Seamus J. King Archive Article

Viewing entries by
Arna Ionescu Stoll

Share

<span class="postTitle">Miler McGrath (1522-1622)</span> Talk given to Cashel Historical Society circa 1986

Miler McGrath (1522-1622)

Talk given to Cashel Historical Society circa 1986

INTRODUCTION

On my way home from Dean Woodworth's talk nearly three weeks ago Patsy Lacey brought up the subject of Miler McGrath. He was looking forward to the lecture and asked me had I anything new on the man. The question stopped me in my tracks because I had to ask myself had I anything new. I couldn't answer the question because I wasn't fully aware of how much people did know. However, on the rest of the journey I discovered that Patsy knew quite a lot about Miler and, if his level of knowledge is common, I must ask myself another question: Why, then, am I presuming to talk on this former Archbishop of Cashel and Emly, who provides a link with the past for Church of Ireland and Roman Catholic together.

Before attempting to answer the question I should like to tell you what source material is available on Miler. There is the original material contained in documents from the State Papers concerning Miler McGrath. They are collected together in Archivium Hibernicum and are essential reading for anyone who wishes to study Miler in depth. I have to admit that I haven't studied these documents at first hand and am acquainted with them only through secondary sources. Then there are books that contain references to Miler like Philip O'Sullivan Beare's H1STORIAE CATHOLICAE, which vas published in 1621. There is the long poem, containing 168 verses, entitled 'The Apostasy of Miler McGrath' by Eoghan O'Duffy which was first published in Irish in 1577, during the height of Miler's career and was translated by John O'Daly and printed by John Davis White of Cashel in 1864. There are pieces on aspects of Miler's career that have appeared in historical journals.

Then there are the main secondary sources. The one most of you are familiar with is Robert Wyse Jackson's "Archbishop McGrath: the Scoundrel of Cashel', which was published by the Mercier Press in 1974. Twelve years before that Patrick Ryan, a Student in the Holy Ghost order did an M.A. thesis on Miler that extends to over two hundred pages. It is probably the most comprehensive work done on Miler. In 1975 a Capuchin priest, Odhran O'Duain, produced a book in Irish on Miler, entitled Rogaire Easpaig, which contains over 140 pages.

However, despite this wealth of material there are a huge number of gaps in our knowledge of the man. We know virtually nothing about his boyhood and his education. We don't know where he joined the Franciscans. It is pre­sumed that he spent some time in the Netherlands. His life in Cashel is very vague. He is reputed to have lived in Camas and part of the castle ruin can still be seen between Hyde's residence and the river on the left hand side of the bridge. An eighteenth century map shows a mill in the area and there is a graveyard down river. The ruin was partly demolished in the early seventies because it was in a dangerous condition. The demolished section was an arched affair and was the entrance to the castle. According to one source this was a mere summer residence for Miler. However, might he not have resided there with an income from the mill? At a time when travel was so slow and hazardous in the country might not a residence on the hanks of the Suir be the best place to travel from? It is well-known that most transport during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries from Clonmel to Waterford was by boat. So there are two good reasons why Miler might have resided in Camas.

However, we have no contemporary account. The official residence of the archbishop was the castle on the Rock. We don't know if Miler lived there. We do have a report from the last decade of the sixteenth century of a complaint made by some Cashel people to the Lord Deputy that Miler had cut down about a hundred oak and ash trees on Church lands. Miler's defence was that he intended to build a great palace. We don't know if he did or where it was built. I mention these things to illustrate how limit­ed our knowledge of Miler really is and how difficult it is to fill out the bald tale contained in State Papers.

 

THE MAN

And what kind of man was Miler. A friend of mine imagines him big, fat and gross, a kind of Henry VIII in later years. We have no evidence of his physique. We do have a photograph which is on display in Clogher Cathedral. It's the kind of picture we expect of sixteenth century personalities. He is distinguished, perhaps fiftyish and perhaps a little sinister. The man lived to be a hundred and yet we have only one contemporary account of what he looked like. This account makes him handsome, which may be a reason Elizabeth 1 liked him so much.

We have some reports on his behaviour. It seems that in private life he was dissolute. In 1593 he was twice accused by Patrick Kearney of gross immorality: 'The said Milerus, contrary to the sobriety required in a bishop, is an open and common drunkard and maketh all his guests to carouse at every sitting till they all be drunk. Moreover, he doth embrace none other qualities so much as whoredom, drunkeness, pride, anger, simony, avarice and other filthy crimes . . .'

When one hears a litany like that one is inclined to shout stop and attribute it all to a political enemy. If any of you recall the period when Charlie Haughey was Minister for Agriculture and there was a lot of farmer agitat­ion the stories that were doing the rounds about Charlie at that time would have made anyone blush.

The same authority, Kearney, accused Miler also of having a concubine during his stay in England in 1591-92. It is significant that Miler was seventy years old at that stage and, if he did have a concubine, it would indicate an unusually high level of sexual activity for a man of those years. Again, not impossible when one recalls the history of David and Abigail or the fact that Michael Collins's father was seventy-nine years of age when Michael was conceived. Again, Kearney said that Miler was 'an open gamester with mean and common carrughes and gamesters and not with them of his peers.'

Miler's court must have been hilarious, with its harper- GilIpatrick Oge, wild kern, wine cards and dice. Though he employed local men as his servants, from the beginning we find his relatives and friends from Ulster assisting him. His brother Niall was the constant companion of the general official Mathew Ryan. Niall resided at the episcopal manor at Camas and married an O'Kelly from Kiltinan near Fethard.

And what of Amy O'Meara of Toomevara. Amy bore Miler nine children, Turlough, Redmond, Bryan, Mark, Mary, Sarah, Cecily, Ann and Elie. To have done so in those primitive days must have involved a number of miscarriages. From what we know she remained a good Catholic all her life and Miler's best efforts failed to get her to embrace the new religion. Yet, from the story of the meat on Friday there seems to have been a good relationship between the two even if she were a little in awe of her man. We don't know when she died or where she was buried. There is a report that Miler married again but I am inclined to doubt it.

In Fleming's book of Charges of 1591 we are left a description of how Miler went about 'in doublet of proof buff leather, jerkin and, his sword on his side, his scull and horseman staff with his man a horseback, after which a train of armed men to the great terror and bad example of the people . . . And, having any meeting for matters of controversy with his neighbours, doth assemble an army of horsemen and footmen to win his demands with a strong hand...' The archbishop admitted that he had to go armed even to his Chapter House. His extreme unpopularity with certain elements of society and the fact that he was attacked on a number of occasions, barely escaping with his life, made such armour necessary.

 

THE BEGINNINGS

But let's get back to the beginning of the story.

Miler was the eldest son of Donough McGrath and heir to the ancestral estates. His father was both local chieftain and erenach of St. Patrick's Purgatory, which was under Augustinian care. The family were in possess­ion of the original monastic lands, the Termon Daberg. The family territories were Termon Magrath and Termonamongan in the counties of Tyrone, Donegal and Fermanagh. In medieval times Termon McGrath formed a tiny buffer statelet between the powerful families of O'Neill, O'Donnell and Maguire.

The family were also erenach of St. Patrick's Purgatory. The office of erenach was less prestigious than that of being a coarb. The latter was the heir of the original saintly founder of the monastery. The erenachy was vested in a family. It was hereditary but deriving from the bishop’s authority. The bishop had the right to refuse to appoint if he thought the candidate was not worthy. The erenach gave the bishop a small annual payment, dispensed hospitality when his diocesan looked for it, was regarded as a sort of a cleric and so was often in minor Holy Orders. He was invariably married and from the ranks of his sons came many of the clergy.

Into such a family was born Miler McGrath in 1522. We know nothing of his early life. One source said he was brought up in the neighbourhood of modern Pettigo. We know nothing of his schooling but, as the son of an Irish chieftain he was probably brought up the same way. The Irish chieftains lived a simple and primitive life and practised their religion.

Perhaps because he was brought up in the shadow of Lough Derg had an influence on Miler. He decided to become a Conventual Franciscan and in doing so renounced his right of inheritance. From about 1450 up to the time of the Suppression of the Monasteries there was a remarkable revival within the Franciscan Order. This revival was marked by the foundation of a number of houses in the west and south- west, by the prodigious growth of the Third Order and by the introduction of the Strict Observance into the First Order

The first house of Strict Observance to be established in Ireland was at Quin in 1433. This was founded by the MacNamaras as a burial place for their family instead of Ennis. Nine houses accepted the reform in 1560. By 1500 some 24 houses and by the time of the Suppression two-thirds of all Franciscan houses had adopted it.

The first great outburst of Observant activity occurred during the provincialate of Fr. William O'Reilly, the first man of pure Irish blood to hold the office of Provincial Minister of Ireland.

More than one quarter of the Franciscan houses were reformed or built for the Observants by Irish chiefs. All the reformed houses were confined to the south-west and northern portions of the country until 1518, with the exception of Enniscorthy and Wexford. It was almost the eve of the Reformation before many of the Conventual houses, nearer the English sphere of influence, adopted the Observant rule.

All this reforming generated considerable friction between conventual and observant. Some friction remained until the time of the Reformation, especially where Conventuals and Observants lived together.

The Observant movement was popular and necessary. Observant houses be­came overcrowded while Conventual Friaries became greatly depleted. The movement was vigorous and expansive. The Friars were zealous men and produced many excellent preachers. As proof of this Sixtus IV issued to the Abbot of Derry on May 9, 1482 a papal mandate which stated: 'On account of the rich fruits which the friaries of the Observance have brought to the people of Ireland by their exemplary lives, their preaching and other good works, and since the devotion of the faithful towards them daily increases so much that they are ready to build new houses for them in suitable places, he has empowered the Irish Friars of the Observance to build or receive two houses in Ireland, with church and cemetery attached to each.

The Observants were the most active of all the old religious orders at the time of Henry Vlll's attack on the Pope's jurisdiction. George Browne, the Kings Archbishop of Dublin, met with active opposition from the Observants.

However, there is no evidence to show that the Irish Conventuals, any more than the Observants, compromised at the time of the Reformation. Miler became a Conventual between 1535 and 1540 at either Monaghan or Downpatrick, probably Monaghan, which had been founded in 1407. The place was sacked by the English soldiery in 1540 and finally burnt and destroyed in 1589.

