[Patrick_Mucci]

I did read an exchange between Pat Mucci and Mike Cirba about which, as a bona fide linear thinker (not always a good thing), I feel compelled to comment.  

Note that I consider both principals to be friends and that my comment is not specifically related to the subject of who did/did not "design" (whatever that word means) the East Course.

Mike:  I'm afraid I must support Patrick's assertion that "even though there is no proof that something happened, one cannot declare unequivocally that it did not happen".  

While I agree with you that lack of smoke often means there wasn't a fire, there is a popular investment book these days called "The Black Swan" that is, basically, all about the accuracy of Patrick's logic.  The title of the book is drawn from the fact that, although nobody outside of Australia had ever seen a black swan in all the thousands of years of recorded history, that was not any guarantee that black swans don't exist (they do) even though generations of learned naturalists were sure they did not.

I don't have any idea what Barker's role really was, but I do agree with Patrick that we can't absolutely, positively know the answer to that question.  Based on what I've read, your conclusion on the matter seems highly likely to be accurate, but it can't be demonstrated to be 100% correct at this time.


Chipoat,

I don't know what everyone's respective roles were, but, I'm not prepared to accept Mike Cirba's exclusionary pronouncements and Jeff's acquiescencse to them.

That Jeff and Mike don't understand the inherent flaws in Mike's premises and conclusions can only be attributed to a failure in our educational system, or at least the school districts where they attended.

I'd like to uncover more facts before drawing ANY conclusion/s.

It seems that you, Bryan, Jim and others feel the same way, while Mike and Jeff want to shut down the discovery process before any additional facts can be uncovered.

[Mike_Cirba]

It seems that you, Bryan, Jim and others feel the same way, while Mike and Jeff want to shut down the discovery process before any additional facts can be uncovered. [/b][/size][/color]

Pat,

That's pretty funny as I seem to be the one providing all of the factual information.

MacWood and Moriarty have had, what...five years to try and make their case now?    

My lord, if there isn't a statute of limitations on architectural attribution there should be!  

[Patrick_Mucci]

Speaking of Sayres, in November 1915 he presented an address at a dinner celebrating the 50th year anniversary of the Merion Cricket Club, the following is noteworthy to those incliined to think like Patrick Mucci and Tom MacWood who insist that Merion just HAD to hire a professional like H.H. Barker..."THE BEST", as Tom MacWood termed it...to design their new golf course.

Mike, this is just another example of your ability to make quantum leaps to flawed conclusions absent facts and/or reason.
Whatever idiot presented you with this passage, presenting it as proof that Merion would never hire a professional, just goes to show that "birds of a feather ..... "

Are we now to believe that Merion never hired a professional Green superintendent, A professional Golf Pro, A professional Tennis Pro, A professional Club manager.



Given this evidence, I move that in the interest of productive discussion, and in light of Jeff B's point about people like Patrick continually rehashing points we all thought were long dead and buried, can we at least agree to take Barker off the table as the supposed architect of Merion??  

Mike, if this is what you call "evidence" you've got one of the weakest cases in the land.

Your presentation and conclusions are absurd.  They're beyond juvenile, they're infantile.

Please stop, you're embarrassing yourself, as is the moron who provided that passage as proof positive.

[Mike_Cirba]

If we used your so-called logical reasoning, we really couldn't rule out W.C. Fields as the architect of Merion either, because all things considered, he'd have rather been in Philadelphia!!  

p.s.   I notice you very purposefully ignored Alan Wilson telling us that Merion did not use a golf course architect, which summarily rules out your and MacWood's man-crush on HH Barker.

Sorry, but I'll take Alan Wilson's eyewitness account over your and MacWood's biased, threadbare, agenda-driven speculation any day.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Patrick,

So, bring new facts. I haven't seen you contribute one DAMN thing.

I would love a show of hands of those who felt I personally shouted them down. For anyone votes yes, then I apolgize in advance.

Ran, shut down this thread!

[Jay Flemma]

62 pages...is that a record?

So are we any closer at all to solving this mess?

