[Dan Herrmann]

Mike,
Don't architects today sometimes visit the in-progress work of another architect?  Perhaps they're old colleagues and the elder architect stops by and gives the former employee a few words of wisdom?

[Mike Cirba]

Jeff
IMO there is far too much attention given to the swap....in the greater scheme of things it really was not a very important event. Focusing on it and not on the bigger picture has led many astray IMO. Especially when you consider Francis's account was written almost forty years after the fact. I can barely remember what I did yesterday much less decades ago.



Tom,

At least you're wise enough to try to discount Francis' entire article as feeble-minded warbling, as well as try to have us forget about the unsupported notion that HDC would have capriciously decapitated the only property they had available to sell to the club for golf in July 1910.

I say that because the Francis first-person account in full basically refutes every notion that you and David try to advance about the efforts of Barker and Macdonald in the creation of the course, and at least we agree that the decapitation theory makes no sense at all on any level.

How can you say, though, that prototypical ideas for holes would have pointed to CBM when Francis tells us that Wilson created the redan hole based on what he learned abroad, and Findlay told us that Wilson thought he had a "lot of making" to do to create an Alps hole on the 10th?

Why do you think Francis' first-person account fails to mention Macdonald if he planned the course, much less Barker?

Why do you say that December 1910 was before Wilson's involvement?   What factual evidence are you using to support that theory?

Are you and David going to produce any factual evidence at any point here, or are we simply going to spend even more time speculating wildly and carelessly about what you both hope happened, based on your adoring fan elevation of your own mythical beliefs about your favorite architects?

Let us know if you guys come up with even a shred of factual evidence to support your specious theories.    

[Mike Cirba]

I searched for the term "lay off" and "laid off" as relates to golf courses and found very, very little, although this one does refer to land being procured and a J. Cuthbert being brought in to lay off the brand new course.



I found more references to it as related to road building, which seems to have been related to the surveying and location of new roadways, as the following illustrates.   Applied to the golf course, and given that Lesley was an engineer as well as Francis, perhaps this was the start of the work of Mr. Francis?   It seems from the article that laying off meant the planning, locating, and measuring work that precedes construction

Recall again that Evans wrote;

In accordance with instructions given me by the Board of Government of the Merion Cricket Club, I beg to state that a Corporation will be formed on behalf of the Club, which will purchase the tract of land above mentioned one hundred and seventeen (117) acres, at the price or sum of Eighty-five thousand dollars ($85,000.00), in accordance with the terms of your proposition, as quoted above, and that as soon as this Corporation obtains possession of the property, we will at once proceed to lay off, and put in shape a Golf Links.

So, if they were agreeing in mid-November 1910 to begin this process after a corporation could be formed and a formal agreement of sale completed, then what does that say about where they were in designing their golf course at that time?;




I guess on some level I should be encouraged that Tom MacWood agrees the golf course was not designed prior to December 1910, even if he is still trying to pursue his "Anybody But Wilson" theories to squeeze Barker again into the mix.   

[TEPaul]

"But one clarification.   TEPaul and Mike admitted long ago that the MCC records indicate that the Dallas Estate was in play beginning in the summer 1910, either June or July.  This new timeline trying to push the Dallas Estate toward November is fishy at best."



David Moriarty:

Fishy at best?!?   

Well, this may be just another example of you putting words in someone else's mouth that they did not say. It seems now even Jeff Brauer is beginning to recognize that you do this.

You said TEPaul and Mike Cirba admitted long ago that that MCC records indicate the Dallas Estate was in play in the beginning of the summer of 1910, June or July?

Would you show us where we admitted that or said it? And if not, then why not? Is this going to be just another example of what everybody is beginning to recognize you do on here and then just ignore it altogether when some asks you to prove what you claim others have said?