There is no evidence to show that there was any particular laxity in either Monaghan or Downpatrick and it should not be considered as a reflection on these monasteries, where they followed the Conventual Rule. Whatever bad traits we find in Miler McGrath do not necessarily follow from his belonging to the Conventual friars.

 

EDUCATION

It seems certain that Miler was sent to Rome for his studies. Ireland at this time had no universities in which masters and scholars could lecture and scholars study. However, there were non-university schools in the country where canon and civil law was studied while most of the larger religious establishments had theological facilities attached to them. For the Franciscans Galway and Armagh were the two most important seats of learning and seem to have been set aside for the common use of both Observants and Conventuals.

It was customary, however, for the Conventuals, to send their more talented pupils to England or the continent for studies in the various universit­ies and they evidently produced more high ranking academic scholars than the Observants. Miler, himself, as appears from his letters, was an educated man and he certainly did have a keen legal mind. There is absent however from his writings anything of a philosophical nature. His speculations are mainly concerned with the things of the world.

Wherever Miler was educated we know nothing of his scholastic wanderings. If he ministered on the continent we are not aware. He makes his first entrance into history on October 12, 1565 as Bishop of Down and Connor. He was 43 years old and had been consecrated at Rome 'at the private charge of the Pope.

The vacancy in the see of Down and Connor had occurred in 1562 with the death of Eugene Magennis. In the Consistory held in Rome in 1565 in which Miler was appointed he was described as a Conventual Franciscan. According to the Act of Appointment Magrath had reached the canonical age required for the episcopacy and, as to morals, learning and birth he was considered worthy of the office and vouched for by his superiors. It was also stated that he came from Down. Magrath may have claimed Down as his place of origin when aiming at the vacant bishopric. It may also have been that Miler referred to Down as the place where he lived his Franciscan life.

Magrath was in Rome at the time of his appointment and his consecration evidently took place there, the expenses for his promotion being defrayed Pope Pius IV himself. It is not known why he was at Rome. One source states that Miler's 'attention or his unabated obsequiousness to certain high personages, both in Spain and the Netherlands, had, after some time, brought him into notice'. If that be the case he had already revealed those qualities of personality that were later to ingratiate him into the favour of Elizabeth. On the other hand, he must have been a personable man of talent to be so successful.

While Miler was in Rome he drew up a document in Latin setting forth proposals for the establishment of the Holy Inquisition in Ireland with the collaboration of Primate Creagh and Shane O'Neill. The reason for this exceptional display of zeal is not apparent. One reason given is that it was probably due to some antipathy between Primate Creagh and himself; Magrath may have thought Creagh too loyal to Elizabeth. This source furt­her suggests that 'Magrath, a foster-brother of Shane O'Neill would seem to have been at that time fixed with rebellious instincts and with menac­ing hatred towards Protestants.' His zeal may also have been an attempt to ingratiate himself with the Roman authorities. However, his extravag­ant scheme never seems to have been taken too seriously in Rome.

Magrath's document, though not adopted does show us that, at that time, nearly all the people of Ireland, at least in areas not occupied by the English, were still Catholics. He notes that in a few places there were not a few heretics who kept close together and 'under a form of sound doctrine, yet by many tales and pretty conceits disseminated many diverse and profitless matters repugnant to the Catholic faith and the Christian religion, whereby they lead even good Catholics into various errors.’ Magrath was most anxious to be rid of those Protestants. This document is the only one we have from Mcgrath's hands while he was still a Catholic bishop.

By the time Magrath reached Ulster Primate Creagh was away from the scene of conflict. Arrested in January 1565 near Drogheda he escaped at Easter and made his way to Louvain. From there he wrote to the Queen suggesting that she agree to his filling the see of Armagh in return for his civil loyalty to the throne. Like a great majority of English and Anglo-Irish Catholics Primate Creagh appears to have hoped and believed that the quarrel between the Holy See and the English crown would be healed by the passage of time.

In the meantime Creagh received an order from Rome directing him to re­turn to Ireland and in the month of August 1566 Miler arranged an inter­view between the Primate and Shane O'Neill. Magrath accompanied Creagh to this meeting and it is very probable that he acted as mediator between the opposing parties. O'Neill, who had received a letter from the Pope, signified his submission to the Primate and promised him protection. This interview, however, did not compose the differences between O'Neill and the Primate and Magrath has been suspected of having sown dissension between them. Moreover, it was probably as a result of these machinations that Creagh found it expedient to retire into Connaght for a time. Here he was eventually betrayed to the English enemy by one O'Shaughnessy on April 30, 1667.

Down and Connor diocese was in a devastated state when Miler was appointed. Things did not improve. His temporalities, which had been in a bad way,suffered more in the year that followed the conference between O'Neill and the Primate as O'Neill made use of Church lands to aid himself in his war against Lord Deputy Sidney and the combination of Northern chieftains which had formed against him after he was proclaimed traitor on August 3,1566.

At enmity with the Primate and suffering the loss of his temporalities through O'Neill, Miler, along with his patron, Con Maguire, chieftain of Fermanagh, visited the Lord Deputy at Drogheda, where they submitted on May 29, 1567. Maguire had already gone over to the English Government, a fact which enraged O’Neill. It is indeed possible that Maguire may have induced Magrath to submit since he was probably acquainted with the fate intended for O'Neill.

Magrath had chosen a most opportune moment to submit and gain possession of his diocese. Shane was hemmed in on all sides in May 1567. All Miler's submission amounted to was an oath of allegiance. When Sidney wrote to the queen to know her pleasure, he spoke of Magrath as one 'who humbleth him­self and craveth mercy and restoration to his bishopric from her highness’. There is no question here of accepting the bishopric from the Queen but simply that he might be enabled by Sidney's help to occupy his See. T'here is no mention of an oath of supremacy, nor a surrender of any papal Bull of appointment.

In a letter the Queen welcomed the submission of Magrath: 'We like the submission of the bishop of Down and think that he and others whom you shall not find meet to expel may be induced to submit themselves and to take their bishopric from us.’ Elizabeth was counselling lenient and politic methods in dealing with Catholic bishops. Magrath continued as Catholic bishop of Down and Connor and there was no attempt on the part of Elizabeth to make him one of her bishops. He did not see any conflict between political submission to Elizabeth and relig­ious obedience to the Holy See. However, his submission was not popular with the followers of Turlough O'Neill, who had succeeded Shane. In 1568 with things getting hot for him, Miler was anxious to be translated to the diocese of Clogher, which was in the territory of his patron, Con Maguire. Magrath went to Rome towards the end of I567 or early 1568 with a view to securing Clogher for himself. In this quest he had the support of Maguire. In his letter of support Maguire claimed that there were then two bishops, both claiming the see - 'who upon their own authority had divided between themselves the administration of the diocese.’ He requested that both of them might be removed and Miler be substituted in their place.

Primate Creagh, still a prisoner in the Tower, heard of these developments and found means of conveying his sentiments to Rome. He begged the Holy Father to appoint a worthy bishop without delay to Clogher. He was equally earnest in condemning the past career of Miler McGrath and urged the Holy See not to entertain the idea of advancing him to the see of Clogher.

Already much frustrated the ambitious Magrath began to conspire to have Creagh convicted and deposed for heresy. He charged him in the Roman Curia with 'treason to the Divine Majesty, of violating religion, and of prevarication of the laws of the Church.' Miler forged letters as if written by Creagh on matters of great import and 'others of worthless counsels, very different from his mind and dignity. ' These Magrath brought before the Pope and the College of Cardinals for the purpose alleged.

On examination of the seals on the documents and the known character of the supposed writer, the forgery was revealed and Magrath was summoned to answer his calumny. He evidently panicked at this and betook himself to England where he deserted the Catholic faith. This happened about 1569. On arrival in England Magrath was put in prison and remained there until the following year.

 

PROTESTANT

During his imprisonment Miler wrote an obsequious letter to Lord Cecil pleading to be freed. In this letter he made solemn and prophetic protestations of loyalty. In spite of all his protestations he failed to secure his release.

In February 1570 Magrath's case was under consideration and Lord Cecil was thinking of sending him back to Ireland. shortly after this Elizabeth wrote to Henry Sidney, the Lord Deputy, informing him of her intention of sending Primate Creagh and Magrath back to Irekand. She noted the difference between the two. Creagh still refused to acknowledge her supremacy in spiritual matters. Magrath's crime was of resorting to Rome looking for a bishopric. However, his crime was looked on not as grave as Creagh's and he was to be treated differently since he had submitted himself for instruction. However, neither was sent back to Ireland. Creagh was to continue until the end of his days in the Tower and Magrath remained in London at least until the Autumn of 1571.

During his continued imprisonment Magrath continued to petition to get back the see of Down and Connor, which had been given to Merriman. His anxiety to get back may have been due to the fact that he was still Catholic bishop of that diocese and was to remain so for another ten years. Perhaps he wanted to be Catholic and Protestant bishop simultaneously. Failing the possibility of getting Down and Connor he requested to be given some other benefice 'in some safe place where her rule is observed, for I have no desire to live among the rebellious and vulgar Irishmen among whom I was born.' One such place was Cork but Magrath was appointed neither to it or to Down and Connor.

By this time Magrath was destitute, having neither benefice nor any other source of income. Eventually on September 18, 1570 he was appointed as first Protestant bishop of Clogher, a diocese by no means prosperous. He was given £31-6-6 to pay his London expenses. He was also sent by the Queen and Privy Council to Primate Creagh to urge him to conform. Magrath's efforts were futile and Creagh told him to go to hell.

It is not stated anywhere that Magrath ever took possession of Clogher. Even if he did he didn't greatly benefit from his new appointment. The Northern chieftains had turned against him for his acceptance of the 'reform’. It seems likely that Magrath remained in London and on February 3, 1571, he was appointed to the united sees of Cashel and Emly. Magrath had submitted to the Queen and accepted the reform very much as a matter of expediency. The economic factor weighed much in his final decision. In many ways he was still a typical medieval benefice hunter and was probably prepared to intrigue to obtain preferment.

