[Mike_Cirba]

Patrick,

I've posted the July 1st Site Committee report to the Merion Board of Government in it's entirety.   It is two pages and should be back about 50 or so posts.  (EDIT - Patrick, both reports are included in entirety in my post #1440)

I've also posted the November 15th, 1910 Letter from the Board to the Membership in it's entirety, including the Land Plan.

These are both documents that David Moriarty has had from the beginning, and he quotes from both liberally in his essay so nothing relevant here has been withheld from David.

The reason I'm posting them now is because something finally hit me the other day and as I chased it down, it turns out that it proves that the Merion Site Committee recommended purchase of the 120 acres for the golf course to their Board of Governors BEFORE ANY POSSIBLE ROUTING BY MACDONALD AND WHIGHAM COULD HAVE EXISTED.

What occurred to me is what should have been an obvious connection I'd never made before and it was a statement by Tom Paul that the report recommending the purchase of "nearly 120 acres" took place on July 1st, 1910, or exactly TWO DAYS after Macdonald sent his one-page letter to Lloyd of the Site Committee.

Let me repeat what I wrote above to Jim Sullivan;

I went back and read much of David's essay last night and I'd suggest you do the same.

He rests his timeline case around the land purchases on the following premise;

1) Connell and HDC offered 100 acres (or whatever would be required for the golf course) and a routing by Barker in June 1910
2) Macdonald and Whigham came to visit later June 1910
3) During their visit, David contends that it was identified that two additional pieces of land would be needed, proven by the supposed change to now "requiring 120 acres" in the July 1, 1910 report of the Site Committee to the Merion Board.   David speculates that the additional acreage was made up of the Dallas Estate and the Railroad Land, although that would create the requirement for an additional 24 acres, not 20.

However, there was NEVER ANY CHANGE FROM 100 ACRES TO 120 ACRES IN THE FIRST PLACE!!!   BOTH numbers come from THE EXACT SAME JULY 1, 1910 REPORT!!! (copied above)

We now firmly believe that when Barker and Macdonald, and Whigham visited they was already looking at 117 acres...the exact acreage of the northeastern and southern sections of the Johnson Farm, land ALREADY OWNED by HDC and thus able to be legally part of the proposed transaction and recommendation.

We also know that Macdonald recommended additional purchase of the 3 acres of Railroad Land which would have created the "120 acres" referenced in the July 1 letter.

However, there is no way that Macdonald and Whigham routed a golf course between their letter of June 29th, 1910 (copied above) and the Merion Site Committee's July 1, 1910 report (also copied above) RECOMMENDING STRONGLY to the Merion Board that they move forward to aquire the "required" 120 acres, and the only land that could have meant at that time was the 117 acres of those sections of the Johnson Farm, as well as the 3 acres of railroad land.


Also, Patrick, this nonsensical contention that there was other, regular, ongoing communications between Macdonald and Merion between July 1910 and Novmber 1910 is simply not supported by a single fact or shred of evidence.   There is NONE, zip, nada, zero record of any communications.

In July of 1910, after four solid years of working on it, Macdonald was just finally getting his own NGLA open and had his own plate quite full.   From "The Evangelist of Golf";


On July 2, 1910, 14 months before the official opening, the course was finally ready for a test run.   An informal Invitational Tournament was held for a select group of founders and friends invited to participate.

A qualifying round was played on the first day, followed by two days of match play.   The course was still rough with temporary tee boxes, and a few bare spots on fairways on fairways and greens.   Macdonald was still altering and refining the course.  In fact, a new 9th (current 18th) green was already under construction before the course ever opened.

Besides the 9th (current 18th) soon expanded by 60 yards, Macdonald changed his mind and stretched the Sahara hole (current 2nd) from a short 215 to 261 yards uphill over an extended waste area.

It was noted the tournament served the purpose of revealing any design shortcoming that needed correcting.  All holes received high praise, except the Road hole, "which did not play as anticipated".   Apparently the corner hazard in the driving area was not what it would become later.


So Patrick, as much as you and David and others wish to dream on that Charles Macdonald laid out the course at Merion, the true historical facts and timelines speak loudly otherwise.  

Macdonald did offer great help and advice to the Merion Committe, just as it was always written and acknowledged.

