[Tom MacWood]

Its only muddled to those ignorant of the facts.

[TEPaul]

"Its only muddled to those ignorant of the facts."


True indeed, and that would include someone such as yourself who cannot seem to understand what Macdonald wrote in his autobiography about WHEN he (Macdonald) felt Raynor had become a post-graduate in golfing architecture, even if everyone else on here seems capable of understanding what he wrote and said and meant.



To wit:

"Next came the St. Louis CC, then the White Sulphur Springs layout, and then finally came the colossal task of the Lido at Long Beach. By this time Raynor had become a post graduate in golfing architecture, and since 1917 built or reconstructed some 100 to 150 courses, which I have never seen. The Mid-Ocean Club, the Yale GC, the Links Golf Course, the Gibson Island Golf Course, the Deedale, and the Creek Club were the only ones I gave and personal attention to after 1917."

[TEPaul]

Here is another "point," "assumption," "conclusion" or whatever either Tom MacWood or anyone else may choose to call it that was posted this morning.


"Based on an anaysis of Raynor and Macdonald's courses prior to and after 1917, I believe 1917 was the year Raynor began to work independently as a golf architect. CBM did design golf courses after 1917."

Tom MacWood says, 'Based on an anaysis (sic, my inclusion).....

I suppose that would be his analysis. Who else's analysis would it be? Obviously if that analysis was factually accurate it would mean that everything Raynor was involved with before 1917 had to have been done with CBM's assistance or CBM's design. If that's the case it appears there are a number of courses that may not be aware they are CBM designs, including Mountain Lake.

I know a number of people at Mountain Lake including two of the green chairmen, one of which managed through the recent restoration and is actually fascinated by golf architecture and its history. I would say both he and they might be totally thrilled to learn their course was designed by C.B. Macdonald.

But the question becomes will they be willing to take just Tom MacWood's word on this or will they ask him to prove this and if they do how will he go about doing that?  

SHALL WE ASK HIM HOW HE WILL GO ABOUT DOING THAT?

IF WE DO, CAN WE SUPPOSE HE WILL ANSWER US CLEARLY?? 

[Patrick_Mucci]

Pat,

Not sure exactlywhat context you mean "producing documents?"  On this website, via research, etc.

There are really a lot of unresolved issues with that and on here.

As to producing dox here, my first thought was that none of us is required to produce anything for other people here. When I ask questions of those here who might have info I don't, I follow Mom's teachings and say "please" which doesn't always happen here.  It seems rude to ask others to  produce this list or that as if any of us is "owed" that by anyone.

There are also some questions as to intent with the Terrier accusing biographers of having an agenda of protecting the legend of their subject, and those authors believing that TMac has an equally "sinister" agenda of debunking long held histories.  I think he feels there are enough club histories in doubt that ALL are suspect.  There is nothing wrong with that basic attitude, but it is just as potentially destructive as being overly protective of existing history.

And what is the role of this discussion board?  If it really is a historical research site, I bet there are rules of discourse to serious sites of that nature.  Or is it a lively discussion group where no holds, other than common decency, hold us together

Lastly, there is the question of whether any or all of us suffer from "premature evaluation" of partial material, with all of us snickering that the other guy has the bigger problem.

There probably will never be an real answers.

Jeff,

What I meant is as follows.

An individual can't throw out a theory without supporting information and insist that their theory is valid because no one can disprove it.

Said another way, if someone postulates, absent supporting evidence, what degree of credibility should be granted ?

Conversely, if someone postulates, as a rebuttle to a position, and doesn't supply supporting evidence, how much credibility should their position be given.

I'm not stating that anyone who puts forth a position, laden it with supporting footnotes, but, there has to be some degree of reasonable evidence presented in the presentation and/or refutation.

I don't think Tom MacWood is out of line when he asks for supporting documentation from those who refute his statement/position/argument.

Conversely, he has a similar obligation to provide supporting material for his persentation/position, which he usually does.

When you can enhance your position, pro or con, with facts and logic, it benefits all of us.

Absent any facts and/or logic, we typically don't make much progress.

[Patrick_Mucci]

What's interesting about this discussion are the conflicts found in other sources.

Cornish & Whitten, in their book, "The Architects of Golf" list Raynor's death in the year 1926.
Yet, Charles Blair MacDonald, in his book, "Scotland's Gift" written in 1928, lists Raynor's death in the year 1925.

C&W attribute courses to Raynor in 1926.

Is that possible ?

When I'm in Southampton, I will stop by the gravesite and see if the DOD is listed.

