Thy tongue deviseth mischiefs; like a sharp rasor, working deceitfully

Having achieved an excellent result, Colonel Drew lost no time in passing on the good news to higher authority, Mr Bodington the Archdeacon, with a request for instructions to deal with the transfer of ownership, surely a straightforward matter? It is here that the Devil starts his mischief. On the 17 January 1929 Mr Bodington wrote to Colonel Drew :

17 Jan 1929 20 The Close Salisbury Dear Colonel Drew, I am so delighted to hear we have secured that site. It is thanks to you and Captain Ewart. And very good of Lord Wimborne. It is excellent news. I should suggest that the property should be conveyed to the Board of Finance of the Diocese. If you approve of this perhaps you would kindly write to Canon Dale, The Secretary, at the Church House Salisbury. The Bishop's legal Sec. J W Bigg approves of this. Thank you both very much for all you have done. I hope we may meet before very long. do come & see us when in Salisbury - I am so very much in Dorset of course, but here for January. Yours very Truly E J Bodington

And so it is that we now encounter that fearsome devil - the correct administrative procedure. Usually only known to the inner circle and rarely communicated to the outside world. On the 22 January 1929 a letter was written to the Diocesan Board of Finance reiterating what has passed and ending
"The Archdeacon of Dorset suggests that the land should be transferred to the Board of Finance.
Perhaps you will be so good as to let me know if the Board approves of this and I will tell Mr Meaby."
and on the 23 January the Diocesan Board of Finance replied :

	In reply to your letter of the 22nd inst. I am advised by Mr W.E.Bigg the Lord Bishop's legal adviser that in the case of sites for new Churches the proper Authority to accept the trust is the Ecclesiastical Commission. May I suggest , therefore, that you should write to the Secretary, Ecclesiastical Commission, 1 Millbank London S.W. 1 asking the Commissioners to undertake the trust.
so doing as he has been told Colonel Drew writes to the Eclesiastical Commission reiterating what has passed and ending : "it is understood that in such a case the land should be conveyed to the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, and if this is so you will doubtless wish to communicate with Lord Wimbornes Agent :- T J Meaby Esq Canford Estate Office" and to Mr Meaby on the 30 January 1929 : "I have at last ascertained that the land should be conveyed to the Ecclesiastical Commissioners & I have written to the Secretary suggesting that he should get into touch with you"
	I have to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 30th January. with reference to the land which Lord Wimborne proposes to give as a site for a new Church in the Parish of West Parley, and I write to enquire whether it is intended that the Church should be erected shortly. If not, I would suggest that the site should, in the first place, be conveyed to the Salisbury Diocesan Trustees, a clause being inserted in the deed empowering the Trustees to convey the whole or part of the land to the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, under the Church Building Acts, as and when required as the site for a permanent Church

Poor Colonel Drew, yet another frustrating dead end, how many more must he have wondered? Yes, today it could have all been sorted out over the telephone in an hour, but just look at the dates - on the 17 January the opening letter to the Archdeacon and the one above is the 6 February - just 19 days later and that includes weekends! In those days mail was the medium of communication and was dealt with promptly. You may even have had a second post delivery to your door!
Another feature of the day was that letters got acknowledged. Therefore on the 9 February Colonel Drew wrote to the Ecclesiastical Commissioners acknowledging their letter and advising he was doing as they suggested. On the same day he also wrote to Mr Meaby advising him that he would know be hearing from the Salisbury Diocesan Trustees (also commenting "It is odd that the Lord Bishops legal advisor should not have known this in the first place") and finally a letter to the Salisbury Diocesan Trustees once again reiterating all that has happened and asking them to draw up the conveyance as suggested by the Commissioners and to contact Mr Meaby.

Colonel Drew must have hoped, as he posted those letters that this would be the end of the hassle, Oh! Dear!

yet more delay. For how much longer is this going on? See on page 4

Go to Page 4

Go to Page 2

Go to : 1 : 5 : 6 : 7 : 8 :

Footnote : For those of you who have only experienced the age of email please look at the letter from the Ecclesiastical Commission dated 6 February. In the top right hand corner you will see the words "Telegraphic Address". The fastest means of written communication was the telegram. Messages were exchanged in abbreviated format as they were charged by the word. On this basis the recipients address could account for a sizeable charge. To avoid this anyone, individuals and businesses could, for an annual fee, register a "Telegraphic Address" which could be anything but was usually indicative of the business name, in this case it is Energetic-Parl-London, which being hyphenated counted as one word. How this suggests it belongs to the Ecclesiastical Commissioners defies logic. The Post Office (as it was the Post Office that was responsible for the Telegraphic Service) would have the full address on the register and would place this address on the envelope containing the telegram. Telegrams at this time would most likely have been transmitted by telex but perhaps still in morse code. They were delivered to the addressee by Telegram Boys riding a bicyle The service has of course now been obsolete for many years.

© St Marks West Parley