He clearly 1) gave them a somewhat guarded, cautionary recommendation approving of the site with the caveat that they get some soil samples and other study of inland agronomics, 2) hosted the Merion Committee for a night and a day at NGLA where he showed them all of his hole drawings from abroad, how he had applied them at NGLA, and then took them on a tour of the course, and finally, 3) he came down and helped the committee pick the best of their five plans for the proposed golf course.

That's it...and it was extremely helpful.  

Now we know.

[Mike_Cirba]

Mike,

No offense to Joe Bausch and his tremendous efforts, but I am growing weary of you posting long discovered documents as if you have just found something novel, like you do above with those snippets concerning the Dallas Estate.   I site those in my essay and we have discussed them as usual on here.     

It is not so much that credit is that important to me, it is that with you we have to cover this stuff over and over again.  As usual you are about a year behind the learning curve.

Also Mike,  you ignored my post above.   According to TEPaul, the Dallas Estate deal was in the works from June 1910.   So your latest theory is wrong.     You guys are jockeying about who can take credit on yet another fallacious theory.

Doesn't it get embarrassing to keep changing the headings on these threads and then not being able to produce?  How many times are you guys going to prematurely celebrate your victory, only later to find out you are wrong?

Imagine had I been so careless with my essay.

David,

Please see my post above to Patrick where I tell him that you've had these documents for years.   

I just think it's time everyone sees them in their entirety, and in their true historical timeline context.

Also, Tom Paul stated in response he does not recall ever saying that Merion had their eye on the Dallas Estate prior to July 1910.

If you indeed have evidence that HDC or Merion was controlling the Dallas Estate at the time Macdonald and Whigham came to Merion, now would be the time to produce it.


I do notice that you do not dispute a single factual item that I have just put forward, nor do you contest any of the timelines I've outlined.

Instead, you insult me personally again.

That tells me that it's over.

I'd also thank you again for your essay.   I think it spurred the search and discovery of a lot of great historical information from many people, and some of your original findings such as the 1912 Hugh Wilson overseas voyage will become part of the revised history of a great club.

[DMoriarty]

Mike

The reason I have not disputed the points in your "facts" or "timeline" is that I am no longer reading these posts.  I've skimmed a few but for the most part they are a waste of time.   They rely on false assumptions and everything else falls with these assumptions.

As for Tepaul's recollections, as usual he has made so many contradictory claims that doesn't even remember what he has posted. 

[TEPaul]

"Tom,

What do you think that means?   Are you talking about the Dallas Estate?"


Michael:

No I am not. I'm talking about land south of the Dallas estate that would be known as "Merion Golf Heights."

[Mike_Cirba]

"Tom,

What do you think that means?   Are you talking about the Dallas Estate?"


Michael:

No I am not. I'm talking about land south of the Dallas estate that would be known as "Merion Golf Heights."

Tom,

Yes, it looks like Connell controlled that land for awhile, and then it seems E.T. Stotesbury grabbed much it at some point, probably so he could be closer to Cobb's Creek where rumor has it he worked tirelessly on that horrible golf swing of his. 

[TEPaul]

"TEPaul,

You can't refute the written words from Merion.
They had SECURED the land.
Now you've told us that you were a real estate broker in Pennsylvania.
When someone states that they HAVE SECURED land, that's past tense and indicative of the fact that they are in control of that land, either through deed or option."


Patrick:

I'm not refuting the written word from Merion; I'm simply explaining to you exactly what it said. I'm merely pointing out to you given the circumstances reported by the board of MCC that Merion had an agreement to buy 117 acres from HDC in Nov. 1910. An agreement is definitely not the same thing as a purchase and deed transfer from a seller to a buyer with title going to the buyer as a result of a formal exchange of property. That would not technically happen for MCC until July 21, 1911. Between Dec. 19, 1910 and July 21, 1911 Horatio Gates Lloyd et ux held title to that land. In November all that existed between HDC and MCC was a letter from the secretary of HDC making an offer to MCC for a particular amount of land for a particular price and a purchase to occur at a particular time. MCC president Evans accepted that HDC offer in the letter from Nickolson of HDC for MCC in a letter back to Nickolson of HDC. It wasn't even real estate contract on a sale and purchase, just an AGREEMENT TO SELL and PURCASE between two parties.