 

CASHEL

Miler was appointed to succeed James McCaghwell, the appointee of the Crown to Cashel in February 1567. The Papal nominee was Maurice MacGibbon who had been appointed on June 4, 1567. Neither man made much impact on the internal affairs of Cashel. McCaghwell 's reign was too short. He was arrested by MacGibbon 's men and lodged in prison. He died soon after his release. MacGibbon's life was occupied with diplomatic affairs in Spain and Rome on behalf of the Munster insurgents

In the 35 years since the Reformation there was little religious impact in the diocese. Its achievements were negligible. or most of the Church officials were Protestant and all the Cathedral clergy were crown appointees .Little had been done to remedy abuses within the diocese. There was still much traffic in benefices and the local lord, the Earl of Ormond, retained much power over the church and appointments to benefices. The Reformation contributed greatly to the landed wealth of the Butlers and their friends.

So far the Reformation had meant little more than the rejection of Papal authority. The general need of reform was not met with any religious revival and had little effect on the lives of the ordinary people, except to deprive them of their Catholic clergy. By the time jailer arrived in Cashel the Papacy had made its bid for the allegiance of the people and had gained long lead on the reformers.

Munster was torn by war when Magrath arrived there in the summer of 1571 - a war between unifying absolutism and local authority. Magrath’s role was to bring the people into subjection to the Queen in matters spiritual and temporal, in co-operation with the President of Munster, Sir. John Perrot .

Magrath arrived at Cork in the Spring of 1571 with Perrot. Our first evidence of his activity within the diocese of Cashel appears in July when he arrested two Friars for preaching against the reform movement. Six days later Magrath received a threatening letter from James Fitzmaiirice to have them released. A couple of days later Edward Butler came to Magrath's house and took the friars away forcibly, while Miler was absent. By his action in imprisoning the friars the archbishop created a favourable im­pression with the Dublin authorities. the other hand his action made him unpopular in Cashel . He felt his life was in danger and became anxious to be out of Cashel. When Merriman, bishop of Down and Connor, died in 1571, Miler tried to get transferred to the Northern diocese but failed. After his first diocesan visitation in 1571 Miler made one change in exist­ing practice. While on visitation the bishop's retinue had to receive re­fections from the incumbents of the parishes!. Sometimes the retinue was a hundred or more and caused a severe strain on the incumbent's resources. Magrath decided, with the consent of the clergy, to take money instead of the refections. Twenty years laater we read that Magrath was then extorting four times the agreed amount from every incumbent. As a result of such extortions the clergy were driven out of the diocese and by this policy Miler kept their livings in his own hands 'which maketh him so great a moneyed man as he is reported to be.'

The important person connected with these extortions was Magrath's general official, Mathew Ryan, a layman. Another of this official's tasks was the collection of all excessive fees and other rewards that the Arch­bishop got from his diocese. Through this office Mathew was accused of amassing a great fortune to the value of £1,000. Together with Niall Magrath, Miler’s brother, Mathew was for practical purposes, the Archbishop's most important henchman. He was labelled papist and and a traitor by the Archbishop's enemies. On the other hand he earned the hatred of his countyrmen for his diligence against the papists.

Magrath had every opportunity to line his own pockets. He sold diocesan offices to the highest bidders. The officials he appointed to the four rural deanaries are described as his 'caterpillars which continually useth extortion upon the poor clergy, that is most pitiful to hear of. Magrath would take £10 or £20 for their office depending on the value of the deanery. He used his officials cleverly to increase his own income. He also tried to monopolise many of the benefices within the diocese, in particular the lucrative ones. The mutual relations between the Archbishop and his chapter were strained. -The type of person he appointed left a lot to be desired. When commissioners visited his diocese in 1591 five of the benefice holders were deprived, four for contumacy and pluralism, the for defective orders and contumacy. One of these, Edmund Burke, was also illiterate. The same year 22 benefices were reported vacant and their fruits going to to the Archbishop.

There is no evidence that Magrath made any positive effort to forward the Reformation in Cashel. He had no interest in the new doctrine but contented himself with its temporal advantages. These enabled him to marry in 1575. His wife was Any O'Meara, daughter of John O'Meara of Lisiniskey, Toomevara. That place is between Ballymackey and Toomevara off the Nenagh-Roscrea road. Magrath presumably came in contact with her after procur­ing a grant of the Priory and Priory lands of Toomevara from Elizabeth. Any was a Catholic and the nine children that resulted from the union were all reared as Catholics and they all did very well for themselves, Miler's ecclesiastical policy was moderated by her influence and she may have been the principal cause of his duplicity in religious matters.

The mercenary character of Magrath is much in evidence in his administration of the temporalities of the diocese. There was a lot of land attached to the archbishopric and Magrath leased out much of it for his own ends. The income from it ought to have been used for the repair of churches and the payment of clergy. It was Miler's avarice rather than his apostasy which caused so much hostility to him.

 

EXCOMMUNICATION

Ten years passed before Rome took serious action against Magrath. On March 14, 1580 the Holy Office of the Inquisition took up the case of Miler and after discussion he was declared a heretic and solemnly condem­ned. He was proclaimed heretical by Pope Gregory Xlll and deprived of his see of Down and Connor. The customary invocation of the secular arm to punish him was advocated but needless to remark it was a useless clause since there was no Catholic potentate in a position to do so.

It is difficult to determine Miler's reaction to his excommunication and deposition. His conduct in religious affairs subsequently became extreme­ly dubious. Many newly appointed prelates made an attempt to win Magrath back. In 1582 he was given the added responsibility of the diocese of Waterford and Lismore by Elizabeth. Here there were very few Protestants and Miler did little to further the Reformation. His visitation in 1588 revealed that less than half the benefices had clerics in them. Shortly after the visitation he was removed from the see, apparently at the instigation of the undertakers. While he was there he continued his policy of alienation and leasing of ecclesiastical lands.

Miler tried to strike a balance between remaining on friendly terms with some of the counter-reformation clergy and retaining his allegiance to the Queen. He sometimes allowed these clergymen to operate in his diocese but when suspicion was aroused he reported them to Dublin Castle and was able to confirm his loyalty to the Queen. At one stage he kept two papal bishops in his house, Moloney of Kilmacduagh and O'Brien of Emly 'for winning the greater credit with the papists' as his enemies alleged. About 1583, however, O'Brien was seized by the Archbishop and committed to the Castle prison, where he died some years later. Peter Power, who was appointed to Ferns by the Pope in April 1582 was likewise arrested by Magrath. He submitted, took the oath of supremacy, later repented his act, escaped and returned to Rome. When accused with consorting with the Catholic clergy. Miler alleged that it was his policy to invite those to discuss religious matters with him in order to drive them from their errors and conform them to the state religion.

As the years went by the duplicity of the archbishop's position with regard to religion increased! At times he seemed anti-Catholic, consider­ing he had imprisoned at least three Catholic prelates and several priests However, there was no doubt in the minds of the Cathedral clergy and of his local enemies that in the matter of religion Miler was a double dealer. His conscience may have been at him when he made seemingly Catholic speeches. Un the other hand he may have been hoodwinking the Catholics. He allowed his children to be reared as Catholics and they received the Sacrament of Confirmation from some of the Catholic prelates while they were at school in Waterford.

 

GOVERNMENT AGENT

Magrath had a second role during this period: he was an agent of the Government. From the beginning he was associated with Sir. John Perrot's Presidency and apparently was a member of the Council of Munster. From an early date the archbishop sent periodic reports to the Lord Deputy of affairs in Munster and in Ireland in general.

In many ways Church and State affairs were geared by the archbishop to minister to his own needs and thus he led a life more befitting a lay chieftain than an ecclesiastic. As early as 1573 Miler started laying the foundations of large estates for his family and relatives. Lord Deputy Fitzwilliam wrote about him in 1591: From time to time I have misliked his greedy mind to heap together large possessions and his contentious nature always bent to quarrel with such as were his neighbours. For his extortionate policy and high-handed activity he was hated by the poor while the rich had their own quarrels with him. He had a long-standing dispute with the Earl of Ormond.

Magrath spent 1592 in London answering charges against him and petitioning the privy council. He alleged that his income was no more than £98-4-0 per annum and it was insufficient to enable him to live decently.

While he was in England his enemies in Ireland decided to bring his mis­demeanours to public notice. A burgess from Cashel , Edmond Fleming, was appointed to inquire into the whole course of the archbishop's life. The examination of witnesses took place on August 12 and the findings were for­warded to the Lord Deputy on August 21.

Many grave charges of treason, felony, simony and extortion were brought against him. The principal witnesses were members of his own chapter. The most serious charges centred around the archbishop's partiality towards the Catholic clergy, especially towards Dr. Creagh of Cork and Coyne. Other charges portrayed the archbishop as a deceitful, racketeering individual, a high-handed adventurer, a local tyrant, feared by the poor and hated bv all.

However, Magrath successfully defended himself before the Privy Council. His answers to the charges were made in a masterly fashion, each article being dealt with separately. He admitted in most cases that the accusations were not without some foundation but that the facts were wrongly inter­preted or falsified with malicious intent.

Magrath had to extend his stay in London and the Queen availed of his service bv commanding him to set down in writing a declaration of the state of Ireland 'with the means to increase the revenues and amend the government and withstand the Spanish practices.' Miler's report extends to 7,000 words and some of the points are interesting. He suggests that the Shannon be made navigable as far as Athlone for military and commercial reasons, He said there were too many bishops in the country, forty, with the result of too many begging letters from underpaid clerics, and there should be only 16.

The memorandum pleased the Queen and towards the end of the year she again appointed him to Waterford and Lismore. When Miler returned from London he brought with him letters of recommendation from the Queen and the Privy Council.  However, soon after his return there was a rapid deterioration in his relations with the Lord Deputy.

 

However, soon after his return there was a rapid deterioration in his relations with the Lord Deputy. Patrick Kearney, a former clerk of the Archbishop, opened a new slander campaign with a series of charges sent to the Lord Deputy on February 13. In the next month a book of various slanderous charges against Magrath was sent to the Lord Deputy by Piers Comyn. The charges were sufficiently treasonable to undermine the archbishop's position.

Magrath soon discovered about the plot and set about defending himself. Knowing how much the Lord Deputy Fitzwilliain hated him, Miler fled to London. There on June 8 he related his tale to Sir Robert Cecil. He blamed the papists for alienating his friends, servants, kinsmen and even the Lord Deputy himself 'by most false and slanderous suggestions!' He hourly expected danger 'remaining safe neither in country or town, at home or abroad, in church or in chapter-house.' He was driven to appeal thither 'to the uncorrupted seat of Justice and sanctuary of all afflicted subjects - her majesty and her honourable Council.  He asked that a commission be set up to examine his case and if he obtained this request he would return to his poor flock,- live quietly among them and content himself with his poor fortune.'