I don't know about Mike Cirba but if I said that in the past about the MCC records indicating the Dallas Estate was in play beginning in the summer of 1910, June or July, then I was just plain wrong about that. But I don't remember saying that so please show me where I said it or I'll just have to consider it another of a series of endless fabrications you come up with on this website and particularly on the subject of Merion

As far as I can tell from everything I have now, the very first time the Dallas Estate coming into play was ever mentioned by either HDC or MCC was when Nickolsen wrote his initial offer letter to MCC on Nov. 10, 1910 in which the offer of 117 acres was made which did include the Dallas Estate.

So show me where I said what you just said I said about the Dallas Estate.

And if you don't show me and you ignore this post too I'm going to just continue to ask you the same question on here so hopefully everyone cannot help but tell what your real MO is on here, the same MO Jeffrey Brauer has now finally recognized too.

[Tom MacWood]

Tom,

At least you're wise enough to try to discount Francis' entire article as feeble-minded warbling, as well as try to have us forget about the unsupported notion that HDC would have capriciously decapitated the only property they had available to sell to the club for golf in July 1910.

I say that because the Francis first-person account in full basically refutes every notion that you and David try to advance about the efforts of Barker and Macdonald in the creation of the course, and at least we agree that the decapitation theory makes no sense at all on any level.

How can you say, though, that prototypical ideas for holes would have pointed to CBM when Francis tells us that Wilson created the redan hole based on what he learned abroad, and Findlay told us that Wilson thought he had a "lot of making" to do to create an Alps hole on the 10th?

Why do you think Francis' first-person account fails to mention Macdonald if he planned the course, much less Barker?

Why do you say that December 1910 was before Wilson's involvement?   What factual evidence are you using to support that theory?

Are you and David going to produce any factual evidence at any point here, or are we simply going to spend even more time speculating wildly and carelessly about what you both hope happened, based on your adoring fan elevation of your own mythical beliefs about your favorite architects?

Let us know if you guys come up with even a shred of factual evidence to support your specious theories.    

Settle down, any objective observer would appreciate the fact that we are all dealing mostly in speculation. The fact is no one knows for certain who laid out the golf course. IMO the most logical and plausable candidates are Barker and CBM, and it occured in 1910 prior to Wilson's involvement.

Francis first person account does not mention anyone laying out the course. Who knows if even recalls CBM's involvement forty years later, and there is no debating CBM was involved. Francis does mention the committee members, but also mentions their main focus was construction, and in particular getting grass to grow. I don't believe Francis said Wilson created the Redan. Their focus was on construction.

The first known involvement of Wilson is 2/1/1911. IMO it is illogical to think he routed the golf course in December 1910, especially when you have arguably the two top golf architects in the country at your disposal. Why the hell would you have an untested ineperience insurance salesmen layout your golf course...a golf course that was tied to the success of a real estate venture?

My theory is based on a few known facts
* CBM and Barker were engaged by Lloyd & Co. in 1910
* Barker is the only person known to produce a routing plan
* Barker was actively staking out golf courses during a three week period in December 1910 (from NYC heading south)
* CBM guided the construction process
* The golf course as built contained a number of CBM's features and holes
* Verdant Green claimed Barker designed/redesigned 3 courses in Philadlephia
* Wilson indicated in his letters (starting in 2/1911) the golf course existed

[Mike Cirba]

Settle down, any objective observer would appreciate the fact that we are all dealing mostly in speculation. The fact is no one knows for certain who laid out the golf course. IMO the most logical and plausable candidates are Barker and CBM, and it occured in 1910 prior to Wilson's involvement. Tom, on what basis are you saying that Wilson wasn't involved until 1911?   All he ever said was that the Committee was formed in early 1911.   How can you know he wasn't involved prior to then?   Why would they have put a guy in charge of the Committee if he hadn't been involved prior?  

Francis first person account does not mention anyone laying out the course. That is not true, Tom.   Please read below.   Francis clearly separates the two tasks the Committee was responsible for..."laying out AND constructing" the new golf course.  

Who knows if even recalls CBM's involvement forty years later, and there is no debating CBM was involved. Francis does mention the committee members, but also mentions their main focus was construction, and in particular getting grass to grow. I don't believe Francis said Wilson created the Redan. Their focus was on construction. Again Tom, completely untrue.   I guess I need to repost the article so you can read what it says again.   Why are you trying to make Francis out to be a ninny, simply because you don't like what he wrote?

