News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Not to bring up a sore subject, but,
« Reply #500 on: October 12, 2010, 02:25:32 PM »
Tom,

Any idea why Lloyd took chairmanship of the committee for those two months?

Mike Cirba

Re: Not to bring up a sore subject, but,
« Reply #501 on: October 12, 2010, 02:27:16 PM »
Trying to suggest that it wasn't Wilson's committee who created numerous golf courses and then went up to NGLA might be the most unintentionally funny thing ever posted on this website.  After all, why listen to Hugh or Alan Wilson who told us very clearly which committee went up to NGLA, as well as who was responsible for the design and layout.  Forget eyewitness Richard Francis, as well, while we're at it!  

This is now so far past the point of ridiculousness that its the perfect, laugh out loud, denouement to this whole adventure.

I did learn a lot through this process and thank David for stimulating the topic, but we're now so far past farce as to be bordering on parody.

Say goodnight, Gracie...
« Last Edit: October 15, 2010, 06:11:43 AM by MCirba »

TEPaul

Re: Not to bring up a sore subject, but,
« Reply #502 on: October 12, 2010, 02:48:14 PM »
"Tom,
Any idea why Lloyd took chairmanship of the committee for those two months?"


My recollection is that the minutes only mentioned that he did and not why he did.

I suppose one might assume that Lloyd and the rest felt that Hugh Wilson may be better at chairing and leading the committee of "amateur/sportsmen" members charged with designing and creating the new East course. If not one sure does wonder why Hugh Wilson was appointed to such a thing.

As for Lloyd, I have never really understood what kind of golfer he was or what he knew of golf course architecture before, then or later. But I do know he did have a fairly active interest in agronomy and obviously plants and such because there is correspondence some years later that reports Lloyd went to the US Dept of Agriculture with Hugh and Alan Wilson to meet Piper and Oakley. But that might have had something to do with the USGA's inclination to raise a $1 million dollar fund to run the USGA Green Section. And of course, Lloyd's place on nearby Cooperstown Rd, Allgates, had become one of the best known gardens in America for various types of plants such as apparently water lillies or some such and Mrs Lloyd was the president of The Garden Club of America.

Also, another interesting little irony that touches on GOLFCLUBATLAS.com and one of its participants, Tom MacWood, and one of his interests and essays, was that the architecture of Lloyd's house at Allgates, was also one of the most interesting and important examples of well known building architect, Wilson Eyre's American "Arts and Crafts" style. I drove my wife right through the front of it about 10 days ago. Her only remark was; "It looks pretty dark and depressing to me."

I have also proposed to Merion as an interesting semi-subject is a full-blown essay on the part Horatio Gates Lloyd played in this move to Ardmore with both the course, the corporation for it, and the corporate roll he played with HDC and the residential community that was created to the west between Merion East and Allgates. In a real way the members of Merion were never assessed much more than a playing fee for all this and consequently it just may be that Lloyd played the roll at that time of perhaps the biggest angel a club like that ever had. He did not appear to seek any real recognition for any of it which seems to have been the way men like him back then tended to do things and wanted to do things.

Was that some kind of ethos of that culture back then, and certainly more so back then than today? Yes, I think it was and the evidence to prove it may still be hiding in musty attics and perhaps libraries here and there. I would like to find more of it, and so I will become a formal, full-blown, card-carrying SEARCHER! And for it I hope some day Tom MacWood will become proud of me! Frankly, nothing in life would make me happier other than perhaps going to the WaWa in my Mini Cooper S at near 100MPH for a cup of large chicken soup with about 5-6 packets of crackers, a bottle of spicy V8 juice, and a carton of Winstons! ;)
« Last Edit: October 12, 2010, 03:09:36 PM by TEPaul »

Phil_the_Author

Re: Not to bring up a sore subject, but,
« Reply #503 on: October 12, 2010, 02:54:03 PM »
David,

BEFORE you ignore this post, I want to take you up on your offer:

"That said, if you or anyone actually interested in what really happened would like an alternative perspective let me know and I wiil be glad to provide mine."

