No matter how mysterious some may want to contend the timing and membership were, it is indisputable that whoever was on or in charge of "the committee" were responsible for the various "plans" that were "laid out" for the golf course.
In the past, it has been argued here by some that the various "plans" that were "laid out" could have simply been physically staking the course "on the ground", as if the members of this committee simply walked around the property driving wooden stakes into the ground in accordance with someone else's plan.
This, of course, is complete and utter poppycock.
Let's read again what the MCC Minutes tell us about who was responsible for those plans.
Golf Committee through Mr. Lesley, report as follows on the new Golf Grounds:
Your committee desires to report that after laying out many different courses on the
new land, they went down to the National Course with Mr. Macdonald and spent the
evening looking over his plans and the various data he had gathered abroad in regard
to golf courses. The next day was spent on the ground studying the various holes,
which were copied after the famous ones abroad.
On our return, we re-arranged the course and laid out five different plans. On April
6th Mr. Macdonald and Mr. Whigham came over and spent the day on the ground, and
after looking over the various plans, and the ground itself, decided that if we would lay
it out according to the plan they approved, which is submitted here-with, that it would
result not only in a first class course, but that the last seven holes would be equal to
any inland course in the world. In order to accomplish this, it will be necessary to
acquire 3 acres additional.The careful reader will note several things here, but the most important element is this;
Even if we consider that it's possible, if preposterous, that the committee was out there driving stakes, one would have to somehow accept that they drove five different sets of stakes in various locations! Did they perhaps color code them to avoid mass confusion??
But, reading closer one sees clearly that such an interpretation is sheer nonsense.
First of all, we learn that when Whigham and CBM came back on April 6th they spent their time considering the five plans "and the ground itself", which was separate from the five plans.
Moreover, we KNOW the plans were created on paper. In fact, the plan recommended by CBM is "submitted here-with" to the members of the Merion Board of Governors.
So, unless somehow someone dug up 120 acres of stakes and turf and managed to stake it to the back of the Committee Report, we have no riddle here at all, and this whole idea of them staking out the course "on the ground" turns out to be self-evidently ridiculous and erroneous.
Hugh Wilson's personal account of the two-day visit spent at NGLA, for an article on Agronomic issues for Piper and Oakley in 1916, reiterated what took place during that visit. It is also very telling to note that Wilson said, "
our problem was to lay out the course, and build and seed 18 greens and fifteen fairways...", indicating clearly that these were two separate steps. If Wilson's committee was only involved in the construction aspects, he would not have needed the separate initial step of "to lay out the course", but would have moved right to "build and seed";
