David Moriarty's excellent The Missing Faces of Merion is now posted under IMO

[DMoriarty]

The facts as we know them indicate that H Wilson's study trip abroad occurred in 1912.  Yet TEPaul, Wayne Morrison, and  others have him traveling to Europe  in early 1910 to study golf holes for a golf course that had not yet even been purchased.

So why do they keep messing with people?   Surely getting to the truth has nothing to do with that.   If the facts don't satisfy them on this issue where the evidence is ample, then how on earth are we to rely on them to tell us anything truthful and accurate about less well defined issues?   

They had their answer to all of this BEFORE Wayne pulled the documents from MCC.   All they are doing now is conforming the documents to their preconceived theories.

[DMoriarty]

Your post #732 is just another good reason why we here (certainly Wayne and me and Merion) are not willing to collaborate with you on a new essay on the creation of Merion in the years 1909-1912.

To suggest such a thing as I did to you and Tom MacWood (on an email with others included) was a really bad idea on my part.

1.  Your offer was duplicitous and rhetorical, made only so you could pretend that you tried to cooperate.  Like you are pretending now.

2. You withdrew the offer to me before I had even read it!

3.  When MacWood inquired about your plan, you idea of COOPERATION boiled down to:
    a.  MacWood and I should turn over all our research and analysis.
    b.  MacWood and I would have no further involvement in the process.
    c.   You and Wayne would not be sharing anything. 

4.  I have been COOPERATING fully throughout, even by your skewed definition.  Among other things . .

-- I have provided Wayne with Merion documents he did not have, even though they were within easy reach. 
-- I have provided Wayne with old clippings to shed light on the real estate issues an others.
-- I have provided you and Wayne and everyone else with Atlases and their location.
-- I even accurately interpreted some of the property issues, including a deed that you guys have been misreading for at least a year (and you still are.) 
 
6.   It is you guys who have been playing games with MCC and MGC's historical record, not me .   

Obviously the documents  must contain information that is susceptible to an intepretation that you guys do not like.  So you repress the source information and are trying to sell us a fiction rather than the facts.  Same thing  you guys have done again and again.   I don't think there is a Philadelphia Conspiracy, but I KNOW that you two have been duplicitous in the past with the sources, and you are still being duplicitous with the sources. 

If you want the truth, there is an easy solution.  But you guys don't want the truth.  Otherwise, why hide the ball?   


TEPaul:

You repeatedly refer to the contents of the documents, and tell us what they mean.   But you refuse to let us see them or check up on you.  Surely you don't think we ought to just trust you to tell us the whole truth do you?   What about Wayne's professed devotion to the critical review process?

[JC Jones]

"The amount I have learned about a place I have only (and likely, will only) see on TV and in pictures, is priceless and the stories are, to me, as interesting as the Jefferson wine bottles."

JC:

Do you think C.B. Macdonald designed those interesting Jefferson wine bottles too? If so, you better tell that serious West Coast researcher, D. Moriarty, about that. Maybe he can put that into his PART THREE about Macdonald and Wilson and Merion East!

I dont have any evidence that says he didnt design them so I suppose there is a chance that he did

[JC Jones]

JC/TEP

Weren't at least some of those "Jefferson" wine bottles proved to be counterfiet?

RFG

All, if Im not mistaken.

[JC Jones]

"I want to preface this question by saying that I dont mean it in any accusatory manner, it is merely a question.  For the year-ish I've been a member here I've held the opinions of you and Wayne in high regard so I am not questioning your intent here merely asking what it is.

You express above that DM's interest has always been to show that CBM should get some credit.

What is your interest?"


JC:

No problem at all--none. It's a good question. Wayne and my only interest in all this is to show as clearly as we possibly can who-all was involved in the routing and design and construction of Merion East, how and when in as much detail as this source material provides, period, end of story.

Of course David Moriarty will tell us that we are out to get him or some other such lunacy but that is not the case at all.

These recently discovered meeting minutes from the old MCC club and some supporting letters show in more detail than those Wilson reports and the Tolhurst Merion history books who-all was involved, how and when. And that includes Wilson and his commitee and Macdonald and Whigam. Unfortunately, or fortunately in the timeframe when the actually routing, design and construction processes went on (1911) there is not a single mention we've been able to find about H.H. Barker's contribution. That was mentioned back in the middle of 1910 as a plan an independent real estate developer supplied MCC with but it appears it was never considered after that.

Fascinating.  I cant wait to read your essay (assuming you are preparing one).