[Peter Pallotta]

Patrick - this thread moves so fast, but just some thoughts on your reply:

I used the term 'template holes' as shorthand for the classic holes of the great British links that CBM was promoting so agressively at the time. I mean to suggest that CBM's boiler-plate 6,000 yard course did not seem -- to me at least -- to highlight or incorporate those kind of holes.  I allow, however, that he could've discussed those kind of holes during that first one-day visit. I alo think that, yes, while concept and placements ARE tied together in site-specific situations, I don't see any evidence of CBM having gotten into that level of detail at Merion. Finally, I don't see the Nicklaus-Doak partnership as analogous to the Merion situation in 1910.

Peter

[Mike_Cirba]

Patrick,

So, bring new facts. I haven't seen you contribute one DAMN thing.

I would love a show of hands of those who felt I personally shouted them down. For anyone votes yes, then I apolgize in advance.

Jeff,

There's only person pounding on the table , shouting inanities, hurling insults, and trying to distract attention from any productive discussion that doesn't anoint either CBM or Barker as architect over Hugh Wilson and that's the man in GREEN.  

Although, that one time I do think you slightly raised your voice to me.    

We can shut it down, but I really would like to hear Jim and Bryan tell us how Merion supposedly had control of both the triangle and the land they contend that they had to swap out to acquire the triangle all at the same time.  

[Patrick_Mucci]

p.s.   I notice you very purposefully ignored Alan Wilson telling us that Merion did not use a golf course architect, which summarily rules out your and MacWood's man-crush on HH Barker.

Mike,

Would you remind us, and cite for us, Alan Wilson's actual involvement with the creation of the Merion Golf Course circa 1909-1912 ?

Sorry, but I'll take Alan Wilson's eyewitness account over your and MacWood's biased, threadbare, agenda-driven speculation any day.

"Eyewitness Account" ?

Would you please cite the sum total of Alan Wilson's involvement at Merion circa 1909-1912 ?

Thanks

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom Macwood asked me to post this for him:

Mike
Here is a link to 'Hugh Wilson - An Ongoing Investigative Journey'

http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,32632.msg644817/

There is nothing in that thread that implies he was independently wealthy in 1910 or at anytime. There is nothing to indicate he was a magnetic personality. Regarding his status as an elite golfer this is your timeline for his competitive career leading up to 1910. [/b][/size]


May 9, 1897:  GAP match for Belmont team
Dec 4, 1897:  GAP tourney
Dec 5, 1897:  match at Philly CC
Mar 6, 1898:  story calls him 'king' golfer at Belmont and that he doesn't play when the weather gets cold.
May 8, 1898:  interclub match playing for Philly CC
May 18, 1901:  named captain of golf team
1902: On the Princeton GC green committee at the time new course constructed
May 11, 1902:  NCAA match at Garden City
June 14, 1903: better ball tourney
Sept 27, 1903:  GAP qualifier
Nov 4, 1903:  wins Election Day Trophy tourney at St Davids
May 8, 1904:  interclub match
May 26, 1904: Stevenson Cup qualifier (playing for Merion)
May 28, 1905: GAP match at HVCC (for Merion)
June 4, 1905: GAP match vs Mt. Airy
May 24 and July 1, 1906:  tourneys at Merion
April 21, 1907:  named to play in 4/27/07 Chevy Chase match
May 3, 1908: intercity match vs Washington


Unlike Leeds, Macdonald or even Crump he was not a nationally ranked golfer and did not compete nationally, never in the US Am or US Open like those three, and never named to the Lelsey Cup team, saved for the best players in Philadelphia. He did not travel overseas. Regarding his architectural aptitude or interest there is nothing pre-1910. And you claimed he played over these courses while at Princeton (1898 to 1902) to show his experience:[/b][/size]


Myopia Hunt
Garden City
Chicago
Lakewood
Baltusrol
St. Andrews
Essex County
Philadelphia Cricket
Philadelphia Country Club
Richmond County
Morris County
Midlothian
Exmoor
Atlantic City
Ardsley
Misquamicut


Princeton and Wilson did not play at Myopia, Essex County or Misquamicut. Harvard had their own golf course, the former Cambridge GC, however Princeton did not travel to Harvard during those years. They did not play over any of the Chicago courses (Chicago, Midlothian and Exmoor) during his tenure. GCGC was the most significant course he played, but one must remember the 1902 version was not the later post-Travis version. This is the corrected list:[/size]


Garden City
Lakewood
Baltusrol
St. Andrews
Philadelphia Cricket
Philadelphia Country Club
Richmond County
Morris County
Atlantic City
Ardsley


I'm still waiting for someone to come up with a logical explanation why Lloyd and company would put the design responsibilities in the hands of a complete novice.