MCCGA would not own that land for another nine months and it doesn't make a damn bit of difference if someone like you tries to rationalize that they did somehow. The FACT is MCCGA did not PURCHASE that land until July 21, 1911, and for good reason. And yes, I was a real estate broker in the state of Pennsylvania for about twenty years so I probably know quite a bit more about real estate transactions in this state that Merion is in than you do!  

[Patrick_Mucci]

Patrick,

I've posted the July 1st Site Committee report to the Merion Board of Government in it's entirety.   It is two pages and should be back about 50 or so posts.  (EDIT - Patrick, both reports are included in entirety in my post #1440)

You'll have to forgive me, but, if you, David, Wayno or TE expects me to revisit and review 42 pages of posts, it ain't gonna happen.

I've also posted the November 15th, 1910 Letter from the Board to the Membership in it's entirety, including the Land Plan.

I believe that you ONLY posted that after I requested same.

These are both documents that David Moriarty has had from the beginning, and he quotes from both liberally in his essay so nothing relevant here has been withheld from David.

The reason I'm posting them now is because something finally hit me the other day and as I chased it down, it turns out that it proves that the Merion Site Committee recommended purchase of the 120 acres for the golf course to their Board of Governors BEFORE ANY POSSIBLE ROUTING BY MACDONALD AND WHIGHAM COULD HAVE EXISTED.

I don't see how that proves that M&W couldn't have provided an early routing.
You seem to get lost in "exclusionary" conclusions, ruling out any other possibility because you don't want there to be any other possibility.

What occurred to me is what should have been an obvious connection I'd never made before and it was a statement by Tom Paul that the report recommending the purchase of "nearly 120 acres" took place on July 1st, 1910, or exactly TWO DAYS after Macdonald sent his one-page letter to Lloyd of the Site Committee.

Let me repeat what I wrote above to Jim Sullivan;

I went back and read much of David's essay last night and I'd suggest you do the same.
He rests his timeline case around the land purchases on the following premise;

1) Connell and HDC offered 100 acres (or whatever would be required for the golf course)like 117-120 acres ? and a routing by Barker in June 1910
2) Macdonald and Whigham came to visit later June 1910
3) During their visit, David contends that it was identified that two additional pieces of land would be needed, proven by the supposed change to now "requiring 120 acres" in the July 1, 1910 report of the Site Committee to the Merion Board.   David speculates that the additional acreage was made up of the Dallas Estate and the Railroad Land, although that would create the requirement for an additional 24 acres, not 20.

However, there was NEVER ANY CHANGE FROM 100 ACRES TO 120 ACRES IN THE FIRST PLACE!!!   BOTH numbers come from THE EXACT SAME JULY 1, 1910 REPORT!!! (copied above)

So now you use David's speculations as proof of your point ?  ?   ?

We now firmly believe that when Barker and Macdonald, and Whigham visited they was already looking at 117 acres...the exact acreage of the northeastern and southern sections of the Johnson Farm, land ALREADY OWNED by HDC and thus able to be legally part of the proposed transaction and recommendation.

See my comment under your point # 1

We also know that Macdonald recommended additional purchase of the 3 acres of Railroad Land which would have created the "120 acres" referenced in the July 1 letter.

However, there is no way that Macdonald and Whigham routed a golf course between their letter of June 29th, 1910 (copied above) and the Merion Site Committee's July 1, 1910 report (also copied above) RECOMMENDING STRONGLY to the Merion Board that they move forward to aquire the "required" 120 acres, and the only land that could have meant at that time was the 117 acres of those sections of the Johnson Farm, as well as the 3 acres of railroad land.

Why not ?

Also, Patrick, this nonsensical contention that there was other, regular, ongoing communications between Macdonald and Merion between July 1910 and Novmber 1910 is simply not supported by a single fact or shred of evidence.
There is NONE, zip, nada, zero record of any communications.

That doesn't mean that communication didn't occur, only that it wasn't recorded, sort of like the missing topo map.
You can't rule out the possibility/probability of communications, via phone, letter or personal visits because there's no record of them.

