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

[Mike_Cirba]

Rich,

Your logic is unassailable and your instincts are correct.

However, your views are way too logical and commonsensical to have much value here.

Move along, please. 

[TEPaul]

Patrick:

In your post #282 you seem to be arguing with Peter Pallotta with no real purpose. (which of course never surprises me ).

What Peter is saying is that if Moriarty (or anyone) really can prove that C.B. Macdonald actually did ROUTE and DESIGN Merion East as Moriarty's essay clearly concludes then that would mean that Merion very much should reniterpret their history and attribute the DESIGN of Merion East to Macdonald and not to Wilson and his committee has they have ALWAYS done.

On this, I could not agree more. If a plan from Macdonald can be found that really does show the course as it was built to be basically the same as on a Macdonald routing map and perhaps fully developed hole plan details how could anyone say that Macdonald SHOULD NOT be given complete credit for DESIGNING Merion East?

It that turns out to be the case I sure do know that people who have studied Merion's architectural history carefully over the years such as Wayne Morrison and I would very likely recommend to Merion that they should rewrite their architectural history to attribute Merion East's design to Charles Blair Macdonald and only that Wilson and his committee simply executed that plan and design in a construction phase something as a construction foreman and his crew would.

To date nothing like that has been proven, in my opinion, but maybe it will be! But if it isn't proven in that basic manner I believe Merion's architectural history should remain as it has always been.

[Tony_Chapman]

Mike -- I think you may be asking for David to produce a "picture" of the Barker routing so we can all see it? Is this correct? If so, he answered Phillip Young in post 294 as follows:

"Phillip,  I don’t have a copy of the Barker routing,  If I had it I assure you it would have been in the article."

Just wanted to point that out if you didn't see it. I'm happy to be in the crowd watching this debate. Great points have been made by both sides.

[Mike_Cirba]

Mike -- I think you may be asking for David to produce a "picture" of the Barker routing so we can all see it? Is this correct? If so, he answered Phillip Young in post 294 as follows:

"Phillip,  I don’t have a copy of the Barker routing,  If I had it I assure you it would have been in the article."

Just wanted to point that out if you didn't see it. I'm happy to be in the crowd watching this debate. Great points have been made by both sides.

Tony,

Actually, what I'm asking of David is to provide or point us to the source material that states that Barker produced a routing.   

I believe it would be instructive and interesting to see exactly how it is phrased and since it seems to be part of a report that David has in his possession, or access to, I don't believe it's insulting to simply ask him to share it with us.   Sometimes a bit of information that one person might overlook as meaningless could be an important clue to someone else coming from a different perspective.

Thanks for your feedback and interest.

[TEPaul]

Here is a question that I believe the answer to is completely central to the assumption and conclusion of his piece that is Macdonald routed and designed Merion East.

"David,
Do we know more specifically when Macdonald visited Merion for the first time?"



Mike Cirba asked this question yesterday about 5:30 but I can't see that David Moriarty bothered to answer it but perhaps I just missed his answer. Perhaps he missed the question.

Yesterday I was rereading David's essay again and I noticed he never actually said when Macdonald FIRST came to Merion Ardmore. Does he know when Macdonald FIRST saw the site that would become Merion East and just neglected to include it in his piece?

I called Mike Cirba about 5pm and mentioned that to him and he said he recalled noticing that too. I asked him if he understood the significance of that question and answer. I was on the way out the door (actually to Merion ) and I asked him to post that question.

I'm sure everyone who has followed this thread and its timeline construction can understand the significance of the answer to this question.

If Macdonald FIRST arrived at Merion Ardmore at some point in 1910 before around November 5, then David Moriarty's premises still can technically hold together. But if Maconald FIRST arrive at Merion Ardmore at some point after that his premises and conclusion really can't because the reality of a timeline would virtually destroy his premises and conclusion.

Some of the reports such as Alan Wilson's mention that Macdonald/Whigam only came to Merion TWICE. I don't know if that is accurate and he actually came three times or more. But if he only did come twice we definitely know one of those times was in the spring of 1911. Newspaper accounts confirm that.

But when did he FIRST arrive? I vaguely remember seeing a newspaper account that mentioned he came at some point in the fall of 1910. But when exactly? I can't seem to find that newspaper account.

If he did come at some point around November or after around Nov. 5, 1910 did he come at some point before that?

Another way to check this is to find the date of his letter to the board or the date of the board's deliberations about somehow "embodying" Macdonald's ideas on the creation of Merion. But what if that was all offered and deliberated AFTER the land transactions had been set in place?