1917 appears to be a significant date since MacDonald cites that date as the line of demarcation with respect to co-authoring or consulting with Raynor on course design.

CBM lists the courses where he continued to remain active, although, we don't know to what degree.

CBM also provides interesting insight and high praise for Raynor when he stated, "He was a world builder.  I had given him all my plans and only occassionally was I asked for advice."

When you couple that statement with the previous paragraph, and the last paragraph, it would appear that MacDonald concedes that he turned over the reigns to Raynor in 1917, and that he, CBM was content with that arrangement, marveling in the quantity of Raynor's work, indicated that Raynor built or remodeled 100-150 courses that he had not seen and that he had supreme confidence in Raynor and Raynor's work and viewed his death as a tremendous loss to him personally.

So, if Tom MacWood is stating that 1917 was the year that CBM all but retired and SR went off on his own, CBM seems to confirm same.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Pat,


So under your own terms, what degree of credibility does your last post get?  It is making an analysis out of conflicting facts, after all and you add one more (reasoned) opinon to the pot.

Whether Terrier MacWood, Pound the Table Paul, or even you or me , most of the last ten pages reminds me of an American repeating phrases louder and louder to foreigners, figuing they will understand the English better.

TMac is right - someone needs to bring forward new evidence.   As it is now, he postulated that 1917 was important, and I can see some logic in it but don't necessarily agree. I asked - but got no answer - on just what question we are actually trying to resolve here.  Are we saying that quote has direct bearing on how much CBM was involved at NS (as per original thread) or are we really asking just how much CBM was involved in general in what I consider to be a "transition period" between strong boss/weak but improving employee to junior/senior partners (kind of) to CBM being the designer emeritus who never came out really, but liked the idea of somehow being associated with the endeavor.

If we are talking strictly NS, I maintain the quote later has little real value.  It may mean more in the bigger picture, but maybe not that much.  Not worth arguing or losing friends over.

[TEPaul]

Jeffrey:

Anyone doing comprehensive research on any subject is always looking to find new evidence on the subject but from experience we find sometimes more evidence just may not exist or be findable for all kinds of reasons.

I think Macdonald was pretty explanatory in his book on the courses he felt he had something important to do with. He certainly did talk and write about them in his book.

He never mentioned North Shore in his book but we all got lucky when Steve Shaeffer found the Harmonie Club/North Shore GC records in the New York Historical Society recently and then Mark Hissey for the club went back there and looked at them again. They do mention Macdonald and in a way that seems both logical and accurate as to what his involvement might have been with that club and project.

I think those records were also very explanatory about Seth Raynor's roll in that project as well as Robert White's roll and even the roll of the North Shore GC "committee."

Basically it probably won't get any better than that and now North Shore can put all that material into their existing records and architectural archives for all to see and consider who are interested in actually going there to see them and consider them.

I think this is how it should be with the architectural histories of these clubs and courses.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jeff,

I drew no conclusions regarding the DOD of SR.

I merely presented the conflicting reports of two experts on his life, one a contemporaneous account, (the kind you like) from his dear friend, partner and mentor and the other from two prominent current day researchers.

By example I was trying to show that even the most respected parties don't always get their facts right.

However, by bringing questions to light, hopefully more research will be undertaken, which can lead to setting the record straight.

[TEPaul]

Pat:

We went to Raynor's grave in Southampton but I don't remember if there was a DOD on his gravestone (Macdonald, Whigam and Raynor are all buried within thirty yards of one another). I believe he died very early in 1926 and that may've been why CBM thought he died in 1925. I believe he died quite suddenly and of pneumonia. I think he may've been in Palm Beach at the time. He was only 51.

As for why some of his courses may be listed as 1926 that is probably because his designs and plans for them were in the process at that time and on-going.

[George_Bahto]

WWI - 1917

Seth Raynor ws heavily involved in the war effort !!!!!!!!!!!

[TEPaul]

"WWI - 1917
Seth Raynor ws heavily involved in the war effort !!!!!!!!!!!"




GeorgeB:

That's a very good point to make on here. Sometimes some of us today just look at those dates and those years as some kind of seamless architectural continuum but it was anything but that during America's 18-19 month involvement in WW1.