Remember, there's no contemporaneous evidence that Wilson routed and designed the golf course.
None, zip, nada, zero record.
So according to your logic, we should dismiss him as well.

In July of 1910, after four solid years of working on it, Macdonald was just finally getting his own NGLA open and had his own plate quite full.   From "The Evangelist of Golf";

That's not true.
Please don't equate the process of forming a club, soliciting members, acquiring the land, the concept, with the sole task of routing and designing a golf course.

Macdonald was treading into new territory far from the centers of influence..
Merion was an established, local club

On July 2, 1910, 14 months before the official opening, the course was finally ready for a test run.   An informal Invitational Tournament was held for a select group of founders and friends invited to participate.

A qualifying round was played on the first day, followed by two days of match play.   The course was still rough with temporary tee boxes, and a few bare spots on fairways on fairways and greens.   Macdonald was still altering and refining the course.  In fact, a new 9th (current 18th) green was already under construction before the course ever opened.

Besides the 9th (current 18th) soon expanded by 60 yards, Macdonald changed his mind and stretched the Sahara hole (current 2nd) from a short 215 to 261 yards uphill over an extended waste area.

It was noted the tournament served the purpose of revealing any design shortcoming that needed correcting.  All holes received high praise, except the Road hole, "which did not play as anticipated".   Apparently the corner hazard in the driving area was not what it would become later.

So Patrick, as much as you and David and others wish to dream on that Charles Macdonald laid out the course at Merion, the true historical facts and timelines speak loudly otherwise.  

No, they don't.
The leaps you make from one topic to another, drawing conclusions from unrelated subjects, is quite astounding.

The routing of NGLA is the same today as it was in 1909, nothing about the routing has changed.

As to "fine tuning" Macdonald continued "fine tuning" NGLA until his death in 1939

Macdonald did offer great help and advice to the Merion Committe, just as it was always written and acknowledged.

He clearly 1) gave them a somewhat guarded, cautionary recommendation approving of the site with the caveat that they get some soil samples and other study of inland agronomics, 2) hosted the Merion Committee for a night and a day at NGLA where he showed them all of his hole drawings from abroad, how he had applied them at NGLA, and then took them on a tour of the course, and finally, 3) he came down and helped the committee pick the best of their five plans for the proposed golf course.

Who crafted those five plans ?

Were they outgrowths of Barkers ?  M&W ?

I don't know what M&W did or didn't do, and quite frankly, that's never been my focus.
If you go back far enough, you'll see that I debated that point with Moriarty & MacWood years ago.
But, I also don't know what Wilson did or didn't do, and neither do you.  So stop posturing that you do.

I've always been fascinated by Francis's role.

My interest is simple, I want to learn/discover more about how the golf course came into being.

That's it...and it was extremely helpful.  

Now we know.

I guess you feel that if you repeat the mantra often enough, even you will believe everything you write.
I don't.

Thus, the quest for information continues.

[TEPaul]

"You've conveniently substituting and confusing the issues.

# 1   The historical record WAS WRONG and REMAINS WRONG today.
        Unless, you're conveniently forgetting that Ulrich told you that Merion has yet to correct this error ?

# 2   We've been told that Wilson wasn't  active on the committee in 1910, so how could Wilson do anything
        with the committee in 1910 as you've alluded to in your above paragraph.

# 3   As we sit here today, Merion's historical record is WRONG.  How can you possibly refute that ?"




Patrick, look, I have considered you a pretty good friend of mine on here but that kind of response serves no intelligent purpose on this thread, this subject or frankly this website and I really would like to ask you to drop those kinds of pretty stupid games!! Again, it serves no purpose at all on this thread and subject and if you don't know that or understand it you most certainly should or you just shouldn't participate on threads like this one!

We are not discussing if Merion's WEBSITE is wrong because it has not yet changed the DATE Wilson went abroad!!

In #2 you say "we've been told that Wilson wasn't active on the committee or in 1910, so how could Wilson do anything with the committee in 1910?"

We have been told Wilson was not active at all on a routing or design plan for Merion East but WHO have WE BEEN TOLD THAT BY???