A commission was set up to examine the accusations and sat between July 7 and July 20, 1593. It failed to reach any conclusions.

It is a tribute to Magrath that he emerged from those years of plots and strives without suffering much loss. All through he had the unswerving support of the Queen against otherwise overwhelming odds. Magrath found himself trying to please Catholics and Protestants, not out of any interest in either religion but to enable him to follow more readily his material interests.

During the Nine Years war Magrath' s policy was to please his Queen. He was in Ulster as a Government agent and was well-qualified. He possessed a thorough knowledge of the country and its people with an intimate knowledge of the ruling families and their internal strives. He knew the language of the countrv as well as English and Latin. He had a great capacity for in­trigue and legal skill. He was on good terms with the Ulster chiefs and the London authorities.

Later he worked in Munster doing his best to break up alliances among the Irish and winning their undying hatred. He remained a Government agent until the death of Elizabeth in 1601 Magrath had been her great favourite. Upon him she heaped benefice after benefice and took his part in his quarrels and other difficulties. To her he would refer in his troubles.

 

FAMILY FORTUNES AND QUARRELS

Despite all his service to the state the one principle which guided all of Miler's activities was the material welfare of himself and his family. He made incessant demands on the state for services rendered. The fruit of all this was a large fortune for himself and his sons and a series of good marriages.

A regrant of the family lands of Termon McGrath was made to his father under the Queen's letter of August 9,1593. This surrender was made so that the lands were regranted to him for life, with successive remainders to Miler and to Miler's sons. Miler had land in Toomevara and Aughnameal. With his son Brian he bought land in Ballymackey and Kilmore at a time when the Irish were selling it off cheaply for fear of plantation. In this way Brian became one of the largest landowners in Ormond. Another son Terence acquired large tracts of land in Emly and the Barony of Clanwilliam. Son Redmond acquired much land in the district around Cashel, in Thurlesbeg, Ballymore and Killough.

The archbishop's grasping for land and wealth brought him into conflict with neighbours, most noticeably with O'Dwyer of Kilnamanagh. Eventually this dispute was fixed up in a series of marriages. Redmond Magrath married O'Dwyer's daughter and Cecelia McGrath married Philip O'Dwver of Dundrum.

Because of his intensive secular pursuits the spiritual side of Miler's program was left in abeyance. Reform was scarcely tried. Protestantism was an Act of State and the State hadn't been accepted in Ireland. The bishops who might have implemented it were mere place hunters and time servers. The Reformation was their vested interest.

Magrath's laxity in religious affairs was a byword. By the end of Elizabeth's reign the physical character of the Established Church within the dioceses of Cashel, Emly, Waterford and Lismore had steadily deteriorated. The Protestant bishop of Cork called Waterford 'the sink of all filthy superstition and idolatry.’ Catholics were allowed to practise their religion secretly provided the practice wasn't bound up with treasonable action.

The accession of James 1 ushered in a widespread resurgence among the Catholics of Ireland. In Waterford the Mass was celebrated in public again.

Sir John Davies reported to the Government on the state of the Protestant Church and clergy. He cited Magrath as the most notorious example of pluralism, having 70 benefices and 4 bishoprics. Churches were in ruins and there was no divine service or dispensing of the sacraments.

To counteract this resurgence in Catholic activity there was a Royal Proc­lamation declaring there was to be no liberty of conscience and that people should attend the Protestant services.

In 1607, at 85 years, Magrath was still active and his main interest was personal wealth and family fortune. About this time he was in London and while absent a visitation of his four dioceses was inaugurated by the Lord Deputy and undertaked by the Archbishop of Dublin, accompanied by the bishops of Kildare and Ferns. The report substant­iated the belief that 'wherever the archbishop could do hurt to the church he hath not foreborne to do it.'

When Miler heard about the visitation and report he complained to the King and Privy Council that divers persons in Ireland plotted against him 'to bring in question and in hazard of his life and of malice for his good ser­vice and for his profession.'

However, despite his plea the Lord Deputy and his Council were determined to reduce Miler's jurisdiction. The result was that he was forced to resign Waterford and Lismore early in 16O8 and received Killala and Achonry in­stead. Whether as a response or not in August Miler requested David Kearney, the Catholic Archbishop, to solicit the Pope to absolve him and receive him back to the Catholic Church.

Meantime it was decided to bring Miler to trial to answer for his misdeeds. Miler demanded a public trial and the Lord Deputy had second thoughts and the trial did not take place. Soon after this Miler returned to his former ways again.

Miler spent little time in Cashel. The administration of the diocese was left in the hands of one of his sons. In l6l0 a co-adjuter, William Knight, was appointed but he brought no improvement in conditions in Cashel. In l811 an Inquisition into the behaviour of the Protestant bishops was set up under a Scottish bishop. The results were highly critical of Magrath. Miler may have feared deposition. We contacted Fr. Ultan, the provincial of the Franciscans, who was living in the Cashel diocese. Miler expressed his desire to return to the Catholic Church and expressed a readiness 'to recant in the presence of the heretical church' if the Pope so commanded him. We don't know if the English authorities got wind of this or not but they decided to leave Miler alone.

Relations deteriorated between Miler and his co-adjutor. Knight grew weary of the office and returned to England. One source gives the reason 'for that Knight appeared drunk in publick and thereby exposed himself to the scorn and derision of the people'. Another authority has it that Miler got him drunk in order to provide him with an opportunity to disgrace himself. Another Commission examined the condition of the State Church in 1615 and visited Cashel in July. The commissioners learned that Magrath was non-­resident. Thirty-three churches in the diocese were in bad repair or entirely in ruin. Numerous churches, rectories and vicarages were in the hands of the archbishop himself. The number of Vicars Choral was only four. The number of preachers in the diocese was fifteen but only five were resident. Cashel had a public school and the headmaster, Flanagan, was getting £20 a year, but he only idly performed his task.

 

All the fault for the failure of the Reformation in Cashel cannot be laid at the feet of Magratb - the Church was bad everywhere but perhaps a little worse in Cashel. Cashel had the added problem of the conversion of Ormond to Catholicism in 1605 after which the Catholic clergy were given free rein.

There isn't much information on Miler after 1615, even though he was to live for seven more years. In the history of Catholic Ireland written in 1621 Philip O’Sullivan Beare included a chapter on Magrath, According to it Miler was nearly worn out with age. He still continued to rule his diocese in some fashion.

In 1612 he indicated to Rome again that he intended to renounce 40 years of heresy. The Pope believed him and stated that if he came to Rome he would receive a loving reception there. Miler didn't go but he used this document as a defence if anyone tried to discipline him. A vear or so before his death he erected a monument to himself in the Cathedral of Cashel on the south side of the choir between the episcopal throne and the choir. The effigy in the monument is not one of Miler. The figure is vested in full Roman vestments and not in the usual vest­ments of a Protestant bishop of the period. The figure is wearing a pallium, an undoubted sign of a Catholic archbishop. At the foot of the effigy there is a dog on which the feet of the archbishop rest, which points to its medieval origin. Above the head is the archbishop's coat of arms, similar to the Magrath family arms, which are carved on the side of the tomb. On the plate is to be read the epitaph:

The ode of Miler McGrath, archbishop of Cashel, to the passer-by.

There had come of old to Down as his first station,

The most holy Patrick, the glory of our Nation;

Succeeding him, would that I had been as holy;

So of Down, at first I was the prelate;

behind thy sceptre, England, I worshipped for fifty years,

and in the time of noisy wars, thy chiefs I pleased,

Here where I am laid, I am not.

I am where I am not.

Nor am I in both places, but I am in each.

It is the Lord who judges me.

Let him who stands take care lest he fall.

On November 8, 1622 Miler made his last will and testament and six days later he died. He had reached the age of 100 years and had ruled the diocese of Cashel for 50 years and ten months.

There are numerous authorities who state that Miler died a Catholic but there is no proof positive. One authority claims that he died openly a Protestant but secretly a Catholic. This is based on the last two lines of the epitaph.

One authority, O'Sullivan Beare, claims that Miler married a second time but he is the only one to make the claim. The general belief is that he married Amy O'Meara of Toomevara and had nine children, Turlough, Redmond, Brian, Marcus, James, Mary , Cicely, Anne and Elie. Many attempts were made after Miler's death to retake the diocesan land appropriated but most of this failed.

 

CONCLUSION

Miler was an irreligious man who confessed God with the lips but denied him in his acts. He was able to hoodwink those in authority and even Catholics as well. Avarice was his ruling passion, the driving force of his activities. It corrupted him and drove him to excesses in simony. He turned his ecclesiastical office and sacred things to selfish ends. His idol was his own ends and his family's interests. He and his family grew enormously rich. He was always restless, never satisfied.

He had a passion for intrigue as can be seen from his endeavours to bring Primate Creagh into disgrace with the Roman Curia. There is evidence that while he was openly in the service of the Government, he was secretly in league with some of the Irish and Anglo-Irish Lords. He had a reputation for depth and cunning. He was elusive, quick-witted and plausible. He did not lack the pen of a ready writer. His great and undoubted talents are unquestioned.

Share

Share

<span class="postTitle">Bill Ryan Laha</span> County Senior Hurling Final Program, Cashel, Oct. 30, 1983

Bill Ryan Laha

County Senior Hurling Final Program
Cashel, Oct. 30, 1983

There are only two players left from the last team to win an All-Ireland football final for Tipperary They are Mick Tobin of Grangemockler and Bill Ryan of Laha. Bill is now eighty-nine years and lost his wife only recently. He played right-back most of his life on the team with the exception of one occasion against Sligo in an All-Ireland semi-final when he played centrefield. On the same day the Tipperary hurlers were beaten by Kilkenny. It was the 1922 championship played in 1923.

Bill was on the Tipperary team for twelve or thirteen years and won three Munster football medals! The other two were in 1918 when Wexford beat them in the final and 1920 when they went ahead to win their last All-Ireland football championship.