They had already brought in the two top architects to inspect the property, they hired the top construction firm in the country (out of Boston) to build the course and brought in top grass expert Reginald Beale from the UK. [/size]

[Mike_Cirba]

Patrick,

NONE of the Merion people who were there EVER mentioned Barker, including your buddy Francis.

Not even Once.

Not even in passing.

Not a friggin whisper.

Get over it.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Patrick,

NONE of the Merion people who were there EVER mentioned Barker, including your buddy Francis.
Not even Once.
Not even in passing.
Not a friggin whisper.
Get over it.

Mike,

Why is it that when I ask you a direct question, you NEVER answer it ?

I asked you to cite Alan Wilson's specific involvement at Merion circa 1909-1912 after YOU cited him as an "EYEWITNESS"

WHY ? have you failed to answer that question ?

[Mike_Cirba]

http://

Yes, Tom MacWood and Patrick...Hugh WIlson was a nobody, who didn't know anybody, didn't travel in knowledgable golf circles, even though he was the first champion of what is today Aronimink in 1897, even though he played Ivy League golf when that actually meant something and was captain of the Princeton team, and even though he was on the Green Committtee of Princeton Golf Club in 1902 when they were building and opening a brand new golf course...and I just typed up the 1906 results above on Photoshop.  

But yes, Barker, by virtue of the fact that he came from abroad and was a professional golfer, and did a small handful of mediocre same-day routings, almost all of which were summarily replaced over the years, and who had at most two actual golf courses built on the ground as of June 1910 was the actual architect of Merion, it's just that everyone over 100 years forgot to actually ever notice that, much less think to mention it to anyone.

[Mike_Cirba]

Mike,

Why is it that when I ask you a direct question, you NEVER answer it ?

I asked you to cite Alan Wilson's specific involvement at Merion circa 1909-1912 after YOU cited him as an "EYEWITNESS"

WHY ? have you failed to answer that question

Patrick,

Because your question is ludicrous.

Alan Wilson was one of the most prominent golfing members of Merion from back in the 1890s and your ridiculous contention that he wouldn't have known the details of who was doing what at Merion when his brother was the Chairman of the commitee is just hugely insulting.

Why the hell would Merion have asked him to write the reminisce for the club about the creation of the East course if he wasn't intimately, if not officially, involved?   Francis and Griscom were still alive...Griscom would later become the first President of Merion Golf Club when it split from the Cricket Club.    All of these men obviously had faith in Alan Wilson to provide the true story, even though they couldn't have known he'd be insulted and questioned by a bunch of internet nudnicks for doing so when he couldn't defend himself 85 years later.

Your question is ridiculous.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mike,

Could you answer the question instead of posturing ?

[Bryan Izatt]

Mike,

You've done well with surfacing documents and news reports.  I am curious about two other documents, whick I don't believe have seen the light of GCA yet.  They relate to the securing of the 117 acres.  You have previously stated:

"Of course there was no deed for the 117 acres, but there was an agreement in principle, in the form of a letter from HDC to Merion from November 1910, and a returned acceptance letter from President Evans of Merion to HDC for specifically 117 acres."

Do you have these documents, and can you post them?  Or are they part of Tom/Wayne's private stock?  Do you have the exact dates of the two letters.  One thing I find in the documents that I've seen is that the documents always seem to trail the action.  For instance, PALCO bought the Johnson Farm on February 21, 1907, even though they weren't incorporated in PA until March 15 of that year.  So, they were deeded property before they legally existed.  Curious.     In any event, can you post the letters or at least put a precise date on them?

[Bryan Izatt]

Time to get back to tearing my hair out on mathematics.

Bryan,

Yes, it needed to net out to two acres, but only because we KNOW the Land Plan measures 122 acres and we KNOW they purchased 120.  So, if we didn't KNOW those two areas, it (whatever you think it is) would/could have netted out to something else.  But, good start.  We do KNOW the area of the the land plan map is 122 acres.  And, we do know the Merion deeded area is 120 acres.  In mathematics those would be known as constants in any equation.  And it's good that we agree that 122-120=2, because it sure is tough to get agreement on anything around this thread.