The first known involvement of Wilson is 2/1/1911. IMO it is illogical to think he routed the golf course in December 1910, especially when you have arguably the two top golf architects in the country at your disposal. Why the hell would you have an untested ineperience insurance salesmen layout your golf course...a golf course that was tied to the success of a real estate venture?   Tom, your contempt for Wilson is clear and I understand it's a class warfare thing for you, but you're not making sense here.   The first documented letter we have from Wilson to Piper and Oakley was 2/1/1911.   From that you are inferring he wasn't involved prior, and that's completely absurd and wishful thinking.  

My theory is based on a few known facts
* CBM and Barker were engaged by Lloyd & Co. in 1910 Connell of his own accord brought Barker while he was in town for a tournament in June 1910.   Griscom brought in Macdonald subsequently for a day, also in town for the tournament.   Barker was never heard from again, and Macdonald was not back on the property until another single day visit 10 months later.
* Barker is the only person known to produce a routing plan
* Barker was actively staking out golf courses during a three week period in December 1910 (from NYC heading south)
* CBM guided the construction process I've heard of hands-off management before but this one is hysterical.
* The golf course as built contained a number of CBM's features and holes Did CBM invent the Redan and Alps holes?   Did CBM invent the redan hole that Francis tells us Wilson designed or the Alps hole Findlay told us Wilson made?
* Verdant Green claimed Barker designed/redesigned 3 courses in Philadlephia Nobody ever wrote that Barker designed Merion, did they?  Why in heaven's name would you think they would have excluded him, Tom?
* Wilson indicated in his letters (starting in 2/1911) the golf course existed Tom, that's a completely absurd reading of Wilson.   Why would you begin ploughing up an existing golf course in late March 1911?

Tom,

I'm thinking we need to revisit this article...

After introducing the committee, and telling us about his role on it, WHO do you think Francis is referring to as "WE", as in "we thought Ardmore Avenue would make a fine hazard" on holes 10, 11, & 12, as part of getting the first 13 holes fairly easily routed, or as in "we had some property west of the present course which did not fit in at all with any golf layout"?

If Francis was out early with Lloyd working on CBM's (or Barker's) hypothetical golf course routing, before WIlson's committee was formed, then why do you think he doesn't mention Macdonald or Barker at all in his accounting of events, and why do you think he seems to assign to the Committee tasks that are design-oriented?

After all, this was for a national publication in the 1950 US Open Program, not some internal Merion memo.

Why would he give Wilson clear credit for the creation of the redan 3rd hole, and not CBM?

Do you think it's possible that Francis was "added" to the Committee sometime after it was formed, and not at inception?

[JESII]

Interesting that the swap is a waste of time, but the Barker train ride is vital...that's a head scratcher...

[TEPaul]

"The fact is no one knows for certain who laid out the golf course."


Tom MacWood:

Just about anyone certainly would know who laid out the golf course if they bother to just read the Wilson Committee report to the MCC board on April 19, 1911, but I doubt you even know what that is, much less what it says, even at this point!     ;)

But to give you a hint it might be one of those original MCC documents you said on here I altered.  

[TEPaul]

"Interesting that the swap is a waste of time, but the Barker train ride is vital...that's a head scratcher..."


Sully:

It really isn't all that much of a head scratcher coming from Tom MacWood. Some, even most, may view Moriarty and MacWood as sort of a team with their take on the history of Merion, and certainly given that Moriarty mentions that MacWood was one of his primary sources for his essay, at least as far as the part about Barker as well as being one of the reviewers of his essay before he put it on here.

But those two may not be the collaborators some think they are at least from Tom MacWood's perspective. One good indication of that is some emails MacWood sent to Merion in his attempt to have them send him their archival material. In one email he told them that he did not have as much to do with that essay as they might think and that he did not even agree with some of it.

Someone should probably ask Moriarty----with friends like MacWood if he thinks he needs any enemies?  