When Macdonald FIRST came to Merion is an important question and a good analysis of this piece needs its answer!

[Rich Goodale]

Tom

Vis a vis your last post, since the US Open was held in Philadephia in June 1910, might not Macdonald have attended as a High Heidjin of the USGA?  If so, there should be record of this, in Far Hills or elsewhere.  I assume it is not terribly far from Wissihicken to Merion.

Rich

[Andy Hughes]

Since it is still an open question it seems where Hugh Wilson was in 1910---eg we here in Philadelphia just don't know where he could have been and Moriarty has assumed he could not have been abroad simply because he couldn't find any ship manifest with him on it before 1912.

To me that's not exactly the best way to try to prove he wasn't abroad!  

Tom, doing my best to try and keep up with all this (and it ain't easy!).  My understanding is that DM has not said that Wilson could not have been abroad before 1912, but rather that he has seen no proof or facts that would support such an assertion.

[Peter Pallotta]

David - that's a fair request. But like with any piece of writing, I can only read and think about it in my own way, and with whatever I bring to the table. I just wanted to be honest about what I was bringing to the table. 

TE - Yes, that's pretty much what I had been suggesting to Patrick through the last few posts.

Mike C, Rich G - two very good posts, it seems to me -- fair, on point, clear and direct, and in good faith.

Peter

[TEPaul]

This is of course all speculation at this point but I think good researchers need to speculate about certain things simply for the purpose of sending them down important roads of inquiry.

So here is some speculation:

Who was it who brought H.H. Barker to Merion on June 10, 1910? David Moriarty tells us either in his essay or on this thread that Barker was brought in by one Mr. Connell or perhaps Mr. Connell and a Mr. Nickolson. Who was Mr. Connell? As far as I can tell from a June 24, 1909 indenture describing and in some way contracting this land that would become most of Merion East or the Haverford Development Company he was a man who owned 10/25th of this land or some portion of it in June of 1909.

Who was Nickolson? He was a man who was the president of a company called "The Title and Trust Company" that was a "party of one part" to this indenture describing and apparently contracting some of this land.

So I suppose Connell and Nickolson must have been these two 'ambitous real estate developers' Moriarty mentions in his essay.

Why did they bring Barker in? It was apparently to facilitate a quick sale of property owned or controlled by the Haverford Development Co to the interests or Merion Cricket Club perhaps even including land for residences for MCC members but certainly including a golf course.

Moriarty tells us that for whatever reasons MCC's board essentially turned down Barker's ideas for a course and decided to seek another opinion and that of course was Macdonald's and Whigam's. He even tells us Rodman Griscom contacted them and that would certainly make sense as at least he and Robert Lesley knew Charlie from the Lesley Cups in 1905 and 1906.

One newspaper account sort of infers that Macdonald and Whigam and Barker may've all been brought in together but that clearly seems not to be the case. It appears that essentially Barker's plan was refused or shelved by the MCC board and M/W were brought in next for some alternative plan.

One wonders where these two HDC 'ambitious real estate developers' got Barker? I would speculate they may've gotten him by contacting American Golfer magazine editor and famous golfer Walter Travis who said to them I'll send you this golf professional at my club, GCGC, who's into golf course architecture.

And when Charlie Macdonald heard about that I wonder what his reaction was? I think we can say with assurance that at that point in 1910 Travis and Charlie were probably not on speaking terms over the fallout of the Schnectedy Putter incident and Travis' anger and public declaration in American Golfer that Charlie actually served on the Rules Committee of the USGA AND the R&A and that that was one massive conflict of interest to an American golfer involved in a massive I&B rules controversy. We also know at this point Charlie had essentially FIRED Travis from working with him as a design consultant at NGLA.

So maybe Charlie told Griscom and Merion: "Screw that Travis and his good-for-nothing head pro who dabbles in architecture, what you guys need is me and my son-in-law Whigam to come down there and show you how to do your course the way we're doing NGLA." And so down they come but at what time for the first time?

It seems pretty odd to conclude that MCC waited up to five months to bring Charlie and Hank in unless they'd spent a bunch of the time between June and November trying to do things themselves.

Anyway, it's interesting speculation.

Another interesting item is what in the hell was Horatio Gates Lloyd and perhaps a number of his Merion friends doing with this land and Haverford Development Co during 1909 and 1910. Was he buying the land, was he buying a piece or controlling interest in the HDC at this time which did have public stock?

