Grammar Gazette- Issue 2, 2010

B R I S B A N E G I R L S G R A M M A R S C H O O L

of long-standing friends and correspondents, a number of whom were past students, and is remembered as being a gracious and generous hostess. She was not ‘stuffy’, enjoyed a drink, arranged bridge parties and was interested in racing. The girls’ nickname for her was ‘Blos’ — for Tigerlily — perhaps an ironic reflection on the erratic ‘Lilley’ temper which she shared with her brother, Charles. She was quite capable of the most fearsome public tantrums especially in assemblies, during which her normally well-modulated voice was raised to a shrieking crescendo, of ‘ranting and roaring’. What was not always so apparent to her pupils, but revealed by one of her staff, was that she had quite a sense of humour — even about her own spectacular temper — something which assisted her to maintain a balance through the extraordinary demands of her professional life. The original terms of appointment meant that Miss Lilley lived in the Boarding House for most of her appointment in an upstairs sitting room and bedroom overlooking the Terrace. This situation virtually meant she was on duty twenty-four hours a day. Moreover in the early years of her appointment she first taught twenty-four, and later twenty lessons a week in English and French within a thirty-five lessons per week programme, and fitted in administrative matters around these responsibilities. It was not until the forties that she acquired a part-time secretary, solely for her own use. Virtually no money was spent on professional development for the Head. Contemporary male colleagues were better paid (at that time the Headmaster of Brisbane Grammar School received a salary of £800) and were better housed. Of course, her situation was in no way novel, but reflected the heavy demands, even hardships, which many professional women faced in their day-to-day lives. ‘Making-do’ was, perforce, the credo which guided most activities; Kathleen Lilley would have realised right from the beginning of her appointment how straitened her means were. In July of her first year, new canvas was required for the verandahs and new linoleum for the dormitories. The Trustees Minutes contain the following: At present money not available but fresh money will be coming in ... Finance Committee will prepare a rough budget for ensuing half year and if money is likely to be available this should be one of the first matters for attention. Indeed the money was forthcoming in August, but this air of financial uncertainty and of limited means permeates all the years that Kathleen Lilley ran the School. When roofs or floors needed replacing they were often patched or mended; guttering, plumbing and painting were attended to when items fell into disrepair rather than being dealt with as part of regular maintenance. Despite recorded over-crowding in the late 1920s and post World War II, the only major construction during the Lilley administration was a new laboratory built in

1933 which was opened by the Governor of Queensland, Sir Leslie Wilson in August.

Across the Lilley era the various Boards of Trustees held to balanced budgets and displayed a frugal attitude to staffing and salaries. This fiscal conservatism was largely a consequence of operating within the constraints of the Grammar School legislation and regulations. While many advantages flowed from being a Grammar school: tradition, academic reputation, a lower fee-structure which theoretically encouraged able children from all social classes, non-sectarianism, government subsidies and endowments, and assistance (from time-to-time) from the Department of Public Works with buildings and maintenance, there were also considerable disadvantages. Endowments and subsidies were always meted out sparingly, permitting only the absolute necessities of educational existence. Another budgetary and planning vulnerability which existed when Kathleen Lilley took charge was the actual method for the granting of scholarships upon which the School depended for a major source of revenue. These scholarships were awarded for two and a half years, with the major entry being in July with an annual ‘exodus’ in December. Naturally, this created great difficulties in both accommodation and staffing for the second half of every year. While this time-frame was fortunately abandoned in favour of a two year system with the onset of the Depression, dependence on the scholarship system meant that ‘... the Grammar schools found their enrolments fluctuated according to the economic prosperity of the state and to the variations made by the state in the matter of scholarships’ (Goodman, 1968, p. 284). It must also be acknowledged that the Board and the Headmistress were extremely reluctant to raise fees as there was genuine support for the original purpose of the founders of the Grammar schools that any able child should have the advantages of a broad, liberal education. Miss Lilley valued a social mix in her school and she strove against the introduction of any activity (such as the beginning of a tuckshop) which would reveal or emphasise financial differences amongst the pupils. The Board

1 9