THE LATE REV. C. W. H. DICKER, R.D. 43 



correspondence that ensued Mr. Dicker acknowledged that 

 he had not himself visited the church, and had been mis- 

 informed ; but that he would shortly pay me a visit and 

 inspect the church himself.* 



Time went on, one thing and another delayed Mr. Dicker's 

 kind intention, until in the afternoon of Thursday, August 

 22nd last, he paid me his long-promised visit (in company 

 with the Rev. A. L. Helps, Vicar of Puddletown). I was 

 unable to accompany him to my church, but he made a close 

 and thorough inspection of it under the guidance of one of 

 my sons. He had no time to give me a report on it at the 

 moment ; but on the following morning {Friday, August 23rd) 

 wrote to me the result of his examination of several points of 

 interest, including the Norman doorway. Saturday and 

 Sunday, August 24th and 25th, intervened ; and then early 

 on Monday, August 26th, the sudden and lamentable 

 catastrophe occurred in which we have to mourn his 

 irreparable loss. 



I feel sure that no one of us will under the circumstances 

 object to enter into a little detail of what thus occupied 

 Mr. Dicker's last scientific consideration. I therefore make 

 no apology for quoting, almost verbatim, his letter to me, 

 dated August 23rd, 1912. " Dear Mr. Pickard-Cambridge,— 

 " I was much interested in your church, and am very glad to 

 " have seen it. The porch is particularly a good bit of 

 " Jacobean building ; the architect has adopted a nice 14th 

 " Century moulding in the outer arch — probably a copy of 

 " work in the older building. I am not sure that the lower 

 " stones of the jambs are not part of the original. The 

 " doorway is much more like a Norman Chancel Arch than a 



* Mr. Dicker appears to have been unaware that the Field Ckib paid 

 me a visit on Avig. 19th, 1886, when I pointed out that " the only 

 remaining portion of an original Norman Church was the Doorway." 

 See report of F. Club Proc, Vol. VII., p xxiv., 1886 ; also that in a 

 paper on Bloxworth Church read at the meeting above mentioned and 

 published Vol. VII., p. 99, this doorway is again remarked upon. 