We've been told that by David Moriarty in his essay "The Missing Faces of Merion" which is a wholly inaccurate and fallacious essay whether or not you care to admit that at this point! And WE have asked David Moriarty to produce some EVIDENCE, any evidence, and some FACT, any FACT, that Richard Francis had anything do with a routing and design plan of Merion East IN 1910!! He has steadfastly REFUSED to do THAT! Why do you suppose THAT IS??

The ONLY thing that was ever recorded by either MCC or Francis was that he served on Wilson's Committee and he even stated in the remainder of his story in a 1950 US Open program that he was 'added to' Wilson's Committee because he read and drew plans!

Hugh Wilson wrote himself that his committee was appointed in the beginning of 1911. IF there is ANY reason to doubt THAT then the one doubting it should at least PRODUCE SOME FACTUAL EVIDENCE of why he believes that. David Moriarty's fallacious and highly speculative contentions in that essay and on this DG frankly just doesn't cut it at all!!!! And it certainly doesn't cut it on this DG when he continuously REFUSES to produce ANY factual evidence for his contentions in that essay and on this DG. His latest excuse to me that he refuses to produce that evidence because he thinks I'm rude and I won't give him some private club material I have is JUST PATHETIC and so totally TRANSPARENT!! Come on Patrick, I'm pretty sure you're as good at recognizing a real bullshiter as well as I am! 

Why are any of us who both have Merion's records and understand the history of Merion back then and have explained them all thoroughly to you even being asked to discuss that kind of crap and total bullshit Moriarty produced??? It is the biggest waste of time this website has ever seen.

[Patrick_Mucci]

"TEPaul,

You can't refute the written words from Merion.
They had SECURED the land.
Now you've told us that you were a real estate broker in Pennsylvania.
When someone states that they HAVE SECURED land, that's past tense and indicative of the fact that they are in control of that land, either through deed or option."

Patrick:

I'm not refuting the written word from Merion; I'm simply explaining to you exactly what it said.

We know what it said, we're perfectly capable of reading the Board of Governors formal report to the members of Merion dated November 15, 1910.

I'm merely pointing out to you given the circumstances reported by the board of MCC that Merion had an agreement to buy 117 acres from HDC in Nov. 1910.

An agreement is definitely not the same thing as a purchase and deed transfer from a seller to a buyer with title going to the buyer as a result of a formal exchange of property.

We're aware of that and it doesn't change the FACT that the club HAD SECURED the 117 Acres.

That would not technically happen for MCC until July 21, 1911. Between Dec. 19, 1910 and July 21, 1911 Horatio Gates Lloyd et ux held title to that land. In November all that existed between HDC and MCC was a letter from the secretary of HDC making an offer to MCC for a particular amount of land for a particular price and a purchase to occur at a particular time. MCC president Evans accepted that HDC offer in the letter from Nickolson of HDC for MCC in a letter back to Nickolson of HDC. It wasn't even real estate contract on a sale and purchase, just an AGREEMENT TO SELL and PURCASE between two parties.

MCCGA would not own that land for another nine months and it doesn't make a damn bit of difference if someone like you tries to rationalize that they did somehow.

You can be in denial all you want.
Merion indicated that they HAD SECURED the land.
The Board of Governors, in a formal report to the members, clearly stated that the club HAD SECURED the land.

Stop wasting everyone's time, we're clearly aware of the distinction between securing the land and taking title.

The FACT is MCCGA did not PURCHASE that land until July 21, 1911, and for good reason. And yes, I was a real estate broker in the state of Pennsylvania for about twenty years so I probably know quite a bit more about real estate transactions in this state that Merion is in than you do!  
I've never disputed that, but, it's clear that Merion had what they wanted sometime between July 1, 1910 and November 15, 1910.
That the exchange of title would take place subsequently is of NO significance.

Unless, Mike Cirba and Wayno want to assert that NO WORK could take place at Merion until AFTER July 21, 1911, when they officially took title

[Patrick_Mucci]

TEPaul,

Let's forget David Moriarty's "In my opinion" piece for a moment.

And, let's forget about Merion's website or history.

Let's accept your statement that Wilson and his committee were commissioned in early 1911.

I previously asked you if it was counter intuitive to believe that Merion, which HAD SECURED the 117 acres sometime between July 1, 1910 and November 15, 1910, would wait until 1911 to begin the routing process ?

