[wsmorrison]

From the January 1913 American Golfer

"THE POWER BEHIND THE THRONE

It is remarked upon in some quarters as passing strange that with hundreds of thousands of golfers in this country the same man should be chosen, the same year, on the nominating committees of both the United States and metropolitan associations and that in each case he should be designated as chairman.  By looking back fifteen years it will be seen too, that Charles B. Macdonald has been on more nominating boards that any other three men taken together and he has secured the chairmanship with surprising frequency.  Naturally Mr. Macdonald sees to it that many of his intimate friends are named for places….It appears more than probable that a protest will soon be heard from Chicago about one man power in American golf.  After the line of Western cleavage that developed a few years ago, provision was made for the nomination of a competitive ticket, but as more or less red tape is involved, nomination remains almost as good as an election.  Macdonald is the American advisory member of the St. Andrews committee on rules---an honorary appointment.  A year or two ago the rules chairman remarked that Macdonald seemed to have great influence on the game in this country.  Surely the way he dominates the nominating committee would tend to bear out that estimate."

Herbert Henshaw in Brooklyn Life


Courtesy of the Creek Geek

[Peter Pallotta]

Wayne
I was doing some searches through the NY Times archives recently, just for my own interest. It was striking how many times Macdonald is mentioned in golf-related articles between 1910-1930, e.g. as a designer, as 1895 champion, on golf club technology and agronomy, referenced by people like Emmett as a leading authority, as organizational man etc. (Also striking was how often Merion comes up - many times as the host of ladies championships, but of couse around all sorts of other events/issues). I found it interesting because I can't imagine the NY Times was a leading or even important voice re: golf in those days.

Peter

[john_stiles]

Wayne,

As I mentioned in earlier posts,  there was a GCA article in the March 20, 1910 Philadelphia Inquirer, reprinted from the NY Herald.  

The article noted that CBM had proclaimed the British ideas are far better than those in this country.  The article discussed some of the ideas or templates of the great British holes and mentioned the Sahara, Alps, Punchbowl, Leven, etc.

The article was definitely slanted towards 'CBM',  that he  had this revelation,  that he knew the way to build an ideal golf course in America, and that he had made "minute examination of English holes and hazards wanted in the U.S."

It was published in Philadelphia and New York newspapers so it would have been widely read, as opposed to say a somewhat limited printing of golfing magazines.

He couldn't have written a better article himself.

[TEPaul]

Wayne:

I think that article shows, once again, what I've been suggesting for some time now which is Macdonald was actually far more influential at that time in other areas of golf than just golf architecture. Today, I think, we tend to view him so much more in the context of just American architecture than he really may've been at that time. In other words, the impact of his reputation in golf at that time obviously came from other areas of golf, and not just from golf course architecture.

The key is to begin to look at what his positions were at that time on the other areas of golf he was so prominently involved in as that article clearly shows.

The rift with the Western Golf Association which at that time was viewed as something that might destroy unified golf administration in America is a great example. The Western Golf Association was threatening to split from the USGA and create their own Rules of Golf. And this from an organization based in Chicago, Macdonald's former home town.

Why would they rift with Macdonald's thinking? Well, one reason was in a golf organizational sense he was perhaps the world's biggest "elitist".

[wsmorrison]

John,

If you have the 1910 article, could you please post it?  That would be an interesting story to read.

Tom,

His place in golf has to be seen beyond architecture.  In fact, it is probably fair to say that his impact in golf architecture was subordinate to his other efforts in golf.

[ANTHONYPIOPPI]

Wayne,

That article also seems to dispel the idea of Macdonald as some foul-mouthed, overbearing tyrant. If was a member of so many influential boards then it seems obvious he was very-well liked.

Anthony

[wsmorrison]

Anthony,

I'm not so sure about that.  According to the editorial, he did populate the committees with his close friends.  I wasn't sure he had very many.  I wasn't aware of claims of foul language, but certainly a hot temper.

Letters that Tom and I obtained from the USGA Green Section archives do indicate that he was difficult, even to men he knew for a long time and who were of help to him.

Club records, even where he started out as the driving force and chief executive show where he got into confrontations and clashes.  It wasn't mentioned if these clashes were foul-mouthed or not.  But the truth seems evident that he had trouble getting along with people he was associated with.

I need to know more, but I think he was more of a one-man show and wanted everything done his way, for to him that must have been the only way.