So, if either of the gives or putbacks (out of a possible range of X acres on either side of the transaction) was different and not netting out to 2 acres, Jeff's theory wouldn't work.   Where are you seeing "a possible range of X acres on either side of the transaction"?  Look at Jeff's map again.  The areas in white are fixed by the approximate road and GHR.  There is no range in the size of each area.  They are fixed.  Jeff measured the fixed area of each.  And, since we KNOW that 122-120=2, we also KNOW that the sum total of Jeff's white gives and putbacks MUST equal 2 acres.  There is no other possibility!    So you're setting up an "if" condition that is not mathematically possible, and then saying because it didn't happen (because it can't possibly), that by double negative logic, Jeff's theory must be right.  Ridiculous.  Although I don't condone Pat's adjectival descriptions of you, I have to say that you are being incredibly obtuse on this point. 

What are the odds of that?  The odds of what?  The odds that the gives and putbacks would net out to 2 acres?  The answer is infinity to 1.  There is no other possibility.

Just using a maximum swap of either side of the transaction at 5 acres (which is extremely conservative because you are arguing that they swapped 14 acres for 5), the odds of both of his calculations of gives and putbacks netting out to 2 acres is 1 in 45.

The odds of matching both 1 precise number of 5 possible and 1 precise number out of 14 = 1 in 171.   I haven't a clue what you're trying to say here.  If this is your understanding of odds, I sure hope you aren't a betting man.   



p.s.

Tom does not agree it's the railroad land.   He believes it's the additional HDC land that moved the purchase from 117 acres secured to 120 purchased.    The Lloyd letter to members outlines the 2,500 price tag.

To quote from Tom,



OH MY GOD!?!??!

[Bryan Izatt]

Mike,

You stated, and I responded, as below:



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

"Second, there would have been no need for Merion to approve purchase of 3 extra acres in April 1911 from the original agreement in principle to purchase 117 acres if they already had secured the land to the Johnson Farm boundary.  We've been over and over this point.  Give it up.  The three acres was the RR land.  Even Tom said it was.  Go back and reread his posts."



And, then you said:

"................................

p.s.

Tom does not agree it's the railroad land.   He believes it's the additional HDC land that moved the purchase from 117 acres secured to 120 purchased.    The Lloyd letter to members outlines the 2,500 price tag."


And, then Jeff says:

"...........................

"The prime example is the RR land. I think someone brought it up a while back.  In my mind, it was pretty well conceded that this came later and that MCC is really 123 acres 120 from HDC and 3 from the RR.  And yet, here it comes back up today.  Maybe I am wrong, but I thought that was settled."


Well, here you have befuddled me again.  You start off by saying that they approved purchase of 3 extra acres in April to get from 117 to 120.  That'd be the Thompson resolution.  Back in post #223 Tom said:

"Immediately after "adjoining..." in the Thompson resolution that was approved I left out the part about the app. 3 acre purchase of what we refer to as the "railroad land" for $7,500 and the payment of annual real estate taxes. Was that part of the Richard Francis Land Swap idea? I didn't realize that---SILLY ME!

That purchase was approved on 4/19/11 at that board meeting but the club wouldn't actually buy that land from the P&W Railroad (affectionately known by them as the "Pig and Whistle") until over a half century later and when they did buy it over fifty years later they got it for $11,000 for a over half century price appreciation of a staggering 46.6731%".

Now you report that Tom is saying that he thinks that the 3 extra acres in going from 117 to 120 is from HDC land. 

Are you now saying that you agree with Tom and that it wasn't the RR land or the Thompson resolution 3 acres (since the two are synonymous) that increased the acreage from 117 to 120?  Or, are you saying that the Thompson resolution isn't the RR land, but rather other HDC land?

It seems that you have at least befuddled me and Jeff.

On a related point, I don't think we ever agreed on who Lloyd was holding the land for.  Tom said back in post #215:

"DEC, 19, 1910; The date of the transfer of the 117 acres into the names Horatio G. Lloyd et ux for MCC that would become the majority of the world famous Merion East golf course; Reflected in a deed dated Dec. 19, 1910."

I note that the news article you posted said the same thing.

Yet, you claim that Lloyd was holding it for HDC; I assume, because you can't rationalize the Thompson resolution purchase of 3 extra acres unless Lloyd was holding it for HDC.  If Lloyd was holding it for MCC then it wouldn't be necessary to purchase it.