[TEPaul]

"TEPaul:
You repeatedly refer to the contents of the documents, and tell us what they mean.   But you refuse to let us see them or check up on you.  Surely you don't think we ought to just trust you to tell us the whole truth do you?   What about Wayne's professed devotion to the critical review process?"


David Moriarty:

Oh God no, I'd never expect you to trust what I tell you, or what anyone else here in Philadelphia tells you, for that matter. I think you've proved over the years you'd never do that. You don't even trust a man like Richard Francis to tell the truth, basically just sloughing off what he said as hyperbole or whatever to suit your premise timelines and conclusion. You don't even seem to trust what Alan Wilson said (although apparently you still aren't even aware of what-all he did say), so of course I'd never expect you to trust anything I tell you or we tell you.

But we've already been over this with you a bunch of times! How short a memory do you have anyway? Before we start to quote or transcribe the actual wording of MCC meeting minutes an essay has to be written and we need to get permission from the clubs to use it on here or anywhere. We've told you that a number or times so how many times and in how many ways are you going to keep asking us that? When it's all put together and written and permission is gotten you'll get it at the same time and in the same way everyone else does. Is there any particular reason you think it should be any different with you than anyone else who's interested?

[TEPaul]

"TEPaul,   Your duplicitous nature shines through even in your answer to Andy's simple question.   As usual, you misrepresent my essay.   Also you continue to twist the facts to try and lead readers down a path that you KNOW has no validity."

David Moriarty:

My duplicitous nature?? I see! And this from the joker who was always harping about civility on here?

 "H.G. Lloyd was on the site Committee as well as the later Construction Committee.  Yet you repeatedly use his  early involvement -- before the site was even purchased -- to support your claim that Hugh Wilson may have been involved."

I've never said a thing about Lloyd's roll on the Search Committee to support any questions or opinions I may have of how early Hugh Wilson was involved with the golf course. It's interesting how you seem to create interpretations of things that have never been said. Horatio Gates Lloyd being involved earlier, if indeed he was beginning to get involved earlier than say 1910, I think has to do with his seemingly hugely important and ongoing roll as basically a financial "angel" and facilitator for MCC with the move to Ardmore and very much including his roll in HDC and its real estate development component to the west of Merion East which we can now see was closely and intimately connected to the move of MCC's course to Ardmore.

"As for Francis, there is evidence that he was involved earlier, most likely because his engineering skills were needed in figuring out if the holes would fit.   There is no evidence that Hugh Wilson was involved earlier, and I can think of no reason they would have needed maritime(?) insurance."

There is no evidence at all that Francis was involved in 1910. You just conveniently made that up because you had to fit his late night landswap/Quarryman story (which naturally you couldn't just ignore ) into your 1910 Macdonald timeline theory. That's not evidence, it's just speculation on your part. It's interesting how you've continuously tried to turn your own speculations into actual evidence in this essay.

I don't know, David Moriarty, you must think people are really dumb or really gullible. As you can see there are a whole lot on here who are neither!

[Andy Hughes]

...so early in 1911 the Club appointed a committee

Hugh I. Wilson wrote that he became involved in the project in early 1911

David, Wilson's quote above does not necessarily mean he was not involved before the Committee was formed, does it?  You may well be right, but those quotes would not seem to be absolute.

Tom, can you at this point discuss whether the documentation and club minutes etc that Wayne and you have can shed any light on when Wilson became involved?

[Andy Hughes]

David, why do you believe that with so many wealthy, high-powered members desiring a top golf course they went with someone who by his own admission didn't know much about the task? It seems such an oddity to me.

[JC Jones]

David, why do you believe that with so many wealthy, high-powered members desiring a top golf course they went with someone who by his own admission didn't know much about the task? It seems such an oddity to me.

Unless, of course, he was merely being charged with the task of building what CBM had designed. 

[Andy Hughes]

Unless, of course, he was merely being charged with the task of building what CBM had designed. 

Actually, I think that would make even less sense to me as his trump card that folks here plunk down in his defense seems to be that as a good player he had at least seen all the good courses here and might have picked up some design principles.

[JC Jones]

Unless, of course, he was merely being charged with the task of building what CBM had designed. 

Actually, I think that would make even less sense to me as his trump card that folks here plunk down in his defense seems to be that as a good player he had at least seen all the good courses here and might have picked up some design principles.

Yes, but if NGLA didnt open until 1911 (like Tom Paul just said on another thread) and Wilson didnt go to GB&I until 1912, who would have designed the replica Alps, Eden and Redan holes?