I am very intersted in what "actually happened" and woukld like you to provide your "alternative perspective."

DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Not to bring up a sore subject, but,
« Reply #504 on: October 12, 2010, 03:43:47 PM »
In clarify the record to Jim Sullivan,  I corrected a TEPaul claim that was quite obviously incorrect.

"Inexplicably, TEPaul claimed 'they were not referred to by MCC's minutes in early 1911 as a 'construction committee,' they were indirectly referred to as a committee on new golf grounds.'  Huh?  I dont think Wilson's construction committee was referred to as committee 'on new grounds.'  That was Lesley's committee. "

Since, I have been subjected multiple posts and thousands of words of insults and slams, all of which completely lack substance or relevance to the discussion.

It is too much. 

All you people who snigger or look away while this guy behaves like this ought to be ashamed of yourselves, as should Ran and Ben for letting this "true gentleman" to run roughshod over their otherwise estimable website.
_____________________________________________________________________________

Mike Cirba wrote:
Quote
Trying to sggest that it wasn't Wilson's committee who created numerous golf courses and then went up to NGLA might be the most unintentionally funny thing ever posted on this website.  After all, why listen to Hugh or Alan Wilson who told us very clearlyu which committee went up to NGLA, as well as who was responsible for the design and layout.  Forget eyewitness Richard Francus, as wee, while we're at it!


Mike Cirba,
Please point out where Hugh Wilson told us who all went to NGLA?   Thanks.   Please point out where Richard Francis ever said a word about who all went to NGLA?  Thanks again.

By the way, about a week ago I told you that you needed to recheck your dates of when various persons had traveled overseas.    Did you?    Why do you suppose I informed you that you needed to recheck your dates?

_____________________________________________________

Phil the Author wrote:
Quote
David,

BEFORE you ignore this post, I want to take you up on your offer:

"That said, if you or anyone actually interested in what really happened would like an alternative perspective let me know and I wiil be glad to provide mine."

I am very intersted in what "actually happened" and woukld like you to provide your "alternative perspective."

Phillip,

While I'd be glad to provide my perspective on specific matters, there were over 100 posts between my post 373 and my comment you quoted.  I'd need a full time staff to even begin to address the inaccuracies and misrepresentations in those posts.   

Perhaps you can be a bit more specific?


Golf history can be quite interesting if you just let your favorite legends go and allow the truth to take you where it will.
--Tom MacWood (1958-2012)

TEPaul

Re: Not to bring up a sore subject, but,
« Reply #505 on: October 12, 2010, 03:50:38 PM »
Hey Phil, for your #505, thanks a lot. What a pal you are. I thought after about seven and a half years Moriarty may've finally decided to call a halt to his nonsense about Merion.

Well, carry on then and maybe we will get to the end of it in about fifteen years this time.  ;)

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Not to bring up a sore subject, but,
« Reply #506 on: October 12, 2010, 03:55:14 PM »
Tom,

What I'm curious about is why Lloyd would have taken chairmanship at all if it were only going to be for 2 months. What could have happened in that time?

TEPaul

Re: Not to bring up a sore subject, but,
« Reply #507 on: October 12, 2010, 07:55:19 PM »
Sully:

Don't know as the MCC minutes don't say why.

However, today I received a disk from Drexel U that contains a ton of stuff on Lloyd. All kinds of correspondence including letters between Lloyd and Macdonald which helps explain why CBM wrote Lloyd at Drexel Co instead of the MCC Search Committee. As I suspected it seems he may've been acting pretty independent of MCC even though it was said in the MCC minutes he was representing MCC with HDC, at least until the initial offer was made in Nov. 1910. I have for some time suspected that his negotiations with HDC before the offer was made may've been part of his estate papers which were never reposited with MCC.