His first success was with Castleiney when he won a senior football medal in 1914 when they were combined with Templetuohy. The combination beat Nenagh Institute in the final at Thurles. There were only two drinking on the team. Bill recalls they were taken in to John Maher's after the match by some Gael and there were only two alcoholic drinks in the round. They were beaten in the county final in 1915. They didn't have the full team as some were injured and one of the players had a death in the family. They broke up with Templetuohy after that. A few went with Templemore. In 1925 they beat Fethard in the final at Carrick-On-Suir. Three years later they won the Mid but were beaten by Fethard in the final.

Bill remembers the Munster championship of 1918. Tipperary beat Cork and Waterford and met Kerry in the Munster final in the Cork Athletic Grounds. The result was 1-1 to 0-1 in favour of Tipperary. They beat Mayo by a point in the semi-final and trained at Dungarvan for the final, which wasn't played until February 1919. They spent two weeks in collective training. For the final they were missing three forwards, including Bill Barrett of the Commons, an uncle of Tommy's, because of flu. They got three fifties in the second half and failed to score. At full-time they were a point behind, five to four in favour of Wexford, who made it four-in-a-row on that day. Bill remembers that his Wexford opponent that day, Reynolds, was one of the most elusive players he ever came across.

Tipperary were beaten by Kerry in the 1919 Munster final but they reversed the result in 1920. They overcame Mayo by five points in the semi-final. The All-Ireland against Dublin was played in June 1922. The team trained in Mullinahone, staying in houses for the fortnight. Those from around the area went home at night. Every day there was a regimen of football, running and sprints. There was no compensation for being away from the farm. The final result was 1-6 to 1-2 in favour of Tipperary.

Bill has vivid memories of 'Bloody Sunday' in Novenber 1920. The occasion was a challenge match between Dublin and Tipperary to raise funds for the I.R.A. The team went up on Saturday evening. Bill got the train at Templemore. There were fourteen English soldiers on the train and there was nearly an incident between them and the players on the train. When the train arrived at Kingsbridge there was a large military presence and Bill and his fellow-players expected to be arrested on some pretext. Instead the soldiers were arrested. Seemingly, they had done some damage at the station at Templemore before leaving and the station-master had wired Dublin.

The players stayed at Barry's Hotel. When the team lined out on the Sunday, Mick Hogan was playing behind Bill. They had a discussion about changing positions because the Dublin corner-forward, Frank Burke, was a great forward and a bit of a handful for Hogan. However, they didn't change. Tipperary were defending the Canal End and the game was on about twelve minutes when the attack came. The soldiers came in at the Canal End and there was pandemonium when the firing started. The field also was surrounded because Bill made two attempts to get away and was turned back by the military on both occasions. Eventually, somebody gave him a coat and he made his way back to the hotel where the team had togged out. There was no score at the time of the military incursion and the match was replayed for a set of medals the following year and Tipperary won. Two other members of that team were shot later: Jackie Brett went with the column and was shot and Jim Egan got shot in the Civil War.

Bill was not a big man. In fact he was only 5' 8" and weighed only 11-8 at peak fitness. He relied on speed, which he had in abundance, and high fielding to make up for his physical limitations. The two best footballers he ever saw were Tommy Murphy of Laois and Larry Stanley of Kildare. Bill's I ife wasn't all football. He started hurling with the Clonmore junior team. Later he played with Templetuohy juniors and won a Mid final with them in 1923. He won another medal with Castleiney juniors in 1925 on a team that included, Martin Whelan of Toomevara, who was working on the Council in the area at the time. The team had to go senior as a result of this victory and Bill won a Mid senior medal with them in 1928. He stopped playing in 1932 when his knee went and became a club officer. Himself and Jim Ryan of Loughmore carried the team along for many years after that. Bill is eighty-nine years of age to-day and is still remarkably fit and lively. He's looking forward to a Loughmore-Castleiney victory today with as much enthusiasm as he did to his own great victory in the Mid Senior final in 1928.

Share

Share

<span class="postTitle">Tom Duffy, Lorrha Veteran</span> Tipperary G.A.A. Yearbook 1981, pp 82-83

Tom Duffy - Lorrha Veteran

Tipperary G.A.A. Yearbook 1981, pp 82-83

Tom Duffy

Tom Duffy

One of the few remaining members of the famous Tipperary team that toured America in 1926 is Tom Duffy of Lorrha. Tom is 86 years old since May 4 last and is still mentally and physically active. A favourite occupation of his during summer is sitting on a small tank at the end of the house with the gun on his knees, waiting for the occasional pigeon or crow. He follows the GAA games as avidly as ever and was in Thurles for the Tipperary-Cork match and for the Munster final. "It's not hurling at all now. You can't draw your breath or you're pulled. You can't knock a man down on the broad of his back anymore. These lady rules have ruined a man's game." According to Tom there is an awful shortage of skill. So many players today don't know how to rise the ball. "If you can't rise it the first time, hit it on the ground. There's a trade in rising a ball and, if you haven't got it, don't try it." Something else is necessary. "You need a head. Horgan's got a head. He's my kind of man, always knowing where the ball is going to be."

 

Hurling Career

Tom's career with Tipperary was from 1924-26. He would have been on in 1923 but he was serving time in jail. Altogether, he spent 18 months behind the wire. He was a member of the Fourth Battalion, Offaly Brigade. His prison time was spent in Birr Castle, Templemore, eight months in Maryborough and three months in the Curragh. He thought he would be released for the 1923 championship which Tipperary lost to Limerick. Tom was in great form at the time as he hurled every day in the Curragh. He believes that had he been there that day Tipperary would have won.

He got his chance in 1924. Tipperary beat Kerry in the frist round by double scores, 6-2 to 3-1. They overwhelmed Cork in the semi-final and beat Limerick in the Munster final by two points. Tipperary played Galway in the All-Ireland semi-final in November 1924. Galway had played Limerick in the 1923 All-Ireland, played two months previously. According to the press "Tipp's display was a poor contribution to the traditions of a historic county. They never had such a bad defence and Galway might have won by fifteen points to one." In fact they won 3-1 to 2-3. To add salt to Tipperary wounds Galway were beaten by Dublin in the final.

 

First Hurling

Tom was born in Graigue, Rathcabbin on 4 May, 1894. He was one of two boys and went to school to a Mr Cahill in Rathcabbin N.S. He played hurling and football in school and hurled his first senior match for Lorrha in Borrisokane against Toomevara at the age of 17. Hurling was much tougher in those days. The hurleys were better also. "A rounded boss was great for ground hurling. There's no balance in a hurley now. The weight isn't in the boss. It's more top heavy than boss heavy."

Tom's favourite position was right half-back though he did play wing-forward in 1925. He won two North Tipperary divisional championships with Lorrha in 1914 and 1924.

 

Injuries

I asked Tom did he ever get injured. "No. I never let anyone hit me." He did admit he got a belt on the left knee from Mooney of Cork and had to go off. "But I came back on later in the game." He suffers a slight pain in that knee in the winter. "Paddy Leahy hit me in the

eye in a trial in Nenagh. I was beating the socks off Paddy, especially in the second half with the wind. Off the ball he gave me a belt over the eye which necessitated five stitches. Ever after that day whenever I met Johnny Leahy he would say "I don't think Paddy struck you deliberately." "Ohl I used to say, maybe so, maybe so." This used to happen occasionally. Eventually, about two months before he died, I met Johnny in Thurles. "Do you know something, Tom. I think Paddy meant to get you that day in the trial." "Did it take you over forty years to find that out?" said I. And I walked out. Later he added. "But the Leahys were great lads to be with. And they never let me down. They used always come down for me."

 

Tom Duffy

 

All-Ireland

1925 was the high point of Tom Duffy's hurling career. Tipperary accounted for Kerry in the first round and had their toughest encounter in the semi-final against Cork, eventually winning by 5-3 to 5-1. The Munster final was easy against Waterford and they eliminated Antrim in the All-Ireland semi-final.

For the All-Ireland against Galway there was collective training for a fortnight at Mount St Joseph's, Roscrea. "1 trained at home. I couldn't afford to be away from here for two weeks. I used to hurl with someone in the evening or just puck the ball against the gable wall. Training isn't everything. If the stuff isn't in you no training will bring it out. I played with fellows who smelled a lot. But embrocation isn't enough. If you work hard and are young you don't need any training. In fact you should layoff the hurley for a week before a match. Put the hurl under the bed and when you get it in your hand you'd be mad for it."

All-Ireland day was September 6th. Tipperary won comfortably by 5-3 to 1-5. According to the report the following day in the 'Irish Indepentent' "Galway were outclassed in nearly all the strategy of hurling and the performances of the Tipp team were frequently bewildering in their brilliance." The band of the Artane Industrial School marched through the streets to the grounds about 2 o'clock and gave a display of physical drill. Thirty special trains brought 14,000 from the south and 10,000 from the west. Tipp supporters outshouted Galway which "was a testimony to the popularity of the Munster team but also to the immense proportion of the Tipperary players resident in Dublin." The Liam McCarthy cup was presented for the fifth time by Mr P. D. Breen, President of the GAA to Johnny Leahy, the Tipperary captain. The rest of the team was: Paddy Leahy, Arthur O'Donnell, Paddy Dwyer, Jack Power, Paddy Power, J. J. Hayes, Bill Ryan, Martin Mockler, Martin Kennedy, Stephen Hackett, Mick Darcy, Jack Darcy, Tom Duffy, Phil Cahill. Tom had a fine game scoring a total of 2-3.

 

American Tour

Tom had a finepuck of a ball. He scored a couple of goals against Clare in Nenagh and Tommie Daly reported to his local curate after the match: "I'll tell you the truth, Father, I never saw them." For Tom, Martin Kennedy, Phil Cahill and Stephen Hackett were outstanding players, the last "the best corner forward of them all. They were all good or we wouldn't have won anything at all" Of his opponents he reckons Bob McConkey to be the smartest man of the lot. And Dinny Barry Murphy was a 'grand hurler.'

The Tipperary team went to America in May 1926 on an eleven weeks' tour, during which they played six games, two in New York, one at each end of the tour, and one each in Boston, San Francisco, Buffalo and Chicago. They were victorious in all and attendances were big with 30,000 in New York and 15,000 in San Francisco. The aim of the tour was to popularise Irish games in the U.S. and to try to internationalise the game of hurling. Tom doesn't remember much about the games but recalls prohibition and the speakeasies. He remembers fun and games with Jim O'Meara on Coney Island and a mystery tunnel tour with Stephen Kenny. "We nearly died from the heat. I remember us sitting on the verandas with our mouths open panting like dogs. 'Twas too hot to put our coats on our shoulders."

