David,
Please see my replies below in BLUE. Thanks.
This is ridiculous Mike. Whenever you get stuck on an issue you go into hiding, put off the questions and issues, put them off again and again, and then take off in another direction as if there was never even an issue.
At one point we had been discussing your claim that the October articles described the site referred to as "near the canal." For the following reasons and more, this was not the case. I've asked you to address these points again and again, and again and again you said you would. You never have. Now you have the nerve to wonder what is still at issue. You are playing games.
Here they are again. There are more but lets start here:
1. The acreage is way off. The acreage listed in the articles is over double what CBM reportedly tried to purchase.Why do the articles say 250 acres?
David, I believe I've tried to offer a theory multiple times now. What we do know is that 250 acres is not the correct amount, either of what CBM actually secured, what he purchased, or what he wrote he offered originally. So, we know that in this aspect the news report is wrong.
Personally, I believe it was a transcription error in the paper that got propagated. We know from 1904 onward that CBM wanted just over 200 acres, we know he wrote in his Founders agreement that he needed 205 acres (110 for the golf course, 5 for clubhouse and surrounds, and 1.5 acres ea for building lots for the Founders), and we know that what he eventually secured and purchased was exactly 205 acres. Coincidence? No way.
I believe and have hypothesized that because his first offer was for land that Alvord was planning for real estate development that after CBM was shot down asking for 205 acres, he decided to skip the building lots and see if he could buy just enough of that land for the golf course (120 acres), which also got refused, but which he related in his book.
I think it's absurd to think that it's because on one site he decided he needed 205 acres for his course while southwest of there he'd only need 120. Ridiculous, frankly, but respectfully.
2. The timing is way off. CBM wrote that he decided that he wanted to buy this land within a few weeks of the developer's purchase which was in the fall of 1905. This detail strongly suggests that the offer was made closer to that time period --CBM presents it as if it was a missed opportunity, that he just missed getting the land on the cheap. Plus, CBM wasn't a fool. I doubt he would have sat on his offer for about a year until the development was reportedly well under way. Why is this happening about A YEAR after CBM decided to purchase land in SH?
Once again, I've addressed this multiple times, but the short answer is that I believe you are reading CBM's book incorrectly. He doesn't tell us he decided upon the Canal Site shortly after Alvord did his huge land purchase...he tells us he decided to build his course in the Shinnecock Hills shortly after Alvord made his purchase in late 1905.
You can surmise all you like about CBM's motivations, but they really aren't supported by facts. If he was so eager to not miss an opportunity then why did he go abroad for 5 months right after Alvord's purchase.
Instead, I believe CBM would NEVER have made an offer on land until he was sure it fit with the general dimensions and type of fetaures he wanted but he couldn't even quantify that until he had his Topographical maps of the great holes and features abroad...which was the primary purpose of his extended stay.
Again, what was the very first thing he and Whigham did after he got general agreement from Alvord to sell him land at Sebonac Neck? They, "studied the contours earnestly, selecting those that would fit in naturally with the various classical holes I had in mind."
3. The outcome is way off. CBM wrote that his 120 acre Canal offer was rejected. Yet the October articles indicate that CBM had purchased the property. While this pronouncement may have been premature, it strongly suggests that CBM and SHPBRC were on their way to making a deal at that point, especially when we consider that they formalized their deal two months later. If his offer was rejected, then why do the articles report he was purchasing the land?
4. The project was too mature. Likewise, the articles indicate that they were well along in the process; that CBM and HJW had already been over the sites several times, had created maps, and even sent them abroad. It sounds like, whether the final deal had been worked out, CBM had his location. This does not jibe with the description in Scotland's Gift of the land having been rejected. CBM and HJW would not have invested so much time and energy on land that wasn't even for sale!If the land wasn't for sale, then why was it reported that had they spent substantial time and effort on the project, including going over the property multiple times, making maps, and sending them all over the world for comment?
5. Later articles confirmed that the site purchased was the same one that had been previously discussed. To what were the later articles referring if not this article?
6. The location is way off. The 120 acre Canal property was located "near the Canal." The October articles described property adjoining SH Golf course to the east. The Canal is about three miles west of SH Golf Course. No matter how hard he tries, Mike cannot reasonably reconcile these two descriptions with a 120 acre golf course, or even a 250 acre course. This is especially so when we consider the rest of the description. The land reportedly stretched along Peconic Bay with the westerly point of the property near the inlet, which is then still over a mile and a quarter to the Canal. Why isn't the described site near the Canal?
7. Speaking of location, the described land is way too close to SH Golf Course. Take a close look at Scotland's Gift. In the paragraph discussing his attempt to purchase the 120 acre Canal parcel, CBM explained that he did not want to get too close to SHGC. He also explained that entire parcel was huge ("some 2000 acres") and that the land he sought was near the Canal. The Canal was the western edge of the SHPBRC land. It was as far away from SH Golf Club as one could get on the Shinnecock Hills property. In Scotland's Gift CBM told us he did not want to crowd Shinnecock Hills Golf Club and tried to purchase land well away from Shinnecock Hills Golf Club. This is irreconcilable with the October articles which describe land adjacent to the golf course. Why is the described site adjoining SHGC?
_____________________________________
As for your measures, we've covered this before and I have explained where I think the 4 acres figure came from. I considered your interpretation and don't buy it. If CBM meant a 1/2 mile he would have said 1/2 mile. If he meant 8 furlongs, he would have said 8 furlongs.
David, I'll get to your questions 3-7 this weekend, I promise. In the meantime, perhaps you and/or Jim can tell me what you think CBM meant with "4 acres" in width, because perhaps I missed it previously.
If he's talking about square acres, that's only 208 yards wide, and we know most of NGLA is MUCH wider than that and there certainly wouldn't be much land to choose from "for his consideration".
If he's talking the way it was used to measure width historically, as in a furlong, then it's 880 yards, which is very consistent with a site of 450 acres overall, especially since we know that the site is actually 1.45 miles long, and not 2 miles. Do the math and it comes out pretty close to 450 acres overall.
At the width of a square acre, 208 yards, the site would have only been 151 acres at 2 miles long and a paltry 112 acres at 1.5 miles.
It was 4 furlongs, and he was talking about having ALL of Sebonac Neck for his consideration and at his disposal to stake out the best holes and land forms in December of 1906.
Thanks...