[Peter Pallotta]

Wayne,

In an NY Times article the same year, on the eve of the annual USGA meeting, the issue of the “Nominating Committee” is front and centre. Then-USGA President Leighton Calkins is quoted extensively, and it’s interesting how Macdonald (and "American Golfer") get special mention:

“It follows that nothing could be more misleading than the charge that a clique holds the control. If any clique controls, it is only because the clubs acquiesce. Even the American Golfer in the January issue makes a funny mistake in stating that the Nominating Committee selects its successors and that they should be elected by the delegates at the annual meeting. Nothing could be more inaccurate. It is probably true as alleged that C.B. Macdonald has served on the Nominating Committee so often as to have become a kind of ex-officio member of it; but to the extent that he has served since 1909 he has served only with the acquiescence of the club delegates, because in no other way could he hold down the job.”

Peter

[wsmorrison]

I don't claim to know the truth of the matter, I think it is interesting that the dynamic was in play and that Macdonald was seen by some as a very powerful man in golf, probably the most powerful in American golf.  If so, and it sure seems like it, that would be a fascinating subject to delve into.

In the interest of disclosure, was Leighton Calkins in Macdonald's inner circle?  Henshaw may have had a bug up his arse when it came to Macdonald (though if it were merely personal would AG print it?) but perhaps Calkins was biased as well.  I'm not accusing him of it at all.  In any case, we should, as you indicate, not take the American Golfer editorial necessarily at face value.  

[TEPaul]

"That article also seems to dispel the idea of Macdonald as some foul-mouthed, overbearing tyrant. If was a member of so many influential boards then it seems obvious he was very-well liked."

Anthony:

I doubt I'd go that far. Macdonald may've been one of those characters who actually disspelled the cliche "To know him is to love him."

[Peter Pallotta]

I drew a different conclusion, Wayne i.e. something along the lines of "with friends like Calkins, Macdonald didn't need any enemies". But all just early guess work on my part

Peter

[David Stamm]

Here are some observations I have of C.B. since I've read about him over the past few years.

1. When the first National Championship was held at Newport in 1894(?), C.B. was the clear favorte, but he didn't win. He said afterwards that the National Championship was invalid because no National Championship could be determined by stroke play, match play was the true gauge in his opinion.

2. St. Andrews Golf Club in New York conducted a National Championship (Match play this time) at their club. Again, C.B. did not win. He said afterwards that he had not lost the National Championship because there wasn't one. He added that no one club could assume to conduct the nation's championship.



Because of these events, it became evident that a central organization was needed to conduct the championships and govern the game. Hence, the USGA was born. I find it interesting that although Macdonald was exteremely influential and strong willed, he was not elected to become the first president. That title was of course bestowed upon Theodore Havermeyer by election. I guess others realized what might have happened had that title been given to C.B.

[TEPaul]

DavidS:

Of course that most certainly is the question---why was Macdonald never the president of the USGA? In my opinion, and if you read his own book very carefully I don't think it's hard to tell that some of his ideas may not have been in tune with what those of the members of the early USGA were.

Also, after Macdonald lost the first two US Amateur championships and declared them null and void for the reasons you outlined above, I guess we can all be thankful that he won the third one after he insisted the USGA had to be formed to conduct it. If he hadn't won that third one he probably would have declared the USGA itself null and void and we in America might have been left with no ruling  amateur golf organization in this country!  

[TEPaul]

Actually DavidS, we're probably lucky Macdonald didn't win the first or second one either or our national championship would either still be at stroke play or St Andrews of New York would probably still run all amateur golf in America.  

[Jim Thompson]

Given such a definitive reference to the development of "the line of Western cleavage", I am shocked Huckaby isn't linking CB's greatness to the establishment and founding of the Song Girls.

Cheers!

JT

[Adam Clayman]

That 1913 editorial posted sure has some similarities to many posts on this board. The human nature to shoot down those "in-charge" seems quite at play in that editorial.

In hindsight, CB's insistance that his version of golf was superior has merit. It's somewhat obvious that the American improvements to the game, were in hindsight NOT improvements. I'll use Match Play as the prime example. If MP were dominate in America today, would we have the serious issue of slow play?

 Throw in the irony that many in GB&I thought the Americans version of Golf course architecture was better and you end up paying the Ryder Cup on an American style course in Ireland.  

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Adam,
You bring up a lot of good points there.

Further, IMO, I think that C.B. saw a lot of what was going on with Golf in America to the point that a person of his....largesse.....utilized that largesse to try to right the ship so to speak. The man learned the Sport in St. Andrews, more or less under the eyes or somewhat in the presence of Old Tom Morris, I think he saw a need to exert some control over the situation at hand.