Flynn was very involved in the War effort and so was Hugh Wilson. Crump's project essentially went on hold too. So did my club's, GMGC (my grandfather who started GMGC with some of his friends in 1916 was on a commissioned private yacht by the name of Alcedo that was coast running in France as a spotter of German warships and is considered to be the very first American naval vessel sunk in WW1). George Thomas flew for the early Army Air Corps in Europe and was lucky to survive. It was considered to be pretty unpatriotic to continue with golf itself and certainly with golf architectural work during our involvment in WW1. Plus most of the crews were gone as they went to war. Even a Victory Garden was planted on the "in the works" fairway of Pine Valley's 12th hole in 1917. The maintenance of many courses was pretty much shut down or temporarily mothballed during that 18-19 months of our involvement. It was felt some courses never really recovered from that. Macdonald definitely felt that was true of The Lido!


Note:
1. America declared war on Germany in April 1917
2. Germany surrendered in November, 1918

[Jeff_Brauer]

Jeff,

I drew no conclusions regarding the DOD of SR.

I merely presented the conflicting reports of two experts on his life, one a contemporaneous account, (the kind you like) from his dear friend, partner and mentor and the other from two prominent current day researchers.

By example I was trying to show that even the most respected parties don't always get their facts right.

However, by bringing questions to light, hopefully more research will be undertaken, which can lead to setting the record straight.

Patrick

I didn't think you drew any conclusions.  You threw out some observations, with no work done to back it up with facts, which is what you just lectured us to do to gain credibility.  So, not meaning to bust your chops or anything, but sort of tongue and cheek, I was just wondering where your post fit on your cred scale.

At this point, we know there are some conflicting facts printed about nearly any course!  I also wonder why, but - WARNING! WARNING! UNSUBSTANTIATED OPINON TO FOLLOW! -  have always thought that it was mostly a matter of newspapers of the day not really knowing enough to get facts right, clubs not interested enough to document to the next level (did they know they were making history, or just trying to play some damn golf?) and even interested writers not necessariy being historians who dug deep enough. 

Ron Whitten was a trial lawyer, and made every effort to be thorough, but he had to travel the country and rumange through the basements of strangers who were descendants of the ODG....not as easy a task as it is today, and today, its still not easy, just easier.

But, I am not really offering anything new here, so I will sit down and shut up!

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jeff,

I drew no conclusions regarding the DOD of SR.

I merely presented the conflicting reports of two experts on his life, one a contemporaneous account, (the kind you like) from his dear friend, partner and mentor and the other from two prominent current day researchers.

By example I was trying to show that even the most respected parties don't always get their facts right.

However, by bringing questions to light, hopefully more research will be undertaken, which can lead to setting the record straight.

Patrick

I didn't think you drew any conclusions.  You threw out some observations, with no work done to back it up with facts, which is what you just lectured us to do to gain credibility.  So, not meaning to bust your chops or anything, but sort of tongue and cheek, I was just wondering where your post fit on your cred scale.

Jeff, citing CBM, in his writings in 1928 as a reliable source with respect to the DOD of SR seems to be more than just a casual observation.
It's a contemporaneous account, memorialized in a book written by CBM, SR's dear friend, partner and mentor.
If it's in error, I'd like to see the refutation before I visit the grave site in Southampton in June.

At this point, we know there are some conflicting facts printed about nearly any course!  I also wonder why, but - WARNING! WARNING! UNSUBSTANTIATED OPINON TO FOLLOW! -  have always thought that it was mostly a matter of newspapers of the day not really knowing enough to get facts right, clubs not interested enough to document to the next level (did they know they were making history, or just trying to play some damn golf?) and even interested writers not necessariy being historians who dug deep enough.

I don't generally disagree, but, here we have your favorite source, contemporaneous writing by the decedent's best friend, partner and mentor.  

Ron Whitten was a trial lawyer, and made every effort to be thorough, but he had to travel the country and rumange through the basements of strangers who were descendants of the ODG....not as easy a task as it is today, and today, its still not easy, just easier.


I'm not disparaging C&W's herculian efforts, merely pointing out a substantive discrepancy on one of the great architects in golf.

But, I am not really offering anything new here, so I will sit down and shut up!

OK

[Mark Hissey]

My photographs apparently need to be digital, so until I go back to the NYHS (and I do need to for a few things) I cannot post the pictures. But, to save any further confusion, I have copied the exact text word-for-word.

The main volume is incribed with the following on the front cover:

MINUTES

BOARD OF GOVERNORS

NORTH SHORE COUNTRY CLUB Inc

March 31st 1913

to

March 10th 1917

                                               
                 

[Mark Hissey]

The first reference to White reads:

Chairman Davies reported generally for the Greens Committee, as follows:

That a contract in writing had been made with Robert White, as professional, pursuant to the action at previous meeting of the Board of Governors: that progress has been made on the plan for a new golf course, taking the sense of the Board of Governors as to the possible use of the woods at the easterly end of the Club property as part of such course.