Now before you fire back, in a knee jerk reaction, THINK about that.

Think about your work at Androsian (sp?) Farms.

Think about NGLA ?

Think about Merion ?

Why on earth, with an early routing by Barker and probably a general or maybe a specific routing by M&W  around July, 1910,  would they wait for a half a year before embarking upon the routing of the golf course, especially when the acquisition of the land had been such a tortured exercise ?

PLEASE, THINK BEFORE TYPING.

Mike Cirba,

I know you're incapable of thinking before typing, so go ahead and type.

[Mike_Cirba]

Patrick,

Honestly, I'm close to just dismissing your posts on this thread because they are unnecessarily argumentative and continually refer to areas of discussion long since resolved.

You keep referring to some magical and invisible correspondences of Macdonald that took place at some time between July 1910 and December 1910, but there are NONE.

Zero.

You and David are asking for us to prove that UFO's dont exist when the complete burden of proof is on YOU.

If CB Macdonald designed Merion, then show us all the what, when, where, and how.

Right now, it's just a dream that you and David seem to share.   A nice, pleasant fantasy, admittedly, but one better suited to relaxing on a beach somewhere dreaming of a young Tanya Roberts, a good Cabernet, and wishing and hoping that your hero was somehow responsible for another great golf course, but a fantasy nonetheless...


p.s....our last posts crossed, so I'd only say that Merion did NOT seek out "One Day Wonder HH Barker" to design their course.    The July 1, 1910 Report makes very clear that the Real Estate developer Joseph Connell did that on his own.    His plan never saw the light of day and there is not even a mention that his routing was included in what got sent to the Merion Board.

Clearly, Merion wanted to go in a different direction than the "Slam Bam, thank you Merion" architecture practiced by the early British professionals like Barker.

We also KNOW based on the timeline that Macdonald visited and wrote his letter of June 29th, 1910, that was most assuredly NOTHING close to a routing of the golf course EXISTED, yet on July 1, 1910, the Merion Site Committee STRONGLY RECOMMENDED to the BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF MERION that they move forward swiftly to aquire the 120 acres available at that time for the golf course, which at that time included the northeastern and southern sections of the Johnson Farm, and the 3 acres of railroad land.

[TEPaul]

"You can be in denial all you want.
Merion indicated that they HAD SECURED the land.
The Board of Governors, in a formal report to the members, clearly stated that the club HAD SECURED the land.

Stop wasting everyone's time, we're clearly aware of the distinction between securing the land and taking title."


Patrick:


Yes the MCC board did report to the membership they HAD SECURED the land on Nov. 1910. I've had that information for years and I can read just fine too. But that has nothing whatsoever to do with a routing or design plan in 1910 FROM ANYONE. Isn't that the point that is the general subject of THIS thread as it relates to WHEN a land swap idea by Francis happened?

All I did is point out to you that the AGREEMENT between HDC and MCC in Nov 1910 about which MCC told their membership they HAD SECURED 117 acres of land is definitely not the same thing as MCC PURCHASING the 117 acres of land!

[Mike_Cirba]

Tom/Patrick,

The issue and timeline of when Merion aquired the property is not even in question, much less by David.

Once again, we have a complete attempt at diversion and obfuscation from the real issues that are surfacing here...this is like Shivas the other day when he went on and on and on and on about how long a carry is required over the quarry on 16.

It's argument for the sake of argument, and any good judge would heave you from the courtroom.

These posts are a waste of time and bandwidth.


Tom,

Patrick, much like David, just can't accept that the revealed facts completely refute their main points, their small points, and their fanciful dreams that CB Macdonald designed Merion.

So, they pretend there is still some fundamental issue we haven't completely resolved.

It's not worth responding, frankly.

[TEPaul]

"TEPaul,

Let's forget David Moriarty's "In my opinion" piece for a moment."


THANK GOD, somebody who has been fruitlessly defending that preposterous "In my opinion" piece said THAT!!!

Yes, it's about well passed the time that ridiculous excuse for an investigative essay be forgotten, and hopefully removed from this website. so that WE ALL can just wash our minds of all the totally trumped up speculative and fallacious crap it spews!! THAT is precisely WHY I have been so opposed to it on here and WHY I am so completely opposed to that type of INCREDIBLY OBVIOUS HISTORICAL REVISIONISM!!!