We do know from a completely independent source that in 1910 Lloyd bought 25 acres of land that seems to have been part of HDC that would become his famous estate "Allgates" that would eventually be expanded into 75 acres----eg a pretty sizable portion of what may've been HDC.

Anyway, some interesting speculations that may provide some good roads of inquiry to run down.

[TEPaul]

"Tom

Vis a vis your last post, since the US Open was held in Philadephia in June 1910, might not Macdonald have attended as a High Heidjin of the USGA?  If so, there should be record of this, in Far Hills or elsewhere.  I assume it is not terribly far from Wissihicken to Merion.

Rich"



Excellent point Richard the Ma--Mah---Maaah---MAGNIFICENT:

Charlie was at this time one of the two top Rules people with the USGA! One sure might think he'd be at a US Open. But who really knows---for the same price of eggs he may've told the USGA; "Screw you Dumb Ducks, even if you don't have a Rules brain in your head you'll have to carry on without "The GREAT Macdonald" because I have more important fish to fry like finishing up the course which will completely transform American golf course architecture!"


Here's another real wingnut possibility your Magnificence:

Who was another apparent Rules expert at that time? Future Merion "Construction Committee" member Richard Francis certainly was who according to Moriarty was running around the property "tweaking" Charlie's routing and design or something like that while his future Chairman of the committee, Hugh Wilson, just sat in a corner with his thumb up his ass doing nothing except WAITING to be appointed the head of the committee in 1911.

I think it is fairly likely that Francis and Charlie may've been completely turned on by one another over their mutual interest in the Rules of Golf. It might even be likely that Charlie and Francis were in bed together and just before turning out the lights that fateful night Francis got this hotflash about swapping land (maybe Charlie even whispered it in his ear so gently that Francis actually thought he thought of it). And so Francis leapt out of bed with Charlie, kissed him goodbye, and biked like a maniac at midnight over to Lloyd's place and sold him on the land-swap idea so that the next day quarrymen were blowing the top off the quarry and the 15th green and the great Merion #16 "Quarry" hole was born.

Charlie should probably be given design credit for that great hole too but maybe by that time he had passed out after a couple of bottles of scotch and the next morning just forgot what he'd whispered in Francis' ear the night before.

Isn't this amazing? Five years ago Tom MacWood demanded to know the DETAILS of who exactly did what and where on Merion East and back then we told him we just didn't know but now we really are giving him some incredible details of who did what and where.

[TEPaul]

By the way, Richard, you may think this idea that a complete whore-monger like Charlie would be in bed with Francis is completely eccentric but conider this:

At this very time who was working side by side or even arm in arm with Charlie at NGLA?

That incredible originator of American "GAY" golf course architecture, the original "cat-in-the-hat" in a white suit (about 75 years before Tom Wolffe borrowed that persona), one Devereaux "Little Devie" Emmet.

This is just some amazing stuff and amazing research. It looks like Macdonald wasn't just selling those "know-Nothing" idiots from Merion who at some point in the future were going to be led by that dumb novice Hugh I. Wilson, the beauties of GB template golf architecture but he was also selling them on the beauties of the original conception of that hallmark time in golf architecture what will heretofore be known as the "American School of "GAY" Architecture".

Those original "Mid-Surrey Mounds" around #9 green may've been an expression of that but at the moment I haven't figured out exactly how----but just give me a little more time and I'm pretty sure I will.

[Tony_Chapman]

Sorry, one more question from the geek in Nebraska.  

It seems that we know when Mr. Wilson came back from his trips overseas. Was there such a thing as a manifest that shows when he left?

[TEPaul]

"It seems that we know when Mr. Wilson came back from his trips overseas. Was there such a thing as a manifest that shows when he left?"

Tony:

No, there isn't at the moment but we do have a letter he wrote from Philadelpha that was dated March 1, 1912.
 
 
 

[John Mayhugh]

I just realized that tomorrow morning, some very committed and dedicated member of Matt Shaffer's staff will walk on to the first green on the East Course tomorrow, cut a hole in the green, and place a rather nice wicker basket in that hole.

Probably an hour or so later, the first group of the day will hole out and move across Ardmore Avenue to the 2nd tee.

I think, though I don't have any manifests to prove it, that this process will continue throughout most of the summer and people will leave the 18th green no better or worse for the experience knowing that someone in 1910 couldn't write to save their lives.

Good night all.

Love your perspective on all this. 