It looks like Moriarty and you may've been right all along and that they were working on something out there with the course in the latter half of 1910. Macdonald and Whigam may've been the actual designers and Wilson and committee may've been brought in later once the land was under Lloyd's control more for developing the agronomics of the course. Maybe this is why so much has been found from Wilson about agronomics and basically not a word from him has been found about actual architecture, at least not in the early days. But frankly I can't even remember when Hugh Wilson ever really spoke much about architecture.

This could be amazing. This very well may be one of the most significant mis-attributions in the history of American architecture. It seems everyone must have been either mistaken somehow or in on some really big attribution conspiracy.

I've got to go to Florida tomorrow for 5-6 days and I'm not taking a computer with me but I will go through all this stuff next week and give a full report.

I guess I should report it to Merion first though. I have no idea what they may want to do. Maybe we might think about just destroying all this stuff and acting like it never happened. Of course I might need to put some pressure on Drexel University to see if they'll consider expunging all this stuff. But, you know, I guess I may have some pull down there seeing as A.J. Drexel was my great, great grandfather, but on the other hand perhaps not as I doubt even they would want to deal with a lying, drunken creep.

Pretty amazing but when someone is proven flat-ass wrong he should just man-up and admit it. One just never knows what may happen next in these things we do. Stranger things have happened, I guess, but not much stranger.
« Last Edit: October 13, 2010, 10:13:07 AM by TEPaul »

DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Not to bring up a sore subject, but,
« Reply #508 on: October 12, 2010, 11:50:04 PM »
TEPaul,  I appreciate you bringing this to our attention, and in a timely manner.   Thank you for that. 

DM
Golf history can be quite interesting if you just let your favorite legends go and allow the truth to take you where it will.
--Tom MacWood (1958-2012)

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Not to bring up a sore subject, but,
« Reply #509 on: October 13, 2010, 10:15:32 AM »
Why would Drexel University have any of HG Lloyd's estate papers?

TEPaul

Re: Not to bring up a sore subject, but,
« Reply #510 on: October 13, 2010, 11:18:35 AM »
I assume because it's in Philadelphia and Lloyd was a partner of Drexel Co in Philadelphia (I guess even though they did have an office in NYC, and a correspondent office in London and Paris) in the first decade and until 1912 when he became a partner of Morgan & Co. But they were essentially sister companies because initially A.J Drexel made J.P. Morgan and I'm told by A.J. Drexel's biographer that the partners in both companies in the early 20th century were very close and sometimes transferable (as they had been in the 19th century).

You never know where you may find some things like that. A couple of months ago I found 200 years of the Biddle family papers at the Univeristy of Delaware. They included correspondence with some of the people of MCC at the time we're interested in. And there are a ton of Leeds family papers in a university in Boston.

There's stuff in the woodwork all over the place and the trick is in the searching. I am no longer a GCA DEFENDER or just a GCA INTERPRETER; I have become a full-blown, card-carrying GCA SEARCHER!!!  ;)

And I'm hot on the trial of that Merion East topo survey map the Wilson Committee referred to in early 1911 and at this point I have not much doubt that Macdonald's and Whigam's names are on it and that they did it and probably beginning in 1910 and culminating in the first half of 1911.

At this point, I think all the Wilson Committee was appointed to do and asked to do in the beginning was to just grow some grass! And that's why we have all those agronomy letters and nothing on architecture or even construction---eg they hired Pickering in June 1911 to do the construction. But then a few years later in 1912 they asked Hugh to go abroad because apparently they forgot to do bunkers in 1911.

I mean seriously, what do you expect from some inexperienced insurance salesman? But I do know he always loved grass and plants and so did his brother Alan, and they both knew quite a lot about both before Merion Ardmore began, so that seems to be why the Wilson Committee was formed. Technically it probably should've been called the "Committee on Grass Growing."