MikeC:

It really is something else what MacWood has said on this thread in the last twelve hours or so after returning to this thread for the first time in some weeks. With him that old adage definitely applies----eg "If you give somebody a little rope they really will hang themselves!"

I think you only asked Moriarty what he thought Francis meant when he said he was ADDED to the Wilson Committee, even though I think he might've ignored that too. My recommendation for you would be to ask MacWood not what he thinks Francis meant by that but just ask MacWood what he thinks ADD actually means. If he says he doesn't understand the question which he most certainly has said on here plenty of times just ask him what he thinks A.D.D. means.

[Tom MacWood]

Interesting that the swap is a waste of time, but the Barker train ride is vital...that's a head scratcher...

A vague account forty years after the fact is a waste of time; a contemporaneous report from December 1910 is something to take note of. The swap in Francis's report sheds no light on who laid out the golf course.

[TEPaul]

"A vague account forty years after the fact is a waste of time; a contemporaneous report from December 1910 is something to take note of. The swap in Francis's report sheds no light on who laid out the golf course."



Tom MacWood:

Do you think this part of Francis' 1950 article sheds any light on who laid out the course?

"The Committee in charge of laying out and building a new course was composed of Mess'rs Horatio Gates Lloyd, Rodman Griscom*, Hugh I. Wilson and Dr. Harry Toulmin. I was added to it, perhaps because I could read drawings, make them, run a transit, level and tape."



And what exactly is that contemporaneous report from December 1910 to take note of that you mentioned? Could we see it or read it?

[Tom MacWood]

Settle down, any objective observer would appreciate the fact that we are all dealing mostly in speculation. The fact is no one knows for certain who laid out the golf course. IMO the most logical and plausable candidates are Barker and CBM, and it occured in 1910 prior to Wilson's involvement. Tom, on what basis are you saying that Wilson wasn't involved until 1911?   All he ever said was that the Committee was formed in early 1911.   How can you know he wasn't involved prior to then?   Why would they have put a guy in charge of the Committee if he hadn't been involved prior?  

Francis first person account does not mention anyone laying out the course. That is not true, Tom.   Please read below.   Francis clearly separates the two tasks the Committee was responsible for..."laying out AND constructing" the new golf course.  

Who knows if even recalls CBM's involvement forty years later, and there is no debating CBM was involved. Francis does mention the committee members, but also mentions their main focus was construction, and in particular getting grass to grow. I don't believe Francis said Wilson created the Redan. Their focus was on construction. Again Tom, completely untrue.   I guess I need to repost the article so you can read what it says again.   Why are you trying to make Francis out to be a ninny, simply because you don't like what he wrote?

The first known involvement of Wilson is 2/1/1911. IMO it is illogical to think he routed the golf course in December 1910, especially when you have arguably the two top golf architects in the country at your disposal. Why the hell would you have an untested ineperience insurance salesmen layout your golf course...a golf course that was tied to the success of a real estate venture?   Tom, your contempt for Wilson is clear and I understand it's a class warfare thing for you, but you're not making sense here.   The first documented letter we have from Wilson to Piper and Oakley was 2/1/1911.   From that you are inferring he wasn't involved prior, and that's completely absurd and wishful thinking.  

My theory is based on a few known facts
* CBM and Barker were engaged by Lloyd & Co. in 1910 Connell of his own accord brought Barker while he was in town for a tournament in June 1910.   Griscom brought in Macdonald subsequently for a day, also in town for the tournament.   Barker was never heard from again, and Macdonald was not back on the property until another single day visit 10 months later.
* Barker is the only person known to produce a routing plan
* Barker was actively staking out golf courses during a three week period in December 1910 (from NYC heading south)
* CBM guided the construction process I've heard of hands-off management before but this one is hysterical.
* The golf course as built contained a number of CBM's features and holes Did CBM invent the Redan and Alps holes?   Did CBM invent the redan hole that Francis tells us Wilson designed or the Alps hole Findlay told us Wilson made?
* Verdant Green claimed Barker designed/redesigned 3 courses in Philadlephia Nobody ever wrote that Barker designed Merion, did they?  Why in heaven's name would you think they would have excluded him, Tom?
* Wilson indicated in his letters (starting in 2/1911) the golf course existed Tom, that's a completely absurd reading of Wilson.   Why would you begin ploughing up an existing golf course in late March 1911?