Submitted an estimate for the upkeep of the present golf course on the basis of an annual expenditure of $12,000 which upon motion duly made, seconded and carried, was approved.

[Mark Hissey]

The references to White's work was quite specific in the next reference.

Upon duly made, seconded and unanimously carried, it was RESOLVED that the officers of the Club be, and hereby are, authorized to enter into and agreement with Robert White, employing him as golf professional, at a salary of Twelve Hundred Dollars per year, ($1,200.) for the term of one year from December 1st, 1914 with the option of the Club to terminate said employment at the end of six months, on thirty days notice.

The duties of such professioanl to be; To take charge of the present golf course and to superintend the building of a new one, if undertaken, and to perform such other duties as the Greens Committee may direct, having the authority, subject to the approval of the Greens Committee, to engage and discharge such employees as may be required. Such professional, under the supervision and subject to the regulation of the Greens Committee, to keep on hand in the shop supplied by the Club, the neccessary and usual accessories to the game of golf, and to sell the same, for his own profit at the prices usually prevailing: also to provide at his own expense, facilities and employees to clean golf clubs,being entitled to members for such serviceat the prevailing rate; also to have the privilege of giving lessons to members, and holders of privilege tickets, to such extent as his duties may permit, and also, at his own expense, to engage an instructor, charging at the rate of (?) ceeding, One Dollar per hour for such lessons.

[Mark Hissey]

On motion duly made, seconded and unanimously (?) the Greens Committee was appropriated and (sic) amount not to exceed Four Hundred Dollars, ($400.) for the purpose of employing Mr. Raynor, in an advisory capacity, for the improvement of the golf course.

[TEPaul]

Jeffrey:

Sometimes even the subjects themselves get dates wrong in their own writing and reports and such. Obviously Macdonald was off on the year of Raynor's death. Hugh Wilson in his own report (chapter) was off twice on the year of the purchase of the land for Merion's West course, the creation of it and its opening (even though the contemporaneous club administrative records got all the dates right). And even though his brother Alan was not technically off on the year of Hugh Wilson's trip abroad the way he wrote about it was confusing at least and very likely lead to a misinterpretation of the year of Hugh Wilson's trip abroad in the club's history books over a half century later. The real irony on the actual year (1912) of Hugh Wilson's trip abroad in the club's history is that it did not exactly go away; it actually became part of what was considered by the club to be a 'romantic rumor' because of the sinking of the Titanic at the same time (the ship Hugh I. Wilson was booked to return home on but for some unknown reason delayed his European departure by a week or so).

[Mark Hissey]

On motion of Mr. Bier, duly seconded and unanimously carried it was resolved that the plans for a new Golf Course, prepared by Mr. Raynor and submitted with a recommendation by the Greens Committee, be and they hereby are, approved and adopted; and that the sum of Thirty-seven thousand, five hundred dollars, ($37,500.) be and it hereby is appropriated therefore, to be expended under the supervision of the Greens Committee, subject to the approval of the President.

It was further moved, seconded and unanimously carried that the Breens (sic) Committee, with the approval of the President, is authorized to employ Mr. Raynor as expert, at a sum, not to exceed Eighteen hundred dollars, ($1,800.) for the carrying out of this work.

[Mark Hissey]

The Greens Committee reported favorable progress in the rebuilding of the course howing a considerable saving on the work so far completed as compared with the original estimates.

[Mark Hissey]

The Chairman of the Finance Committee presented a proposed budget for the fiscal year from March 1st, 1916 to February 28th, 1917 which was on motion duly seconded and carried, approved and adopted with the direction to include a copy thereof in these minutes.

A copy of said proposed budget will be found at the close of these minutes.

The letter of Mr. Seth J. Raynor was referred to the Building Committee.

[Mike Cirba]

Mark,

Thank you very much for taking the time and effort to transcribe these minutes for our education on the history of North Shore.

Best Regards,
Mike

[Mark Hissey]

The Greens Committee was authorized to renew the contract with Robert White, our Golf professional, for another year, on the same conditions as the original contract.

The Greens Committee reports that aloowing for normal conditions the entire golf course will be finished and playable on Decoration Day 1916.

[Mark Hissey]

The Green Committee was empowered to use their discretion regarding terminating the services of Mr. Robert White.

[Mark Hissey]

It was moved and seconded that the Green Committee be authorized to engage the services of Mr. Robert White as Consulting Expert, at the rate of $50. per month, for not less than four visits per month. Carried, with Messrs Adler, Bier, Klee and Kuhn voting in the negative.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()