[TEPaul]

"No one who was actually there credited Hugh I Wilson, either.  No one.   They just always talk around the issue.   The only involved party who spoke to the issue was Whigham, and he did credit Macdonald for the design."


Wait a minute, David Moriarty, aren't you just once again completely dismissing Alan Wilson and his report? Have you bothered yet to read that entire report? In it he sure did mention that Hugh Wilson and his committee DESIGNED and constructed Merion East with some help and advice from Macdonald and Whigam. He also said that to a man the rest of the committee told him that of all of them Hugh Wilson was 'the person in the main responsible for the ARCHITECTURE both of this course and the West Course.'

Why in the world is the same word (DESIGNED) from some guy who may've been at Merion just twice now more important than a man from Merion who saw the entire thing from beginning to end??   

[Tony_Chapman]

"It seems that we know when Mr. Wilson came back from his trips overseas. Was there such a thing as a manifest that shows when he left?"

Tony:

No, there isn't at the moment but we do have a letter he wrote from Philadelpha that was dated March 1, 1912.

Tom -- Thanks! Are you saying they exist, but can't be located. Or, that they don't exist.

What I'm really after is if Mr. Cirba's birth certificate finds that H.I. Wilson was, indeed, H.D. Wilson he was spending some time on a ship and looking at some courses overseas. He was also making time for his wife, if she had a daughter in Sept. 1910   If he did, indeed, return in March 1910, then sketching a routing during that time (and maybe getting it tweaked by Barber and/or Charlie Mac later in the year) would coincide with beginning construction in Spring 1911.

But, if he also returned on a ship in September 1911, I'd sure as hell like to know how long he was gone. He sure as heck wasn't overseeing much construction in the summer of 1911 if he was gone during this time.

All this garbage I'm spewing could be irrelevant if H.D Wilson wasn't H.I Wilson, obviously.

[TEPaul]

"Tom -- Thanks! Are you saying they exist, but can't be located. Or, that they don't exist."


Tony:

I have no idea about that. I've never been one on here who puts that much stock in ship manifests as a way of completely determining if someone was NOT abroad simply because someone like Moriarty and the rest on here have NOT found them on some ship manifest.

To me this idea that Moriarty seems to constantly promote on here that goes something like---"if I can't find any evidence that something happened then that conclusively proves it did not happen."

To me that can of attempting to convince people that one can prove a negative that way is just so ludicrous, and he follows that up by constantly telling us we all speculate and he doesn't. 

[Andy Hughes]

To me this idea that Moriarty seems to constantly promote on here that goes something like---"if I can't find any evidence that something happened then that conclusively proves it did not happen."

Tom, again, has DM said he has conclusively proven that Wilson did not take an earlier trip, or has DM said he has seen no factual support for an earlier trip by Wilson?  These are not at all the same things.

[TEPaul]

"Tom, again, has DM said he has conclusively proven that Wilson did not take an earlier trip, or has DM said he has seen no factual support for an earlier trip by Wilson?  These are not at all the same things."



Ahughes:

That's a good point and maybe it should be cleared up once and for all about exactly what he is trying to say or do with this report and then no one would be at all confused by it.

I mean if he's just saying something with what seems to be his conclusion in his essay that essentially says----eg Macdonald routed and designed Merion East, and that is only the conclusion he's come to and he realizes it is based on premises that are not proven, then everyone could just say fine that's his opinion and I either agree with it or not.

But if he's saying that he thinks his premises and conclusion is such that he's actually recommending that Merion or us should be encouraged to rewrite Merion's architectural history to reflect his essay and it's premises and conclusion that is something else altogether.

I certainly don't think any of us around here who are close to Merion or Merion itself are interested in considering something like that at this point.

However, if he or someone else could produce something physical from Macdonald that proves his conclusion then I think some of us and Merion would certainly consider using it to alter Merion's architectural history.

[Mark_Fine]

For those of us who are interested in this thread but don't have four hours to read all the posts, could someone summarize what has or has not been concluded so far 

[Ed Oden]

For those of us who are interested in this thread but don't have four hours to read all the posts, could someone summarize what has or has not been concluded so far 

First the earth cooled...

[Jim_Kennedy]

Mark,
Could there possibly be an innocent bystander who could give an unbiased account? 

[Ken Moum]

Mark,
Could there possibly be an innocent bystander who could give an unbiased account? 

This is a pretty close approximation:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=teMlv3ripSM

Ken

[Lou_Duran]

No it's not.

[Ken Moum]

   'Tis