It's about time someone like YOU said we ought to forget it Patrick!!

[TEPaul]

"Tom/Patrick,

The issue and timeline of when Merion aquired the property is not even in question, much less by David."



Michael:

I know it isn't. And that's why I'm trying to tell Patrick Mucci to stop making an issue out of something that is totally irrelevent to the subject of this thread!!

In my opinion, the question of this thread and the only two problems we really need to concentrate on solving are:

1. Do the FACTS of Merion's record even remotely indicate that Francis land swap and the idea of it could've happened in 1910 or before Dec. 1910 or do the facts of Merion's record clearly indicate it pretty much had to happen in the timeframe between Dec. 19, 1910 and April 1911 to be reflected in the deed transfer of Horatio Gates Lloyd to MCCGA on July 21, 1911?

2. How exactly did the Francis land swap and fix of the difficulty of fitting in the last five holes actually work and where?

[TEPaul]

Michael"

Your post #1474 is a very good one in explaining the way this entire subject has gone with the likes of Moriarty, Mucci and even Shivas and I'm pretty comfortable in throwing MacWood in there too with the way he discussed this subject before he left.

It is no different at all than someone just throwing some total hypothetical out there that does not even involve an historically legitimat question and then asking and frankly demanding that everyone else produce some proof that their hypothetical is NOT IMPOSSIBLE. 

I don't know about you and others on here but I don't have much time or interest in that kind of thing and I sure do know a couple of hundred members of Merion G.C. who sure don't either when it comes to the historical record of the architecture of their golf course.

The people on here who do this kind of thing (and they seem to be pretty well known for it) are not serious golf architecture history analysts and essayists, they are not much more than petty arguers from argument's sake!

[Mike_Cirba]

Tom,

At this point, we're simply left to mop up the stragglers coming out of the bushes who haven't yet heard that their general surrendered.

[Jeff_Brauer]

"I guess you could label most of the above speculation, which is what most of this thread (the non argumentative parts) is.  Or, interpretation if it sounds more polite!"

Jeffrey:

While that post my seem logical to you or to any of us, it still is complete speculation. There is absolutely no factual information whatsoever to support it.

Furthermore, MCC's own board records do say that the only person negotiating with HDC between July and early November 1910 was Horatio Gates Lloyd! It even states those those negotiations took place at a number of meetings and a few conferences between Lloyd and Connell (of HDC).

Just to touch on that Tom, I don't agree with Jeff that almost all of this thread is speculation.

I believe that many historic documents and facts have been produced on this thread, many for the first time.

Besides the new material, however, the only difference is that this time they've been produced in the proper and factually-accurate sequential historical order.

Tom and Mike,

Yes, some new documents have come forward, and some others have been put in a timeline which helped. Still others have been re-examined in light of other documents to make things much clearer to many.

As regards my speculation on the Dallas Estate, much as TePaul notes it takes and took time from securing the land from HDC until the actual deed, I merely believe that the same was true of the Dallas Estate.  For one, if you rely on the deed of Dec. 1910, but also realize that the Nov 1910 MCC Concept plan included the Dallas Estate, you know that the land was considered in the fold before it officially was.

The question is how and why did they decide to add the Dallas Estate to MCC, and when?  Since it is in the Nov 10 plan, and Freeman transferred it immediately to Lloyd just a week earlier on Nov 4, we know the decision was made at least by sometime in October 1910 (it had to take some time to execute paperwork, no?)

So, how long was the addition of the Dallas Estate under consideration?  There are a few logial scenarios -

If Freeman got his option to buy in August 1910, as reported in the newspapers, and he was acting independently to build a fine home, the Lloyd and perhaps MCC simply decided they wanted to control all the land adjacent to MCC to gain the value of their real estate investment.  And, they immediately arranged to buy him out at a higher price, perhaps offering other incentives.  No problem.

But, from August, even if the original play was to get all the real estate around MCC as then configured, how did it come to be part of the golf course?  Even if  CBM or Barker didn't suggest the Dallas Estate for golf, someone did in this time frame, no?

