I'm afraid I couldn't agree with that. Certainly the prefects administered corporal punishment, often spontaneously for things that happened on the spot. There were other members of the community who may have had particular roles in regard to the boys whom I accept would at times have administered corporal punishment spontaneously, perhaps like a slap, or a clatter. Some of those people might be people who had direct contact with the boys at times, for example, if there was a bandmaster or somebody else who was directly involved with the boys. But I don't think that every member of the community in every role would have administered corporal punishment, I don't think that we heard evidence that that would be true about everybody. I can think of individuals that we did not hear evidence about.
Q. I asked you about every member of the community who had contact with the boys, they all seem to have been entitled to administer or felt entitled to administer corporal punishment; isn't that correct?
A. I think there are degrees here.
Q. Yes.
A. I can't -- I'm not quibbling with what you are saying generally.
Q. The evidence appears to establish that corporal punishment was frequently excessive, both in respect of individual occasions and in respect of the perceived offences for which it was administered, would you agree with that?
A. There are a lot of words in that statement there.
Q. All right, I will break it down.
A. You mentioned frequently excessive, I don't know that I would describe it, from what I heard, as being frequently excessive. I would certainly agree that at times it was excessive.
Q. The Committee has heard evidence of 20, 20 blows being administered to boys, you would accept that occurred?
A. I'm afraid I would, yes.
Q. And that was something that was clearly excessive?
A. Yes.
Q. The Committee indeed heard evidence that on at least one day in 1954 20 blows were administered to 17 boys on the same day. You would agree that that was grossly excessive?
A. I would.
Q. Would you agree also that the perceived offences for which it was administered couldn't possibly be justified, in many cases?
A. The perceived --
Q. Well, I'm quoting just from the Punishment Book,Father, and you can comment on it?
A. Please.
Q. There is "giving cheek"?
A. Yeah.
Q. "Playing soccer frequently"?
A. Yes.
Q. What about those offences?
A. Well, clearly playing soccer should not have been a matter or an issue that people were punished for.
Q. Or giving cheek?
A. Or giving cheek. I think that really depends on the circumstances at the time. If a boy is giving cheek to a prefect in front of a number of other boys that would certainly -- I could see that certainly being an occasion for a boy being punished, given the time that was in it.
Q. Yes. "Talking at mass"?
A. I think it would depend on the circumstances. I'm not defending it, but I think it might depend on the circumstances.
Q. "Horseplay, laughing in chapel", could these things possibly be justified, Father?
A. I think in the context of the time they could be, yes.
Q. All right, well I will come back to context of the time in due course. Would you accept, looking at it generally, that the range of offences for which punishment was administered was surprisingly wide, even looking at it in retrospect?
A. Clearly, I think that there was a wide range of reasons for which boys received corporal punishment, it was very wide, I would accept that it perhaps was difficult for children to know at times exactly where the limits were. But I think that was in the context of the time, as it would be today.
Q. Yes. It appears also from the evidence that it wasn't simply the strap that was used to administer punishment; isn't that correct?
A. Yes, that's correct.
Q. You have heard evidence, which I think you don't doubt, that bare fists were used from time to time?
A. I certainly don't doubt that the open hand was used.
Q. Do you doubt that people were punched?
A. I accept that there may have been occasion when children were punched.
Q. Do you accept that hurleys were used?
A. I find that rather difficult to.
Q. Yet you have heard people say it on more than one occasion?
A. I have.
Q. You accept, I think, that the strap that was used on at least some part of this time had coins sewn into it?
A. I have heard that said, and I have heard others contradict it, and I quite honestly do not know whether there were coins in it or not.
Q. Yes. There is a document, Father, called "Statements on Issues Concerning St. Joseph's Industrial School,Clonmel", do you remember that document?
A. Yes, I think I do.
Q. Yes. I think that's a document that was compiled by the Rosminians themselves; is that correct?
A. There are so many documents, I'm sorry, if I could see the front of it even I would know.
Q. Yes. It is at 37 A14 in yet another set of books that the Commission has been given this morning. There should be two green books in front of the Commission, they are all taken from the discovery and they are organised in a slightly different way.
................
................
Q. MR. McCULLOUGH: If you look at divider A, tab 14, Father. It is the last tab in divider A.
A. Yes.
Q. Is that a document compiled by the Rosminians?
A. That's a document that I compiled myself when I was working in Ferryhouse, in the early perhaps about 2000, 2001.
Q. Yes.
A. Having discussed a range of issues with a number of people, both members of the Congregation, past pupils,former members of staff, and I compiled this and sent it forward to our Provincial in Dublin at the time.
Q. Yes, and it was in due course discovered to the Commission?
A. Yes.
Q. The fourth page of that Fr. O'Reilly.
A. Yes.
Q. At the top of the page reads as follows: "It seems that a coin or coins were put into the straps used in Ferryhouse, although there is no memory of salt being put on the strap prior to use." That's something that you wrote, as you say, in the year 2000; is that right?
A. That's correct.
Q. I take it that that, therefore, was something that you were able to determine prior even to hearing any evidence?
A. That's correct. That's correct, yes.
Q. There can hardly be any doubt, Father, under circumstances where you were able to say that in 2000 that such was the case?
A. I can say in that time, and since, I have heard people say that there was a coin or coins inside. But I have also heard other people saying that there wasn't, and so I cannot -- if somebody shows me a strap with coins in it, I will certainly accept it. I just do not know.
Q. Including, I think, at least one member of the Rosminians or then member of the Rosminians, who confirmed such was the case?
A. Yes.
Q. Who gave evidence in the private session?
A. Yes.
Q. And you don't doubt him?
A. If I say I don't doubt him, do I doubt the people who told me there were no coins in it?
Q. There were particular offences, Father, to which it is clear on the evidence, particular types of punishment were handed out. Boys who ran away were dealt with particularly brutally, do you accept that?
A. I think boys who ran away were dealt with severely, yes.
Q. Mr. McGrath will be dealing with that in more detail, but you would accept, I think, just to ask you one or two general questions about it, that beatings were administered to boys who ran away?
A. Yes, I think boys who ran away were often severely punished because of the problem that it created in the school, the unease that it created among the rest of the boys.
Q. For whatever reason they were certainly beaten; isn't that right?
A. That's correct. Not always beaten, but I accept that often.
Q. But that does seem to be the norm, doesn't it, that they were beaten?
A. I accept that they usually were punished for running away.
Q. And quite severely punished. The Commission has heard evidence of really quite extreme and savage punishments for boys who ran away?
A. I don't think that savage punishments was the norm for boys who ran away.
Q. Including on at least some occasions public punishment?
A. Yes, I accept that, yes.
Q. And that there were other punishments, including people's hair being saved off, that were associated with running away; isn't that correct?
A. For a period of time, yes, I accept that.
|
i can certainly tell you that there was a strap in ferryhouse which was used as a threat and as a weapon when i was there it was known as the leather