Has Tom recanted on the fact in post #215 too?

[Bryan Izatt]

Bryan,

not pissed, didn't take anything personally.  Just realized that this is a no win battle for both the logical arguments put out there or lack thereof, all of our tendencies to call our arguments logic and opposing arguments speculation, and in this latest flurry, the realization that we don't even all have the same basic understanding of points not even in contention.

The prime example is the RR land. I think someone brought it up a while back.  In my mind, it was pretty well conceded that this came later and that MCC is really 123 acres 120 from HDC and 3 from the RR.  And yet, here it comes back up today.  Maybe I am wrong, but I thought that was settled.  Ditto on Pat and the role of Barker.  I was pretty damn sure that everyone agreed that Connell brought him in June 1910, and MCC brought in CBM.  Then we spend a week debating whether double negative logic means that Barker's routing MIGHT be included somehow, somewhere in MCC.  I was pretty damn sure that we agreed that it was done at the start, but not the end.

Old arguments keep popping up like brushfires here.  Yeah.  It certainly contributes to my frustration.  The targets keep moving.     So do new ones, like the 130 acres option.  I like to think of that as a "new" (even though it's old) "fact" in the current discussion context.    That is new to me, so I have no answer for you, other than the newspaper may be wrong.   Yup, or they may be right.  I guess that unless we have signed, sealed carbon dated affidavits that agreement on any point that doesn't fit the various theories will be impossible to achieve  And, to simplify Mke C's contention, how on earth could there have been a land swap if the working boundary was 130 acres?  It would have had to have been a land give back to the tune of 10 acres, not a swap.  That's only if you define a swap as equal for equal.  I don't believe everybody agrees with that yet.

Have you done your Google measurements to see if Johnson Farm less land adjacent to Haverford CC equals 130 acres?   Of course I measured it.  Mike has provided an (almost) correct summary, but I did measure it directly too and it fits.  If the glove fits, you must acquit     This is beginning to look more and more like the OJ trial. 

[Bryan Izatt]

Nice sequence of articles you posted here.  I don't suppose Sayres wrote marginal notes in the scrapbook saying things like: gee this reporter really botched it, or nice article.   

I take some heart in that we're batting 0.500 on these articles.  Two of them mention 130 acres.

It seems to me that HDC/MCC were likely having press conferences/drinks with the lowly reporters to peddle the whole development to generate this many articles.  A lot of the themes in the reports are the same.  Sadly the reporters seem to have had varying capabilities at taking the story line and telling it accurately.  Do you suppose H. N. Barker is related to H.H. Barker?   

The last article suggests that MCC began the site search as early as July 1909.  Does that jive with any other MCC records?

Do you think the writer, clearly familiar with many other details, would just manufacture 13 acres?

I don't know Jim....we have this article that mentions the 13 acre option but also gets wrong the acreage of the old, existing course...




Then, we have this one that incorrectly the total acreage purchased, the money per acre paid, and the previous owner of the land;




Then this one which seems factually correct, if lacking details;




Then, finally this one (in two parts), which also mentions 130 acres, but which gets wrong the total acreage of HDC's holdings (350) the price per acre Merion paid ($3000) , the source of Barker's involvement (Lloyd), hyperbolizes the price of a recent adjacent land deal ($8000 per acre).

Somehow, they have the mysterious 12 or 13 acres in there..

[Mike_Cirba]

Bryan,

Tom Paul at first thought it was the RR land 3 acres but his thinking on the matter evolved as I posted in a series of snippets of his posts from Apr-Jun  a week or so back. EDIT - Please see my posts 1855-1856 on this thread that show Tom's various posts on the matter.   Thanks.

Recall afterwards how I was asking you if you thought it made any sense that the RR was going to charge 2500 an acre for a purchase yet then agreed to a dollar annual, perpetual lease and how Tom contends that the HDC land was selling at that time for 2500 an acre?

Also, I know the offer letter from HDC to Merion was from the first half of Nov 1910.

Don't know the date of the Merion response and they are not in my possession..

[Mike_Cirba]

As far as the two articles mentioning 130 acres, I'm trying to determine if they were from separate papers and/or writers.

Also, at least one of them mentions it's 130 out of a total of 350, which puts an entire different spin on it.