Ultimately I think that's what was the saving grace for Golf, people like C.B. MacDonald, who put themselves out there, made sure rules were followed and how they were upheld. It carried over to the courses too.

I think he did in fact bully people around and of course they didn't like it. It's like that image of C.B. MAcDonald speaking to a gathering of people holding his finger up and pointing to the sky, wasn't him pointing it at a higher power, he was pontificating. You can see it all there in that image.

That image was C.B. MacDonald.

[TEPaul]

What that article from 1913 is really about is the near crisis created by the threatened split of the Western Golf Association from the USGA, particularly regarding the Rules of Golf. The Western Golf Association did not want any part of the USGA, its Rules of Golf or its administration and one of the reason was that Macdonald did not believe in equal representation of most clubs in America including those of the Western Association. He believed only a very few clubs should be permanent "Members" and most of the rest of the clubs in America should be "Associates" without full representation or equal voting power.

Macdonald believed that because he was a classic "elitist". That may not have meant he was something like what we call as "snob" today (although it might have meant that ) just that he felt that only a few people (clubs) had the ability and understanding to know what was good for golf and the ability to make those kinds of decisions.

In this way, Macdonald basically ran afoul of the USGA itself at least in the beginning of this issue. The USGA whether to simply prevent a total split with the Western Golf Association or because they were more democratic than Macdonald, or both, basically chose to become more "inclusive" than Macdonald initially thought prudent.

Macdonald also had a theory that the barometer of success of an administrative national golf association was the less they had to do and the fewer questions they were asked and had to answer was a sign of their success and effectiveness. Obviously this was something he got from the way things once were at St Andrews in the old days.

[Bill_McBride]

One of my favorite examples of how dominating CBM was of early golf in America, how he was able to use his fortune to steer golf in the direction he wanted it to go, is the routing of Chicago Golf Club!  He designed and built it and by God, he could therefore build it to personally benefit his left-to-right tee shot shape.  The course is routed completely clockwise around the perimeter of the acreage, so there was little chance of his ever hitting a tee shot out of bounds!

His long-hitting, draw playing opponents on the other hand...

Talk about personal dominance....

[Guy Phelan]

One of my favorite examples of how dominating CBM was of early golf in America, how he was able to use his fortune to steer golf in the direction he wanted it to go, is the routing of Chicago Golf Club!  He designed and built it and by God, he could therefore build it to personally benefit his left-to-right tee shot shape.  The course is routed completely clockwise around the perimeter of the acreage, so there was little chance of his ever hitting a tee shot out of bounds!

His long-hitting, draw playing opponents on the other hand...

Talk about personal dominance....

Bill,

You are so right! CB is on the top of my list of people I would love to have a cocktail and conversation! What a professional at obtaining exactly what he wants, at all times!

Guy

[wsmorrison]

He didn't always get what he wanted.  His track record for leaving clubs is evidence of that.

He did steal the chef and I believe the flag from Shinnecock though!

[TEPaul]

I think the thing about Macdonald that seems not well enough know is his relationship with others in other areas of golf at that early time (just after the turn of the century and on into the 1920s).

We see him as this dominant figure in architecture, and he probably was considered that for a time.

But it's his relationship within the USGA (and R&A) that interests me most and his relationship with some of the people of that time such as those who started Piping Rock, Lido and particularly The Creek. A few of those men were one and the same, even a few having to do with the USGA. One needs to not just look at Macdonald in a vacuum in those times but to look at those other men too.

If you think he dominated them and got his way, I believe you'd be wrong. The reasons why he may not have been able to dominate them is definitely of historic interest in a number of ways. And in the fact that he may not have been able to be more influential in some of those avenues and what that meant to him, how that may've influenced his attitude generally, and not in a positive way for him, is of real interest, I think.

It seems even in architecture, as time went on, the dominant role he may've originally had or wanted to have began to wan. The fact is that a number of other prominent architects were going in other directions from Macdonald's model in the type and style of architecture they were producing and evolving. Some such as Tillinghast even seemed to get vocal about it which I never previously realized.

The thing I think I notice about Macdonald through that era is that not getting his way obviously frustrated him and perhaps actively depressed him but that he was the type of dominant and powerful man who was remarkably intuitive about sensing when he'd met his match.

That kind of thing alone is historically very interesting, in my opinion.

When one runs into problems and fails to get his way there is a cliche that one sometimes may use. It is;

"I can't fight City Hall."

I believe in some areas of golf Macdonald realized that a whole lot earlier than some of us realize. And I think it took a toll on him that some of realize less.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()