[Andy Hughes]

Yes, but if NGLA didnt open until 1911 (like Tom Paul just said on another thread) and Wilson didnt go to GB&I until 1912, who would have designed the replica Alps, Eden and Redan holes?

JC, I don't know?

But I don't mind telling you that on Mondays TEP tends to hit the flask a little too often so don't take everything he says literally.  He's much better on Tuesdays.

[TEPaul]

"The facts as we know them indicate that H Wilson's study trip abroad occurred in 1912.  Yet TEPaul, Wayne Morrison, and  others have him traveling to Europe  in early 1910 to study golf holes for a golf course that had not yet even been purchased.

So why do they keep messing with people?   Surely getting to the truth has nothing to do with that.   If the facts don't satisfy them on this issue where the evidence is ample, then how on earth are we to rely on them to tell us anything truthful and accurate about less well defined issues?"

David Moriarty:

I just can't imagine what in the world is going on with you to keep saying something like that at this point. Do you even bother to really read what we've said about a trip or trips on these threads?? Apparently not and because you don't seem to read our posts you just repeat the same litany we've explained to everyone on here a long time ago. We have explained how and what we feel about the lack of importance of a trip or trips many times. We're not defending Tolhurst's history books, we're merely trying to explain who designed and created Merion East.

But I will go over it one more time and maybe you will get it this time!

The trip or trips Wilson took even if it was one (or actually even none) and even if there only was one in 1912 JUST DOESN'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH WHAT WE BELIEVE happened as to who routed and designed that course, how and when. These MCC meeting minutes make that abundantly clear. 

We have no idea why Tolhurst's history books claimed Hugh Wilson went abroad in 1910 and for seven months and either do you. As far as we can tell at this point no one knows why Tolhurst interpreted it that way. We have wondered about that interpretation for years now but the point is it doesn't change who routed and designed and built that golf course, and that is what we are after on these Macdonald/Merion threads.

But it still seems to us that Tolhurst may've been looking at something when he wrote that the way he did, and so we will continue to search for something that may explain it. But we've certainly been aware before you and MacWood came along that if Tolhurst only made that interpretation from Alan Wilson's report he probably made a mistake and a misinterpretation. Alan Wilson did not exactly write that Hugh Wilson went abroad in 1910, all he said was; "The land for the East Course was FOUND in 1910 and as a first step, Mr Wilson was sent abroad to study the more famous links in Scotland and England."

All I can think of to explain why Alan Wilson wrote it that way if Hugh Wilson did not go until 1912 is maybe since he wrote his report about fourteen years after the fact perhaps he just wasn't as completely fixated on what we call the first phase of this golf course (1911) as you've apparently become!

But do me a favor, would you please, and that is stop bringing this up about Hugh Wilson's trip because despite what Tolhurst said it actually has nothing to do with who routed and designed Merion East and these minutes prove that.

[Mike_Cirba]

Why put Wilson on the committee at all, much less at its head if he knew so little. Particularly with Fred Pickering onsite...a man who had built quite a few highly regarded courses at the time.?

[TEPaul]

"Tom, can you at this point discuss whether the documentation and club minutes etc that Wayne and you have can shed any light on when Wilson became involved?"

Andy:

Not really. The club minutes and supporting letters from 1910 and such don't say anything about that which leads us to believe that the planning of the course began in the winter of 1911 which the minutes confirm. In 1910 most of the discussion in MCC meeting minutes was about the purchase of the land, the roll of Lloyd and this really complex financial structure that this seemingly important new person in the mix we had not been aware of before, T. DeWitt Cuylers, a member, a lawyer and seemingly one of the most important and powerful railroad men in the country was suggesting with Lloyd's help to the president of the club.

[TEPaul]

"David, why do you believe that with so many wealthy, high-powered members desiring a top golf course they went with someone who by his own admission didn't know much about the task? It seems such an oddity to me."

Andy:

I believe I have a good and really simple answer for that but David Moriarty has gotten so weird with us here, I'd be happy to tell you what my opinion is on that but only if you address the question to me!

"JC, I don't know?
But I don't mind telling you that on Mondays TEP tends to hit the flask a little too often so don't take everything he says literally.  He's much better on Tuesdays."

Andy:

Is that right? I didn't realize that. Well, I guess I better start getting on it!  I guess I better hit those amateur reinstatement applications again and tell some hotshot kid who couldn't make it out there on the pro tours that I'll recommend the USGA cut a year off his wait period but only if he sends me a couple cases of really good red wine! Sully (JESII) could've been winning his first Pa State Mid-am a year earlier if he'd only bothered to send me a few cases. You know me, I'm totally open to bribes particularly after Moriarty has just exposed me above as the totally duplicitous character I am. 