 

Tour Book

Tom Kenny wrote an account of the tour and Tom Duffy features more often in it than any other member of the party. There are about twenty references to him. He was the life and the soul of the party. In one place the party plan to take over the ship. In the plan Duffy is to be Captain. In another place "the wit and humour of most of them, especially Duffy, is most enjoyable." The entry for 7 June reads: "Tom Duffy is singing that song 'The next I met was a fairhaired lady, standing at a cottage door'." And on 9 June there is a discussion between Jack Power and Tom on the state of the country: "A crock of a country", says Duffy. "Sure we haven't seen a tram of hay, a ditch, nor a hedge since leaving the old country, but it is a fine country in other ways, Jack- they do everything the big way." Duffy thinks the Yanks made a mistake to set the country dry. "That hooch is rotten stuff, Jack, and if it continues as plentiful as it seems to be it will make mad men, blind men or dead men of all of them that drink it." On 19 June there is a party on the train and Duffy dances a jig. Later Paddy Leahy and Tom try to sing the last verse of the Star-Spangled Banner at the Eucharistic Congress in Chicago. Later still we learn that five hurlers are found in Duffy's Chicago hotel room saying the rosary. On the ship home he is constantly playing his favourite deck game and won 'Chalking the Pig's Eye' in the ship's sports. Truly a man of many sides!

 

Final Appearances

Tom was among the reserves for Tipperary in the 1926 championship. There were three games against Cork that year, the first in the Athletic Grounds and the others in Thurles. Cork finally won with a score of 3-6 to 2-4. His final apprearances were in the early league games that winter. He got ill and was dropped for the final games and so missed getting a medal. "Only one point was scored off me during my years with Tipperary." He continued to hurl for Lorrha. "I was going on for forty before I retired." Later he acted as a club officer and was on the selection committee when Lorrha won the North championship in 1948. A farmer by occupation Tom got married in 1924 and had nine children, six boys and three girls. One of the boys was killed in England. He's interested in cards, especially '25. "I won four turkeys last year in Birr Golf Club. If we hadn't turkeys I wouldn't have won at all." He has always enjoyed everything sporting. A serious fowler all his life he remarks how "everyone tells you what they shot, not what they missed." He kept greyhounds in his time and had some successes. He smokes and takes a pint."I never drank to do myself harm." He goes out for the pint still. In fact Tom is amazingly active and interested in life and time sits very lightly on his stout shoulders.

Share

Share

<span class="postTitle">Butterflies and Wet Pants and Litanies and Novenas</span> The Education Times, July 4, 1974

Butterflies and Wet Pants and Litanies and Novenas

The Education Times, July 4, 1974

It's exam time again. Thousands of boys and girls are suffering it out in neatly-ordered examination centres trying to organise their chaotic masses of facts. It is an awesome occasion.

The examinations branch of the Department of Education rises to it with its notices and warnings, its stationery boxes and its sealed packages, its 'provisional' envelopes and its inspectors. 

Teachers have been drilling their students for the past month with hot tips and questions that must come up.

The students themselves have butterflies and wet pants and recite litanies and novenas. 'Prayer alone without some work is useless. God helps those who help themselves,' a teacher once told us.

But there is another side to it all. I am thinking of the 'treasures' to be discovered in the answer books. 'The Brehon law and the March law were laws written down by two wise men'. I wonder whether his father was a lawyer.

I have got some marvellous replies to a question on coign and livery. Who wants to know anyhow? 'Coign and Livery were the names of two men. They went into business in the 18th century. The business Coign and Livery we have today is descended from them.' I wonder if the boy believed that. Or if I asked a supplementary: What kind of business? what would his fertile brain invent.

A more bloody-minded fellow gave me something different: 'Coign and Livery were methods of executing a person who did anything wrong.' Were they worse than hanging or garrotting? The answer may have been a hangover from one class we devoted to different kinds of killing.

Another fellow was on the right track. 'Coign and Livery was a type of market for cattle and other livestock. Today we would call it Mart and Market.' I suppose that Michael Dillon was bound to surface in the stream of consciousness.

When I get plain bad answers I have no mercy. If the reply shows some wit or originality I am lenient.

What is a Papal bull? 'The papal bull was the Pope.' If the Pope had been an Englishman he would never have called it a bull. 'Laudabiliter was the Papal bull. He was praised by the people.' What a difference there is between a Papal bull and an Irish bull! I remember when Monsignor, now Bishop, Ryan was appointed the Pope's confessor, somebody said the Pope needed a strong Tipperary lad to take care of the Papal bulls!

Why were they called Gallowglasses? It is a somewhat contradictory name for mercenary soldiers, like a bull in a china shop. A couple of lads thought so. 'Gallowglasses were a tribe in early Ireland, who tried to fight off the Normans. They settled in the Cork area.'

Quite close! Now I wonder why the Cork area? Did he consider the Gallowglasses a good crowd to be descended from or was he having a slag at Cork people?

The word 'tribe' is important for your interpretation. A more cultured kind, probably from the Waterford area, wrote: 'Galloglasses were a sort of glass used in the 18th century.;

While in the sunny south-east I would like to report that 'The Strongbow were a tribe which settled in Waterford. They had very strong weapons and were good fighters.'

I thought I had done a good job teaching the Statutes of Kilkenny. Normally it's the kind of subject that sticks in a young person's mind. 'The Statutes of Kilkenny were a set of battles between the Normans and the Gaelic rules.' A fair attempt but he failed to say what kind of war.

The following answer might have been taken from a tourist brochure. 'The Statutes of Kilkenny are famous for their shapes and their situation. They are a great attraction for tourists all the year round. They are very old.' A very positive suggestion for the regional tourism manager at Kilkenny. Get a copy of the Statutes and exhibit them in a public place all the year round. It might start a revival of trews and the Irish cloak.

No answer book is boring when you get answers like these. I get angry no more. Neither do I blame my teaching. Nature will out. 'What is the coccyx, Browne?' a colleague asked. 'It's the bone behind the bum, sir.' Much closer than many a textbook answer, I reckon.

Share

Share

<span class="postTitle">Civics and Ireland</span> The Secondary teacher, June 1966, Vol. 1 No. 6

Civics and Ireland

The Secondary teacher, June 1966, Vol. 1 No. 6

The proposed introduction of civics as a subject in Irish schools is a welcome addition to the curriculum. The fact that the majority of school-leavers finish their formal educa­tion without being instructed in their rights and duties as citizens is appalling. Admittedly, in so far as they are instructed in their religion, they have some kind of substitute. But it is not a sufficient substitute in so far as the Church and State have not identical ends. It would seem that the State is at last awakening to this fact and becom­ing aware of its responsibility in educating citizens. This "socialization process" is a phenomenon of the modern nation-state and can have good or bad repercussions depend­ing on the uses to which it is put. Its aims will be determined by the political and social circumstances of the state in question.

Many definitions of civics are available. Generally speaking, the aim of civics is to inculcate responsibility as a result of the recognition by the individual of his rights and duties. It includes educating the individual for a job; in this case, the job of being a good citizen. The man of our time is not an isolated individual living a self-sufficient existence in a primitive environ­ment. Rather is he a person whose actions have repercussions for a large number of people. In so far as this is so, his relations with other men must be regulated. The more complex these relations are the more sophisticated must be the regulations governing their behaviour. Side by side with this development of interdependence is the decline in individual independence.

These relations between man and man occur on different levels. There are relations with the family, the locality, the county, the employer, the State, and, in contem­porary times, the international environment. The more developed the society is the more complex will these relations be. Only an educated man is capable of understanding the ramifications of the rights and duties of such relations. It would be nearly true to say that the complexity of our present civilization has grown at a greater rate than the standard of education necessary to understand that civilization; fewer and fewer people understand how things work. The result is that people become more and more dependent and more subject to greater concentrations of power. In so far as it is possible, civics should aim at explaining these relations, informing the citizen on his rights and responsibilities, and giving him back some freedom.

Civics teaching will emphasise different things from state to state. In Ireland certain historical and social factors will dictate the emphasis. There is a strong authoritarian streak in our social experiences. Beginning in the family, the relation between parent and child is usually a one-way street; the child is to be seen but not heard. He does not contribute to family discussions; his remarks are at best tolerated. Growing up in this environment, his concept of the relation between authority and subject is one of power rather than persuasion. In school, a similar procedure obtains; his behaviour is ruled and his relaxations are "put in their place". If he toes the line of servitude he succeeds: if he is "unconven­tional" the world descends on him like a ton of bricks. Religion will play an important part in his life. His first experience with a minister of religion will probably be a happy one. However, as he grows in experience, he will find that religion is not a very personal thing: it is a rigidly laid down form of procedure. He will find that the position of the minister is one of authority. With a little study of history it will be easy for him to find the historical reasons for that position: the minister always held a position of leadership in the country and his word was law not only in religious matters but on political and social matters as well. The minister will have retained the position and the attitude of the only wise man. From this experience the growing child is confirmed in his concept of the relations between ruler and ruled : one of dictation.

When the child becomes an adult he will carry these attitudes into life with him. He may become a good subject or a severe master but he won't contribute much to the reasonable discussion of problems. This habit of the authoritarian approach to problems may be the cause of the failure of communi­cation between many sections of Irish life today. Here civics could play an important role in making mature men. By mature men I mean those who are capable of sitting down together, despite differing positions of authority, and solving mutual problems on the basis of the recognition of each other's rights. It entails eroding the feeling of in­security which is at the basis of the authoritarian attitude. When a man knows his rights, and knows that others know them, he will feel secure and will be less inclined to indulge in arbitrary behaviour towards his fellowmen. On the other hand, when he realises that his rights are preserved with the performance of his duties, he will have a greater incentive to perform the latter.

Civics is probably more important in Ireland today than ever before. The traditional centres of authority—the parent, the teacher, and the minister of religion— are gradually being eroded by the growing power of the state. The state is drifting deeper and deeper into socialism, even though we don't recognise it by that name. This is not necessarily a bad thing; in fact, in Irish circumstances, where resources are at such a premium, the need for the State to distribute the wealth of the country may be desirable. But regardless of its desirability, an offshoot of the development is the tremendous increase in the power of the state. The state becomes the great giver of largesse and more and more of us become civil servants. This outcome gives the state more power in the direction of our lives. There does not seem to be any alternative to this development, even if it were to be desired.