Tom,

I'm thinking we need to revisit this article...

After introducing the committee, and telling us about his role on it, WHO do you think Francis is referring to as "WE", as in "we thought Ardmore Avenue would make a fine hazard" on holes 10, 11, & 12, as part of getting the first 13 holes fairly easily routed, or as in "we had some property west of the present course which did not fit in at all with any golf layout"?

If Francis was out early with Lloyd working on CBM's (or Barker's) hypothetical golf course routing, before WIlson's committee was formed, then why do you think he doesn't mention Macdonald or Barker at all in his accounting of events, and why do you think he seems to assign to the Committee tasks that are design-oriented?

After all, this was for a national publication in the 1950 US Open Program, not some internal Merion memo.

Why would he give Wilson clear credit for the creation of the redan 3rd hole, and not CBM?

Do you think it's possible that Francis was "added" to the Committee sometime after it was formed, and not at inception?

Was there a separate construction committee? Is there any mention of a construction committee in the minutes? I thought there was just the green committee that oversaw the construction. There is no evidence Wilson was involved in 1910 when the golf course was likely laid out. His first known involvement is 2/1/1911. Francis does not claim Wilson or anyone routed the golf course - he is very vague. He emphasizes what the role of the committee was - construction and growing grass. If I was to speculate who WE was, it would be those involved in laying out the golf course in 1910, most likely Lloyd (Mr. Haverford Development), Barker or CBM and Francis, the surveyor. He did not give clear design credit to Wilson for the Redan. I don't know why Francis did not mention anyone by name regarding who laid out the golf course.

The idea that the club (real estate speculators) entrusted the design of the golf course to a inexperienced, untested, insurance salesman is ludicrous...especially when they had arguably the two top golf architects in the country at their disposal.

[Mike Cirba]

Jim,

What do you make of the term "lay off", as used in the two articles I posted?  

If it wasn't a tyop, which David showed it may not have been, it then seems to be somewhat of an engineering term, used in the planning and surveying process and I came across a number of articles where it was used to indicate the process of locating new roads.

What would it do to your thinking if Merion wasn't going to begin that process until sometime after forming a corporation and completing the sale, sometime subsequent to the November 15th Evans letter?

Tom,

I'm sorry, I can't imagine anyone buying your theories.

Plenty of Wilson's contemporaries and accounts from that time, including the club themselves indicated Wilson as the primary architect, or said he "laid out" the course, or from one account, "the genius responsible for both of the Merion courses."

Just because you find it preposterous that amateur men like Wilson, Crump, Leeds, Fownes, et.al. would choose to spend months designing and building their own courses rather than take advantage of a brilliant two-hour slam bam thank you ma'am approach to routing that had developed so many wonderful courses in the US before 1910 by the English golf pros like Barker is no reason to believe that it didn't actually happen.

Perhaps Merion's earlier experience with Willie Campbell and Willie Dunn was responsible for the revised approach for their new course?

[TEPaul]

“He emphasizes what the role of the committee was - construction and growing grass. If I was to speculate who WE was, it would be those involved in laying out the golf course in 1910, most likely Lloyd (Mr. Haverford Development), Barker or CBM and Francis, the surveyor. He did not give clear design credit to Wilson for the Redan. I don't know why Francis did not mention anyone by name regarding who laid out the golf course.”



Tom MacWood:

If you think that’s all Francis emphasized in his article then why do you think he said this in the very beginning of the article?

"The Committee in charge of laying out and building a new course was composed of Mess'rs Horatio Gates Lloyd, Rodman Griscom*, Hugh I. Wilson and Dr. Harry Toulmin.”