[Phil_the_Author]

Mike,

This may have been answered previously, but I can't find it. In the article you posted "New Golf Course For Merion Cricket Club" from The Record of November 1910, it states that prior to the purchase of the land "Horatio G. Lloyd, of Drexel & Company, one of the Governors, took a very active part..."

Especially as the article previously and specifically references "the governors of the club..." in the specific reference then to Lloyd was he a one of the Governors of Merion?

I think this is VERY important as the article immediately follows this with "Before the deal was consummated Mr. Lloyd had the ground inspected by three leading golf authorities, Charles B. Macdonald, H.J. Whigham and H.N. Barker..."

Your consistent stand has been that the CLUB did not hire or have anything to do with Barker. In fact an earlier post of yours on this same page states:

"Patrick,

NONE of the Merion people who were there EVER mentioned Barker, including your buddy Francis.

Not even Once.

Not even in passing.

Not a friggin whisper.

Get over it."

It appears that this article states the exact opposite...

[Phil_the_Author]

Mike,

Tom Macwood asked me to post this for him:

Mike
Is that the best you can come up with regarding a rational for his alleged selection?
 
I take it this match in 1903 is the highlight of his golfing career, when he was seventh man on twelve man team, playing between the immortal JJ Cook and FM Mackie. Defeated in his singles match by the equally immortal LC Kellogg, Jr. I hope you are not trying to make the case he was prominent golfer along the lines of Macdonald, Leeds, Crump, Fownes, Perrin or Tillinghast, please don't insult our intelligence.
 
Being the student representative on Princeton GC's green committee in 1902 may have sparked his later interest in greenkeeping, but its not a legitimate reason for Lloyd & Co to select him to design their new course. The same year he supposedly selected Wilson (1910) Lloyd chose Wilson Eyre, one of the great architects in the country, if not the greatest, to design his home about 500 yards from Merion GC. There is a clear pattern of selecting the best of the best. Every news report at the time said the club would spare no effort in building a course that would rival the best in the country. Based on that commitment, and their pattern of selecting top talent, can you explain why they would choose Wilson? Jeff B's explanation is they saw the potential of a latter day Macdonald in him, of course JB has not explained what attributes they saw in him that suggested this. He had nothing in common with the man. I don't think they would bet the ranch on a novice.
 
Is it possible that Wilson's role, and the role of the CONSTRUCTION COMMITTEE, was to oversee construction and not to design the golf course? The hundreds of P&O letters show Wilson as a man totally focused on the green-keeping aspects of a new golf course - controlling budget, selecting a seed merchant, buying seed, preparing the ground, buying sand, hiring a greenkeeper, etc. There is not a single mention of anything having to do with architecture or design in those letters during the period in question. Wasn't Wilson chairman of the green committee at Merion, and weren't the others on the committee also on the green committee, with the exception of Francis?

[Phil_the_Author]

Mike,

Tom asked me to also post this comment:

"But yes, Barker, by virtue of the fact that he came from abroad and was a professional golfer, and did a small handful of mediocre same-day routings, almost all of which were summarily replaced over the years, and who had at most two actual golf courses built on the ground as of June 1910 was the actual architect of Merion, it's just that everyone over 100 years forgot to actually ever notice that, much less think to mention it to anyone."


Mike
Barker claimed upwards of twenty golf courses in his Merion letter. I have not found twenty courses prior June 1910, but I have found quite a few: Garden City, Waverly, Spokane, Newport, CC of Virginia, Rumson, Arcola, Columbia, Mayfield, Youngstown, Williamsport, Springhaven, CC of Atlantic City, Skokie, Detroit, and Victoria (which I'm still trying to confirm). If you ask me that is a pretty impressive list of designs and redesigns. Another possibility is East Lake in Atlanta , a club he had a relationship with, which was redesigned in the image of GCGC in early 1910.


Who had a better resume in June 1910? And which courses are the 'mediocre same-day routings'?


The redesign of GCGC, along with the design of the NGLA, were the two most important architectural events of this period. Barker was involved in the redesign of GCGC, and with Travis's encouragement turned that involvement into an architectural career. Arguably he was the hottest architecture in the country circa 1910. But you know all this because I've sent you this information before. I don't think you do Wilson and yourself any good trying to mislead. The people at Merion were not dumb.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()