Given how tight and configured this parcel is, do we still believe they just looked at the parcels, independently of CBM or other expert advice and said "Yeah that looks better, even without a routing."  I'll say its possible, because it evens out the land around the clubhouse, making it easier to route returning nines.   

But, I am in the camp that suggests that at least some kind of doodle routin was done to suggest that putting the Dallas Estate in golf would work out.  Is that speculation?  Sure, but its based on my experience that most projects go from some rough concepts to more serious study as property lines have to be nailed down!  I also say that because I believe you and Tom are not as objective as you need to be, still wanting very hard to put the routing back to Jan-April 1911 on Wilson's behalf.

And, BTW, before anyone breaks their arm patting themselves on the back, while there has been some clarity in many areas, you and Tom still preface a lot of your posts with words like "we strongly believe" this that or the other thing.  In truth, I would say that there are STILL not enough facts out there for this group to say definitely that we know the exact time line or who was involved.  And, we probably never will.

[DMoriarty]

Jeff,  According to TEPaul, Merion and/or HDC were actively pursuing the Dallas Estate beginning in June of 1910.  So either TEPaul was lying to us about the source material or this entire theory is completely bogus.   

While TEPaul would have obviously had no trouble lying about the date it if suited him, I think the latter option makes more sense. 

[TEPaul]

"Jeff,  According to TEPaul, Merion and/or HDC were actively pursuing the Dallas Estate beginning in June of 1910.  So either TEPaul was lying to us about the source material or this entire theory is completely bogus."


Again, David Moriarty, WHEN have I said Merion and/or HDC was activley pursuing the Dallas Estate beginning in June 1910???

Answer the question, or there is no reason not to consider you a liar and call you a liar on here for manufacturing statements and attributing them to someone who never said them.

Answer the question! WHERE did I say what I quoted from your last post?   

[DMoriarty]

It came from one of your posts.  It is not my responsibility to keep track of your various representations.   If you posted less, or posted in better condition, you'd be able to keep track of them yourself. 

There are consequences to simply posting whatever is convenient at the time.   It makes it difficult to get your story straight.  Don't expect me to bail you out.

[TEPaul]

"It came from one of your posts.  It is not my responsibility to keep track of your various representations.   If you posted less, or posted in better condition, you'd be able to keep track of them yourself. 

There are consequences to simply posting whatever is convenient at the time.   It makes it difficult to get your story straight.  Don't expect me to bail you out."




David Moriarty:

If you're going to put your opinion of something I said on here and I ask you to support it by SHOWING me WHERE I said something like that which I completely deny and that statement above is the best you can do, I am going to just keep hammering you harder and harder on here and you know that!

SHOW ME WHERE I said that or RETRACT IT!

[DMoriarty]

If you're going to put your opinion of something I said on here and I ask you to support it by SHOWING me WHERE I said something like that which I completely deny and that statement above is the best you can do, I am going to just keep hammering you harder and harder on here and you know that!

SHOW ME WHERE I said that or RETRACT IT!

It is true Tom.  Take my word for it.  Why on earth would you want to verify it?   

[TEPaul]

"It is true Tom.  Take my word for it.  Why on earth would you want to verify it?"


You're going to have to do a lot better than that remark David Moriarty and you know it; and so does everyone else! YOU SAID I said THAT so show us WHERE I said THAT?   

[Bryan Izatt]

..............................

p.s...paging Bryan Izatt, paging Bryan Izatt

Bryan...I did calcs of the Johnson Farm westernmost neck of land from the 1900 Railroad Map (whch seems dimensionally more accurate than the 1908 one).   When I go on Google Earth, it seems about 120 yards wide, but I wanted to get your independent take on the measurement of that land.

Thanks.

Mike,

I'm diligently trying to work my way through the deeds and plot the metes and bounds (a tedious process).  'Till I'm done that, I can't keep up with the thread, and it'd be pointless to estimate distances from the RR map when the actuals are on the deeds.  An early tidbit - the northern boundary of the Johnson Farm is 466 feet long.  It's very clear on the deed I have, not smudged as on Tom's.  So the location of the western boundary of the Johnson Farm will be very close to where I drew it on the last map I posted.

 

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()