And now I'm off to Florida for 5-6 days, Jimbo, and when I get back next week I'll review all this stuff and report it and try to unravel what looks, at this point, like a massively embarrassing mess for Merion and the rest of its friends and defenders here in Philadelphia.
« Last Edit: October 13, 2010, 11:29:53 AM by TEPaul »

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Not to bring up a sore subject, but,
« Reply #511 on: October 13, 2010, 12:07:15 PM »
Tom,

You're a strange duck.


Mike Cirba

Re: Not to bring up a sore subject, but,
« Reply #512 on: October 13, 2010, 12:50:47 PM »
Jim,

That's just crazy uncle Tom!  ;)

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Not to bring up a sore subject, but,
« Reply #513 on: October 13, 2010, 01:48:34 PM »
Yep...

Tom MacWood

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Not to bring up a sore subject, but,
« Reply #514 on: October 14, 2010, 06:34:19 AM »
Lloyd was on the committee responsible for finding a new permanent site, and was one of the principals of Haverford Development, which presumably profited from their Merion dealings and relationship. Would that have been considered a conflict of interest back then, or was dealing in those grey areas more easily excepted and rationalized in those days? Would it be considered a conflict of interest today?

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Not to bring up a sore subject, but,
« Reply #515 on: October 14, 2010, 08:31:22 AM »
Tom,

The most interesting part of all this, to me, is the role Lloyd played for the year up through April 1911...but the way you just phrased that post/question is typically humorous.

Based on one of his letters, I believe dates 11/15/1910, it appears his "middle-man" role effectively turned this whole thing into an investment opportunity for the MCC membership, while also assuring HDC they would get a deal done.

When and where do you see him actually being an active principle of HDC?

I've thought for a while that what he basically did was convince HDC that they would complete the deal but that Merion members would own half the entity...and therefore half the upside. From HDC's perspective, did Lloyd double their money (by directing the deal to their property) or cut their profit in half (by taking half the ownership of HDC for MCC member investment)? I think it all came down to a negotiation between Connell and Lloyd, and Connell didn't win.
« Last Edit: October 14, 2010, 02:22:27 PM by Jim Sullivan »

Tom MacWood

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Not to bring up a sore subject, but,
« Reply #516 on: October 14, 2010, 06:18:43 PM »

When and where do you see him actually being an active principle of HDC?


Is there any question he was an investor in HDC? It was reported he was. I don't think there is any question Lloyd was an active participant, in fact more active than probably anyone. Was that a conflict of interest?

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Not to bring up a sore subject, but,
« Reply #517 on: October 14, 2010, 06:39:48 PM »

When and where do you see him actually being an active principle of HDC?


Is there any question he was an investor in HDC? It was reported he was. I don't think there is any question Lloyd was an active participant, in fact more active than probably anyone. Was that a conflict of interest?


Reported by whom?

Tom MacWood

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Not to bring up a sore subject, but,
« Reply #518 on: October 14, 2010, 09:43:45 PM »
It was reported in the Philadelphia Press (11/24/1910) and Golf magazine (1/1911). Others reported to be involved in the syndicate: WW Atterbury, AF Huston, Rodney Griscom and Robert Lesley.
« Last Edit: October 14, 2010, 09:46:35 PM by Tom MacWood »

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Not to bring up a sore subject, but,
« Reply #519 on: October 15, 2010, 10:55:42 AM »
Tom,

Can you post those articles?

Not that I doubt their existence, by November 24, Lloyd had taken half of HDC for Merion members to invest in, and profit from...but by then the decision to buy the land was 5 months old.

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Not to bring up a sore subject, but,
« Reply #520 on: October 15, 2010, 11:12:57 AM »
Maybe more important in your implication is that Lloyd was instrumental, or at least involved, in getting both Barker and CBM to see the site in the summer of 1910. I see your point, but based on some of the documents it seems like Lloyd didn't get involved with HDC until MCC decided this particular piece of land was going to be theirs.

What does not jive with this, however, is the fact that Lloyd had begun purchasing the land for his estate nearby a year or two earlier. Presumably this guy was interested in what was going on around him, and knew Connell. He may not have known Connell was buying options on some of this land, but the chain of events certainly makes me think Connell had some information on why these particular farms might be worthy investments.