[TEPaul]

“I don't know why Francis did not mention anyone by name regarding who laid out the golf course.”


Tom MacWood:

One more time and let’s take it slow this time around. Here is what Francis said in his article. Hopefully, this time you’ll notice he used the term “laying out” and then he listed four names of the men on the committee who laid out the course with him! The best way to understand what he actually said is to start on the left and very slowly read right until you see a small dot at the lower right part of the last word.

"The Committee in charge of laying out and building a new course was composed of Mess'rs Horatio Gates Lloyd, Rodman Griscom*, Hugh I. Wilson and Dr. Harry Toulmin.”

I’m beginning to really wonder if you are an idiot or you’re just trying to make this website think you’re an idiot for some odd reason. If it’s the latter, I at least hope your reason is a humorous one. 

[Mike Cirba]

Tom,

I, For one, will never doubt MacWood's sense of humor ever again.

[TEPaul]

Jeffrey:

Have a nice flight, wherever you're going.

And please do not apologize for what you call 'comedic potential' as this thread most certainly does have that! And I think your analogy examples above of Moriarty's constant form and use of fallacious reasoning and logic were excellent! I'm gratified to know you now recognize what I have recognized about Moriarty for well over a year now, and, I might add, what the people who run Merion recognized (about him and his essay) for well over a year ago now.

This thread is now nearing 1,000 posts and nearly 30 pages, and believe it or not Jim Sullivan and Mike Cirba still seem to have some hope they can actually have a constructive conversation and discussion with our two resident"Tolhurst history book Doubters!"  

The title of this thread is; "Re: Desmond Tolhurst Account"

To understand what it is really about I would encourage anyone interested to review its initial post and the date of it as well as who created this thread. It was in the end of July, 2009. It ran one page. And I would encourage those interested to notice who it was who pulled this thread back up after it went into the back pages for over a year, and what the initial post was after a year when he pulled it back up in the beginning of Aug, 2010. From there it has run over 27 pages of the same old entrenched arguments with no resolutions at all.

The purpose of the person who posted this thread originally and then brought it back a year later was to point out the many errors in Desmond Tolhurst's 1989 Merion history book and perhaps the updated edition in 2005.

I certainly realize, at this point, that the half dozen or so regular participants on this thread probably carry on simply because they enjoy arguing with one another, even over some really mind-bending minutae and historic trivialities but if anyone on here is interested in what Merion thinks of the accuracy (or what the inaccuracies are) of their Desmond Tolhurst history books, I would be more than happy to tell you what they think.

It seems to me the first question, at this point, should be----Do some on this website really care what Merion thinks of the accuracy of their Tolhurst history book, and if they don’t care, should they care?

The second question should be----Does Merion care what those on here think of the accuracy of their Tolhurst history book and if they don’t care, should they care?

I ask those two questions because I feel, at this point, if most on here think that most participating on this theard don't care what Merion thinks and if Merion doesn't care what most on here think, then I believe my work is finally done and I can go now and leave the remaining arguers to their minutae, trivilities and speculations. 

[JESII]

Mike,

It looks to me like Lay-off and lay-out are interchangeable...and could mean both the planning on paper and/or the putting into the ground...and regardless, at that point Evans could have meant either. By no means am I arguing that the course was complete and just needed to be "laid-off" by the construction team at that point.

My primary contention with the position you, Tom and Wayne have is that it requires the people that became the committee sat dead still for 6 or 7 months and then created what became Merion Easy in 3 months...

All the items that apparently prove your theory to you don't hold water for me...just as mine don't for you.

In this context, the triangle's presence is the most important item for identifying when they were doing some work in the field...and as I've said, I simply can not believe these guys would commit to buying only 117 acres if they didn't know almost exactly what they were going to do with it.

The Lloyd Capitalization letter should also have more presence in this conversation...

[TEPaul]

"The Lloyd Capitalization letter should also have more presence in this conversation..."



Sully:

I think that's a good point, and not just his capitalization letter which is on this thread but the entire presence of Horatio Gates Lloyd throughout this entire period.