In such a situation, the need for respon­sible citizens is greater than ever. If we accept the general direction of government, are we capable of questioning particular decisions? Do we sit back and accept un-questioningly directives from the elite of the civil service? The majority of us will be unable to keep ourselves informed on most matters of government. But we could make it our business to be acquainted with the matters that most closely concern ourselves; an educator ought to be able to discuss the Government's educational policy. Where does civics come in ? It was mentioned above that civics should contribute to the educa­tion of responsible citizens. If the awareness of this responsibility is inculcated in the school, the carry-over should be sufficient to develop the type of citizen recommended above.

This brings us to the actual teaching of civics. There was a court case in an Irish town recently in which a youth was found guilty of stealing. The lawyer for the defence claimed that the youth was really a good boy—he got 90 per cent, in the Christian Doctrine examination in his school. The logic was dubious; a person could get 100 per cent, in religion and yet never perform an act of religion. The same is true apropos of the teaching of civics. The subject could easily develop into a catechism; question and answer without meaning. This develop­ment can be avoided in a number of ways. Not only must civics be a subject in its own right, but it must be part of every subject. In her article Why Civics? Miss Nora Kelleher suggested many relevant ways in which this could be realised. But the teach­ing of civics must go further to be meaning­ful; it must include practice as well as theory. Naturally, making the subject prac­tical will be far more difficult than merely teaching theory; the textbook and the teacher are sufficient for the latter whereas a fundamental change of attitude will be necessary for the former. Making civics prac­tical will involve some kind of devolution of authority in the schools; students ought to be given responsibility as soon as possible. In some schools there is a prefect system; in others, senior students have separate rooms for study; in more, one finds the honour system taking various forms. Some of these have succeeded, others have failed. But whether success or failure has been their lot, they need to be informed with a new attitude from those in authority; they must be seen not as "liberal" concessions but as the rights of the students. It should be possible to have a graduated transfer of responsibilities as the student moves from the lower to the higher forms in the school so that, by the time he leaves, he will have been responsible for getting his final examination : the means will have been available in the form of teachers and facili­ties but the success will have been his because he has properly used the means at his disposal. If the student gets his training in the school, side by side with the under­lying theory, there is a good probability that fewer of his kind will be breaking beer bottles against the railing of St. Stephen's Green during their first year at university to prove that they don't give a damn about anything. It will also facilitate the entry of a boy or girl from a secondary school into a position of responsibility. They will have been trained in responsibility.

The task before teachers will by no means be easy. Initially, they may have to face failure. The material at their disposal will be coming from a background which does not contribute to the development of responsibility. To throw such children on their own principles will lead to early disillusionment. At the other end of the scale they will turn out students capable of some responsibility into a society that tends to regard responsible people as upstarts, "getting out of line". But regardless of the difficulties, the inculcation of responsibility must go ahead. It was mentioned above that the power of the state was growing side by side with the decline in the traditional areas of authority. At the present we are probably lucky in having two great centres of power, the Church and the State. One tends to balance out the worst effects of the other. But to have either one supreme would be to the detriment of the freedom of the ordinary citizen. Present indications would seem to point to the growing power of the State without necessarily a decline in the power of the Church.

In the face of this develop­ment, the need exists for the training of a greater number of alert, responsible citizens, people who, by their awareness of their rights and duties, will be able to offset this encroachment on their freedom. The teach­ing of civics has a fundamental part to play in the training of such citizens and teachers have an obligation to see that mature men are the end product of their efforts. Teachers have one other responsibility: they must ever be on their guard lest the teaching of civics be used for the propagation of some pernicious doctrine. It is their duty to make certain that the subject never becomes a tool in the hands of partisan politics. When teachers have fulfilled these obligations they can be assured that their students will do them credit on leaving school.

Share

Share

<span class="postTitle">The Comprehensive Idea</span> The Secondary Teacher, Dec. 1966, Vol. 1 No. 10

The Comprehensive Idea

The Secondary Teacher, Dec. 1966, Vol. 1 No. 10

(Some of the ideas expressed by Mr. King in this article are, to say the least, controversial. It is hoped, however, that they will lead to the discussion that the author himself asks for in his final sentence.—Editor.)

The idea of the comprehensive school has been in circulation since Dr. Hillery, then Minister for Education, initiated it in 1963. Later, when Mr. Colley took over the top position in education he expanded on the idea. His contribution was the assertion that there would be few new comprehensive schools but that the comprehensive idea would be realised through the fusion of the existing secondary and vocational systems. In September 1960, Mr. O'Malley, the new Minister for Education, announced the pro­vision of free post-primary education up to the Intermediate Certificate level.

These are the general guidelines available to anyone who wishes to .know about this new dimen­sion in Irish Education. The guidelines are so general that it is difficult to formulate in any precise terms what, the result will be. It would seem that the Minister's publication of the idea was an attempt to initiate discussion. In fact very little discussion has taken place, partly, perhaps, because we are not used to thinking about education. The result has been that the comprehensive idea although four years in circulation, is still shrouded in vagueness. Writing about it. therefore, will involve not only piecing together the limited information at our dis­posal but also making suggestions on the comprehensive idea that may contribute to a discussion that never really began.

A Department of Education information sheet has this to say about the comprehensive idea: Comprehensive education is a system of post - primary education combining academic and technical subjects in a wide curriculum, offering to each pupil an education structured to his needs and interests and providing specialist guidance and advice on the pupil's abilities and aptitudes. Equality of educational oppor­tunity is inherent in such a system. The comprehensive school serves such a pur­pose particularly well. The prosperity of a nation depends on the abilities of its people and it is therefore of paramount importance to seek out and develop the talents not just of the few who are intellectually gifted but of all the children. There is a need of all talents, in all their variety and diversity.

The comprehensive idea is an attempt to fuse the secondary and vocational levels in post-primary education that have existed for so long in cold isolation. "It involves," to quote from another Department communica­tion, "the, creation of a situation in which the type of education that is best suited to the needs, abilities and aptitudes of each individual pupil is provided. To do this it is essential that the educational development of each student should be presented with as wide a selection of subjects as possible so that he may be given the opportunity of develop­ing his talents to the fullest extent." The comprehensive idea is an attempt to intro­duce equality of educational opportunity. This involves two levels of equality : it is an attempt to erode the second-rate status of technical education by putting it on a par with its academic counterpart; as we shall see later, it sets out to provide educational opportunity for children living in areas of the country badly provided with post-primary educational facilities : the new comprehensive schools have been built in such areas.

There are other than educational reasons for the comprehensive idea. Education be­comes more important every day. What was good enough for the parents will not be good enough for the children. "Because of the tremendous discoveries of science in the past 25 years," Mr. George Colley. Minister for Education, said to the Carlow group of Pax Romana. in March. 1966. "the fabric of industrial and commercial life has been radically altered. The day is fast approach­ing when the worker without a particular skill will be unable to find employment." And it is not only for a job that we need to raise the level of education; it is also for leisure. The Minister continued : "There is another side of the immense scientific advance which we are now experiencing. There is the promise of greater leisure. The five-day week may well become a three-day week if man remains a rational being, that is, if he does not wipe himself out. Education will help us to get more pleasure from our free time."

Whether for educational, economic, social, or egalitarian reasons, there is a great neces­sity to expand our educational opportunities. The needs of the country demand that we no longer be satisfied with the talents of the privileged. We cannot afford to allow 17,000 children to leave school with nothing but a primary education. This is no indictment of primary education. Rather is it a recognition of the fact that primary education was never intended to cope with the complexities of the machine age. We still need saints and scholars but we need the type suited to a technological age.

How is the comprehensive idea to be implemented? The comprehensive system of edu­cation will be provided through the erection of new comprehensive schools, through the expansion of present secondary and voca­tional schools, and through the co-operation between the secondary and vocational school authorities in providing educational facilities. Already, four new comprehensive schools have been completed and they are to serve as guidelines for schools in the other categories. According to the Department of Education, there has been an excellent response to the Minister's request for co­operation between the secondary and vocational school authorities. Many meetings at local level have already been held and plans have been made in several cases for practical co-operation during the next school year. Problems of authority, arrangement of curricula, and movement of pupils, between centres have not been discussed.

The comprehensive school will be open to all pupils who have reached the age of 12 years. No form of selection is contemplated at this age. The school will offer a three-year course leading to the Intermediate Certificate examination and subsequent courses leading to the Leaving Certificate. Primary education, where comprehensive facilities exist, will end at the age of 12 and the pupil will continue his education in a comprehensive school to the age of 15 years, graduating, if he does not wish to continue further. After 1970, when compulsory edu­cation to the age of 15 will be introduced, this will apply to all pupils.

The Department rejects the principle of any selection at the age of 12 years. Although no investigation into the effects of "streaming" has been done in this country, research in other countries since World War II suggests that it is extremely doubtful if intelligence can be accurately measured at an early age. On the basis of this research, Mr. Colley, in the above-mentioned speech, said : "In regard to comprehensive schools, I have decided that there will be no stream­ing based on ability on entry. Nor will there be streaming at any time during the three-year period leading to the Intermediate Certificate examination." "Streaming" will be avoided but since it will be necessary to obtain some measure of the pupil's achieve­ment on entry so that he may be assigned to the class for each subject that best suits him at the time, the pupils will take achievement tests in Irish, English and Arithmetic. According to their achievement in each sub­ject separately they will be assigned to the appropriate class in that subject. Further­more, each pupil's potential will be measured shortly after entry and the results compared with those of the attainment tests. It will be possible in this way to recognise the pupils whose achievement does not measure up to their potential and steps will be taken to remedy their deficiencies. This investigation will be undertaken jointly by the teaching staff and the Department's psychological service.