Did Connell (or his team) have any sort of business relationship with Lloyd prior to 1910?

What did other farms in this immediate area sell for per acre in 1909 and 1910?

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Not to bring up a sore subject, but,
« Reply #521 on: October 15, 2010, 11:31:27 AM »
TMac,

I have designed some of those housing deals where one party is on both sides of the fence.  No doubt there is (and most certainly was in those days) potential for a conflict of interest, but it doesn't necessarily have to be so.  If everyone involved knew and knew why Lloyd was involved on both sides, then it was probably fine. 

As Jim says, they apparently offered the same deal to later members who weren't part of the original syndicate, which implies everything was above board.

For an example of a country club developer who wasn't totally above board, read the Medinah CC club history by gca member Tim Cronin.  They put out that myth for years that the redesign of No. 3 was on a account of Harry Cooper shooting 63, but in reality, the members found out the main developer was going to profit from housing that he had not disclosed.

As you know, some club histories have been corrupted at least to a degree, and this is one example of trying to keep stuff under the rug, which was much more probable and possible in those days.  It will be interesting, if TePaul isn't just displaying his obtuse sense of humor in his last few posts, to see why MCC may have decided to alter theirs in some key respects......again, the key word is IF in this case. 
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

Phil_the_Author

Re: Not to bring up a sore subject, but,
« Reply #522 on: October 16, 2010, 03:28:25 PM »
David,

I've been away for a few days and just saw your response in post #506:

Phil the Author wrote:

Quote David,

BEFORE you ignore this post, I want to take you up on your offer:

"That said, if you or anyone actually interested in what really happened would like an alternative perspective let me know and I wiil be glad to provide mine."

I am very intersted in what "actually happened" and woukld like you to provide your "alternative perspective."

Phillip,

While I'd be glad to provide my perspective on specific matters, there were over 100 posts between my post 373 and my comment you quoted.  I'd need a full time staff to even begin to address the inaccuracies and misrepresentations in those posts.   

Perhaps you can be a bit more specific?


Why is that such a hard question? YOU offered to provide YOUR "alternative persepctive" to "anyone actually interested in what happened."

I identified myself as one who was and asked you for it. So how much more specific can I be? Will you provide me with your "alternative perspective?"

Mike Cirba

Re: Not to bring up a sore subject, but,
« Reply #523 on: October 16, 2010, 04:55:14 PM »
I'm in NY at present and unable to verify but can anyone in Philly confirm the rumor that there was a mass demonstration and subsequent book burning bonfire in Ardmore  with the Tolhurst tome as fuel late last evening?

I heard the flames could be seen from downtown.
« Last Edit: October 17, 2010, 04:31:12 PM by MCirba »

DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Not to bring up a sore subject, but,
« Reply #524 on: October 17, 2010, 12:10:31 AM »
David,

I've been away for a few days and just saw your response in post #506:

Phil the Author wrote:

Quote David,

BEFORE you ignore this post, I want to take you up on your offer:

"That said, if you or anyone actually interested in what really happened would like an alternative perspective let me know and I wiil be glad to provide mine."

I am very intersted in what "actually happened" and woukld like you to provide your "alternative perspective."

Phillip,

While I'd be glad to provide my perspective on specific matters, there were over 100 posts between my post 373 and my comment you quoted.  I'd need a full time staff to even begin to address the inaccuracies and misrepresentations in those posts.   

Perhaps you can be a bit more specific?


Why is that such a hard question? YOU offered to provide YOUR "alternative persepctive" to "anyone actually interested in what happened."

I identified myself as one who was and asked you for it. So how much more specific can I be? Will you provide me with your "alternative perspective?"

 ???
Golf history can be quite interesting if you just let your favorite legends go and allow the truth to take you where it will.
--Tom MacWood (1958-2012)

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back