[DMoriarty]

...so early in 1911 the Club appointed a committee

Hugh I. Wilson wrote that he became involved in the project in early 1911

David, Wilson's quote above does not necessarily mean he was not involved before the Committee was formed, does it?  You may well be right, but those quotes would not seem to be absolute.

Tom, can you at this point discuss whether the documentation and club minutes etc that Wayne and you have can shed any light on when Wilson became involved?

No, but if you back into the thread you will see exactly how I came up with that statement.

Accurate historical research does not mean that I have to be dense about what the sources indicate.  It means we have to try to put the sources in a context that actually makes sense.   If he was involved before 1911, then the rest of his 1916 essay makes no sense.    If he traveled before 1911 to study abroad, then his 1916 essay makes no sense.   

I am just trying to make sense out of his essay, and will not make up or entertain alternative theories with no support, especially if they render his essay nonsensical.

________________________

"Tom, can you at this point discuss whether the documentation and club minutes etc that Wayne and you have can shed any light on when Wilson became involved?"

Andy:

Not really. The club minutes and supporting letters from 1910 and such don't say anything about that which leads us to believe that the planning of the course began in the winter of 1911 which the minutes confirm.

Are you kidding me?   You have been writing repeatedly that the documents prove that the course planning did not start in 1910, but rather the spring of 1911.   Now we are down to "the club minutes and supporting letters from 1910 and such don't say anything about that. . . "

Which is it?  Do the documents prove that no planning took place in 1910, or are you guys just giving us your version of what you'd like the documents to prove and disprove?   

[DMoriarty]

David, why do you believe that with so many wealthy, high-powered members desiring a top golf course they went with someone who by his own admission didn't know much about the task? It seems such an oddity to me.

First, I dont think he was put in charge.  I am not even sure that the committee had a chair when it was appointed.   I suspect that it did not.

Second, I think Merion planned to lean heavily on CBM and they did.

As to why they appointed the Committee, HWilson's essay provides guidance again.

They "had played golf for many years" and were good golfers.  That was fairly unusual at the time.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Yes, but if NGLA didnt open until 1911 (like Tom Paul just said on another thread) and Wilson didnt go to GB&I until 1912, who would have designed the replica Alps, Eden and Redan holes?

JCJones & AHughes,

Play began over NGLA as early as 1909.[/color]

[Sean_A]

Just when you thought it was safe to go back in the water:

I'd like to give a summary of why I think Wilson and Committee probably designed Merion and M&W did not.  Though I also believe M&W advised Wilson on the design, and may have given him some specific hole/routing ideas. 

I am not sure how this is all that much different than what I have been saying?  Are you?

David

You mean to say, after all this bullshit, you think that Wilson designed the course with consultation (practically the very definition of committee chairman) from others?  You may have stated this in your piece, but if that is your conclusion, your piece doesn't lead the reader (at least me) to believe this is your conclusion.

Ciao

Sean and Rich,

You mean to say, after all this, that you ignored what I wrote in my essay, and ignored my many requests that you believe my intentions as set out in the essay, and instead applied your own motives and conclusions in place of mine?   

I don't care about attribution, so made no statement of who "designed" the course in the sense you use it.   M&W were integrally involved in the entire planning process.   

Dave

This is just my opinion, but the tone of your piece didn't reflect a belief that Wilson was the main man at Merion.  Above, you seem to be saying that Wilson was the main man.  I think if you go back and read your piece you will see how one can be confused.  You spend an inordinate amount of time describing what everybody other than Wilson may have done.   Just to be clear, do you think Wilson was the main man who utilized resources that were available to him?

Ciao

[JC Jones]

Yes, but if NGLA didnt open until 1911 (like Tom Paul just said on another thread) and Wilson didnt go to GB&I until 1912, who would have designed the replica Alps, Eden and Redan holes?

JCJones & AHughes,

Play began over NGLA as early as 1909.[/color]

Thanks for clearing that up Pat!  TP did state that NGLA did not open formally until 1911, seemingly to discredit the argument that CBM would have had some notoriety in 1911 that would have caused MCC to want to hire the "well known" CBM.  To me, that timeline didnt make sense because then NOBODY would have been around to design the replica alps, redan and eden holes at Merion.  If NGLA opened in 1909, then the course would have had 2 years of hype accumulated and it would have made sense for MCC to seek out the designer of such a revered course.