The curriculum for the comprehensive school will contain a core group of studies which will be examined at the Intermediate Certificate examination. This group includes Irish. English, Mathematics, and a hand-and-eye subject. Also included in this com­pulsory core of subjects is Religious Instruc­tion, which will be subject to diocesan examination. As well as this core group required for the Intermediate Certificate examination, every pupil will be required to take ''courses of study in the following sub­jects : Social and Environmental Studies (which will incorporate Civics), Physical Education, Library projects, Singing and Musical appreciation. Optional subjects will include History and Geography, Continental languages, Latin, Greek, Commerce, Rural Science, Physics, Chemistry, Biology.' The compulsory subjects will absorb some 21 hours of instruction time per week, leaving nine hours for optional subjects. The optional subjects are examination subjects and when the pupil has completed his three-year course in the subjects of his choice he can offer them in the Intermediate Certificate examination.

When the school-leaving age is raised to 1.5 years, every child in the country will have free education as far as the 'Inter­mediate Certificate level, regardless of his financial or intellectual ability. Those who wish to continue further will be streamed into the academic, commercial, or technical or apprentice scheme. Those of the academic stream will continue and take the Leaving Certificate examination. Those in the other streams will continue and take the Technical Schools' Leaving Certificate examination. The streaming will be based on the results of the expert investigation of the achieve­ments and interests of the pupil over the three-year period so that he will be able to make a realistic assessment of the goals he should set himself. If he decides to take a Leaving Certificate course, the compulsory core of subjects will be reduced. Christian Doctrine, Irish and English will remain, together with Physical Education, Musical appreciation, and Library projects. This reduction in the compulsory core will enable the student to give far more time to the subjects of his special interest. On the other hand, if the pupil decides to terminate his formal schooling at 15 years, the expert assessment of his strengths and weaknesses should be of considerable help to him in his choice of occupation.

In order to be able to continue his school­ing beyond the Intermediate Certificate level, the pupil will be dependent on either his own financial support or on financial aid from the State in the form of scholarships or grants. At this stage it is not yet known to what extent aid will be available to students of merit who have not the financial means of supporting their further education.

The issues involved in the proposed com­prehensive scheme could be broadly divided into two groups: issues concerning imple­mentation and those concerning education. According to the present Minister for Education. Mr. O'Malley, it is expected that this expansion of educational opportunity to the Intermediate Certificate level will cost the State in the region of two million pounds. As far as one can discover, that figure has been arrived at by multiplying the number of children to benefit by £25 and less. If that be the case, the Department of Education is failing to reckon the true cost of the implementation of this new scheme. Going comprehensive will involve a large increase in staff numbers. Apart from the need to expand the ordinary staff it will be necessary to employ trained people to teach the new subjects on the curriculum. In order to adequately and meaningfully assess pupils over the three-year period the Department will need to expand the num­bers employed in its psychological service. Documentation and filing on the develop­ment of a pupil will involve most schools with secretarial problems. As well as that, the introduction of wider curricula will mean an extension of facilities in most schools, apart from the need for such extension to cope with the probably increased number of entrants into post-primary education as from next September.

For the present, the brunt of the new changes rest with existing secondary and vocational schools. They are expected to co­operate in the sharing of facilities. Schools are fond of their autonomy and there is grave danger in this instance that individual schools, whether secondary or vocational, may be inclined to extend their own facilities to cater for the comprehensive programme, rather than share with a neighbouring school. If this were to happen it would in­volve duplication of facilities and be a waste of scarce money. Or if the nearest school, with which another can share facilities, is some way distant, there are bound to be transport or other problems involved in the movement of pupils from one centre to the other. Although the comprehensive idea is still in an early stage of development, these questions need to be discussed.

When we come to discuss the more edu­cational issues involved we have the Department's admission that the extension of post-primary education is due as much to social as to educational reasons. In so far as the former do not militate against the latter this aim is laudable enough. But in so far as, to quote from a statement by Dr. Hillery to the Press, when he was Minister for Educa­tion, "it is the duty of the State to strive for the opportunity of some post-primary educa­tion for all," the danger exists that educa­tional standards may have to be lowered in order to ensure expression of all ranges of ability. However, this danger may be avoided by the introduction of a grading system in assessing results in place of the existing honours-pass-fail method; any interested person scanning a pupil's achievement card in a comprehensive school will be able to distinguish between ;a pupil with straight A's and a pupil with an over-generous allowance of C's.

Another issue is the content of the core group of subjects. Even though the aim of the new system of education is to prepare better the student for the machine age, there seems to be a failure to take that very aim into consideration in the list of subjects in­cluded in the core group. A General Science course would seem to be of vital importance. It would defeat the comprehensive idea if the core group were enlarged, so that the alternative would be to drop one of the subjects already included. Mathematics would seem the least indispensible. and a General Science course ought to be included in its place. Mathematics is important in many higher areas of education, but the student who thinks he may need it at a later stage could take it as one of his options.

The failure to make History more than an optional subject is another case in point. The fact that we may never learn from His­tory is no guarantee of its unimportance. It is the subject that can best give perspective and cohesion to a whole education. For that reason it is sad to witness its present decline in secondary schools. One of the chief reasons for this decline seems to be the diffi­culty of getting high marks in it at an examination with its resultant liability as a scholarship subject. However, in the com­prehensive idea where the pupil gets not only the opportunity to develop fully his potentialities but also a broad general edu­cation without specialisation, it is a highly relevant subject. The fact that local history is included in the Social and Environmental studies course is not sufficient. Something more is needed. It might be possible to in­clude one hour a week on general history, a History-of-Western-Civilisation course trac­ing our cultural evolution from its be­ginnings to the present day. This could be done over the three-year period in a way meaningful to the age-groups involved. It would be compulsory for all those taking History as an optional subject.

For the present, the burden of implement­ing the comprehensive idea depends on the fusion of secondary and vocational levels of education. This is very well in theory but in practice it is conceivable that both systems will continue to perpetuate themselves; the vocational school could continue to provide essentially vocational subjects, with occasional gestures to the academic side of the picture, while the secondary school could make the necessary bow by taking mechanical drawing out of the basement and giving it a classroom of its own. If this were to happen, the students that begin in one of the systems, when they are better suited to the other kind, may never get the oppor­tunity to develop to their fullest potential. To prevent such an occurrence, care must be taken that the widest possible choice of subjects be available to the largest number of pupils as soon as possible.

The dependence of the comprehensive idea on a secondary-vocational fusion may have repercussions after the Intermediate Certificate examination. The tendency could well be for those pupils attending vocational schools who continue beyond this stage to take the Technical Schools' Leaving Certifi­cate. In so far as no higher facilities exist and in so far as universities continue to accept students from the academic stream only, such a pupil may well find himself in an educational cul-de-sac, or at most with a ticket to a technological college of inferior status to a university. The State has a duty to expand facilities for higher technological education and to upgrade colleges of tech­nology to university status. Otherwise, students who pursue such a course of studies will be relegated to second-class status when they proceed beyond the Technical Schools' Leaving Certificate.

Probably the greatest criticism that can be made of the comprehensive idea, as en­visaged by the Government, is its haphazard-ness. It is to be allowed to evolve out of the existing systems. The vested interests of the existing educational structure may prevent the comprehensive idea from being im­plemented. The danger exists that in the permitted laissez-faire schools will strive to become comprehensive in name by adding to their present curricula. There is the possi­bility of a great waste of money in this situation, especially in rural areas where there is an excess of small schools. Along ten miles of a road it is possible to find eight schools catering for smaller and larger num­bers of pupils. The tendency for each will be to go comprehensive alone. A more logical development would be the sharing of facilities initially and the eventual incor­poration of all into one. Admittedly, some sharing is already taking place, but how is this sharing going to lead to the fusion en­visaged? If the fusion is to be meaningful it must lead to the eventual amalgamation of schools in an area under one authority. What school will vote for its extinction? (It is only fair to mention here that the Govern­ment seems to have the problem under consideration. A recent decision on their part involves the closing of some secondary schools and permission for others to teach classes up to Intermediate Certificate only.)

This introduces the idea of the neighbour­hood school which ought to be the eventual aim of the Department of Education. The evolution of the school system to this end would have many advantages. It would in­troduce a definite goal to be achieved and give direction to existing developments. It would lead to a better use of resources be­cause, apart from preventing the duplication of facilities, especially scientific laboratories, it would enable the Department, by taking account of demographic projections in the area concerned, to invest accordingly. As things stand, it is conceivable that a school, or schools, may expand to suit present population needs only to find themselves in ten years time with empty classrooms.

But the neighbourhood school, catering for all pupils in a certain area, would have other advantages. It would make the school a part of the local community as much as the primary school is today. It would enable a meaningful parent-teacher organisation to get off the ground. This is one thing that is barely hinted at in the proposed comprehen­sive scheme, the role of the parents. In many other countries parents play an important part in the education of their children. The recent Plowden Report on Primary Educa­tion in England recommended, among other things, closer relations between schools and parents. In Ireland, parents seem to abdicate their responsibility when they send their children to school. If parents were available for consultation on a regular and formal basis, they could be of great help to teachers and psychologists in arriving at a correct assessment of a pupil. If the neighbourhood school, incorporating one parish, or more where numbers are small, were in existence, parents could get such an opportunity to express themselves and to contribute to their children's welfare.

One other point is relevant in this context. The neighbourhood school would be a day-school. According to present intentions, ex­pensive boarding schools will continue to exist, with the students paying their own fees. These fee-paying students are in danger of becoming the snobs of our educational system. (However, this development might be avoided if the State were to endow lavishly the schools it takes under its wing. Because there is very little financial patron­age of schools in this country by Old Boys or Old Girls, the fee-charging school might find it difficult to finance expensive expan­sion.) The neighbourhood school, if properly developed, could become the pride of the community. Parents, who ordinarily might be inclined to send their children to expen­sive boarding schools, might come to accept as a substitute for their snobbish inclinations, the fact of their children playing an impor­tant role in the curricular and extra­curricular activities of their neighbourhood school. This would be even more probable if parents were allowed a meaningful role in parent-teacher organisations. There are other possibilities in Boards of Governors and Scholarship Committees, etc.

The Department of Education claims that the comprehensive idea is more than the mere expansion of a curriculum and involves more than the teaching of a wide range of subjects. It is a new dimension in Irish Education. As such it is to be welcomed by all those who regard the present educational set-up as inadequate to present day needs. But the comprehensive idea is by no means a clearly thought-out system; it is still very much in the crawling stage and, before it can walk, it will demand the nurture of much discussion. It is to be hoped that all those, with a genuine interest in education, will contribute to that discussion.

Share