Obviously, in their history books Merion never delved very deeply into this time and this man who just might have been the greatest angel any golf club ever had even though one must certainly consider everything Crump did for Pine Valley financially and otherwise.

The irony here to me is this thread and these two Merion history doubters collaborated on an essay entitled "The Missing Faces of Merion" in which they suggested, and still do, that those "Missing Faces" in Merion's history were Macdonald, Whigam and Barker where now it seems the biggest "Missing Face" in Merion's entire move to Ardmore was actually a man by the name of HORATIO GATES LLOYD!! A man who most of us who actually know Merion's history and have read their history books only knew due to the brief mention of his name on their board and a few of their committees once upon a time way back then.

I've made a proposal to Merion that this entire story be written in detail for Merion.

[Tom MacWood]

Mike, TEP, Jim
Could anyone explain to me why Merion Cricket or Haverford Development would entrust the design of their golf course to an inexperienced, untested, insurance salesman when they had CBM and HH Barker at their disposal? My theory makes a hell of lot more sense than that.

[JESII]

Tom,

Agreed on Lloyd.

Take another look at this letter though, and tell me if you don't think it's just a basic Capitalization...not so much a Re-Capitalization.

If HDC was a going entity outside of its Merion activities then this letter sort of just spells out the opening of a real estate investment fund in which MCC's current members have full right ot half the investment opportunity.

[JESII]

Mike, TEP, Jim
Could anyone explain to me why Merion Cricket or Haverford Development would entrust the design of their golf course to an inexperienced, untested, insurance salesman when they had CBM and HH Barker at their disposal? My theory makes a hell of lot more sense than that.

No, I can't Tom...but your suggestion of Barker requires one thing I'm just not willing to accept...that the club/committee engaged Barker's expertise and totally disregarded it and him immediately. You're suggesting they brought him in to plan their course and 2 or 3 months later had written him of completely as a contributor. I don't think these guys would do that.

[Tom MacWood]

“He emphasizes what the role of the committee was - construction and growing grass. If I was to speculate who WE was, it would be those involved in laying out the golf course in 1910, most likely Lloyd (Mr. Haverford Development), Barker or CBM and Francis, the surveyor. He did not give clear design credit to Wilson for the Redan. I don't know why Francis did not mention anyone by name regarding who laid out the golf course.”



Tom MacWood:

If you think that’s all Francis emphasized in his article then why do you think he said this in the very beginning of the article?

"The Committee in charge of laying out and building a new course was composed of Mess'rs Horatio Gates Lloyd, Rodman Griscom*, Hugh I. Wilson and Dr. Harry Toulmin.”

You are well aware "laying out" can refer to the process of constructing and/or the process of routing. In this case I believe it refers to the constuction process because Wilson's first known involvement was 2/1/1911 and the evidence (P&O letters) suggests the course had already been routed at that point. There is no question Wilson was in charge of construction.

[JESII]

Think about this, Lloyd estimates $300,000 in stock to cover the total development cost of ALL 338 acres. The total paid for the golf course - $85,000 + $7,500 of $92,500 plus 221 acres at $2,500 ($552,500) equals $645,000 in return for the $300,000.

If you were an investor in the fund and a buyer of one of the lots, you got your lot for half price.

Lloyd took away most of the risk AND reward for HDC, and he did it prior to November 1910.

[Tom MacWood]

Mike, TEP, Jim
Could anyone explain to me why Merion Cricket or Haverford Development would entrust the design of their golf course to an inexperienced, untested, insurance salesman when they had CBM and HH Barker at their disposal? My theory makes a hell of lot more sense than that.

No, I can't Tom...but your suggestion of Barker requires one thing I'm just not willing to accept...that the club/committee engaged Barker's expertise and totally disregarded it and him immediately. You're suggesting they brought him in to plan their course and 2 or 3 months later had written him of completely as a contributor. I don't think these guys would do that.

Who said they totally disregarded it? Barker presenting a plan and/or staking out the golf course on a two or three day visit and then entrusting the construction to locals is consistent with his other projects.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()