[TEPaul]

"Are you kidding me?   You have been writing repeatedly that the documents prove that the course planning did not start in 1910, but rather the spring of 1911.   Now we are down to "the club minutes and supporting letters from 1910 and such don't say anything about that. . . "

Which is it?  Do the documents prove that no planning took place in 1910, or are you guys just giving us your version of what you'd like the documents to prove and disprove?"


David Moriarty:

Of course I'm not kidding you.

And I never said on here that the planning of the course by Hugh Wilson and his committee started in the spring of 1911, you're the only one who said I said that so try to interpret what I said correctly or you'll just continue to confuse yourself and everybody else. I haven't yet said when it started as reflected in those meeting minutes but it started before the spring of 1911 but not in 1910----at any time in 1910.

So, it's not a matter of which is it----it's both.

There are no meeting minutes from 1910 that say a single word about the planning of the course in the sense of routing a golf course but they certainly do say quite a lot about what happened in the winter and spring of 1911 and by whom about golf course plans. It's a letter to the president of the club by this man I mentioned who was clearly working in conjunction with Lloyd to create a fairly complex business structure for the course and MCC and MCC Golf Association all of which directly involved Lloyd and the HDC residential real estate land to the west (as I've always suspected) that mentions that no definite course has been planned. That was in the last few days of December. Remember now, he wrote that letter directly to the president of the club and it was reflected in board meeting minutes so I hardly think even you can assign hyperbole to that. Well, let me belay that thought as it seems you can come up with almost any specious rationale imaginable to try to defend your unsupportable premises in your essay.

What he was suggesting, obviously in conjunction with Lloyd, was how the HDC golf course land was to be received through Lloyd as it related to the HDC residential land to the west which Lloyd controlled. The point of it was all about being able to move boundary lines around in 1911 through Lloyd if necessary with the golf course and the residential development and that is precisely what did take place in 1911 that completely explains what that late night bike ride land swap idea of Francis' was about all about. Why did he go see Lloyd in the middle of the night? Why indeed! We've been trying to explain that to you for weeks but you either dismisss it or ignore it! It is no wonder at all that Francis went to see Lloyd and got his agreement and it was done immediately. But that did not happen in 1910 as you've speculated, it happened in 1911 as I've been trying to explain to you ever since you wrote your essay.

But you just refuse to listen and it is no wonder at all as it's not the truth you are after, you are apparently only after trying to salvage these speculative premises of yours that Macdonald produced a routing before November 15 1910 and Francis and Lloyd "tweaked" it. It's certainly clear to all of us that if you can't do that your whole essay and its conclusion falls apart.

There was no routing 1910 anything like the course got built and there was no Francis bike ride landswap idea in 1910 and these minutes and that letter prove it.

Of course, if and when we get permission to write an essay containing those transcripts to be puy on here you could probably just say what you have about most of the other seminal documents that make up Merion's history like Alan Wilson's report and Richard Francis' landswap story is nothing more than hyperbole.

But I'll tell you right now if you use that ridiculous technique with these letters and meeting minutes the discussion with us will be done. I don't care how much you choose to defend your unsupportable premises men like these do not write a letter to the president of the club proposing a complex financial structure and engage in hyperbole, and these obviously intelligent and effective and powerful men do not sit in board meetings with one another and engage in hyperbole over something they are all trying to accomplish together.

So if you even insinuate something like that in the future when these documents are disseminated, as you have so often in the past, I would be shocked if a single person on this website or anywhere else took you and your essay seriously, not that many seem to now.

Again, there was no routing plan for the course in 1910 that the course would be built to as you have concluded--not by anyone, not by Macdonald/Whigam and not by anyone from Wilson's committee.

I'm just not sure why it is you're having such difficulty grasping this and why you still seem to be speaking about when a Wilson trip abroad took place as if it mattered. As you will see that had nothing to do with it. We cannot explain why Tolhurst wrote that in 1989 but nevertheless it makes no difference to who routed, designed and built Merion East.

[TEPaul]

JC:

Macdonald did have a couple of select groups including a tournament of some good national players at NGLA before September 1911 but the course was really rough because NGLA had some very serious grow-in problems that delayed the formal opening by over a year. The course formally opened for play in September 1911.

In one of the agronomy letters Piper or Oakley asked Wilson if he was going to go to it. He wasn't.

Also, in my opinion, the real reasons Merion approached Macdonald at the time they did are almost completely misunderstood on this board.

[Peter Pallotta]

TE -

I was about to post that I thought this thread should end.  But I for one would very much like to read your thoughts about the reasons why Merion approached Macdonald in the first place.

Thanks
Peter

It was interesting to read that Wilson didn't go to the official NGLA opening - but it didn't surprise me.