David,

Every single one of my posts on this topic have dealt with 2 separate points.

First, that you can't state as fact that the Wilson in the manifest was Merion's Wilson without further proof. You agreed to this long ago.

Second, that it is your position that the Wilson in the 1912 manifest MUST be Merion's Wilson. I haven't the least bit of a problem with that idea nor do I disagree with you. In fact, I posted about the "bents of La Tourguet" very early on in agreement with you that he took this trip. That phrase, at least I believe, may explain an ingoing agronomic problemfaced by Merion from the beginning which would then explain Wilson's ongoing correspondence.

Yet every time I state that you believe that Wilson took this 1912 trip you tell me I'm misrepresenting your position. Now you state, "It is extremely likely that this is the correct Hugh I. Wilson, but it is not irrefutable.  That is what I believe and I have consistently said that, and was consistently saying that before you posed your first question about it!" while at the same timeyou state in bold capital letters that, "You are mistaken.  That is neither what I have said, nor what I am maintaining..." in reference to my statement that ”The point is that David IS MAINTAINING THAT VERY POINT and more!”

Yes, David, I understand that you take exception to the use of teh word "incontrovertibly" from my statement; but that really has been your stand. You DO believe that he was that Wilson and your staement, "It is extremely likely that this is the correct Hugh I. Wilson, but it is not irrefutable.  That is what I believe and I have consistently said that, and was consistently saying that before you posed your first question about it!"

I'll take out the word incontrovertibly to my statement, yet what I said still stands, you believe that was Merion's Wilson.

Andy,
I brought out a point much earlier in this thread, pointing to contemporaries of Wilson's who had also designed their first golf courses, both of which were being given unanimous praise and recognition both nationally and interbnationally. Crump at Pine Valley and Tilly at Shawnee. Within a year of its 1911 opening it was already hosting an Open tournament that all of the top pros made it their business to play in and it was awarded the 1919 Women's Amateur.

Neither Tilly nor Crump had designed nor built a course before this time and yet look at what they accomplished.

It is not so far a stretch then to conceive that Wilson could accomplish the same.
 

"By the way, when Horace Hutchinson visited America on Lord Brassey's yacht in 1910 he spent a week with me at Rosyln and three or four days at Southampton. Together we made a study of the National, and I received more valuable advice."


David Moriarty:

In the name of consistency I'm totally shocked that you would overlook this or just ignore it. Here we have from Macdonald himself that Horace Hutchinson gave him MORE VALUABLE ADVICE. What is the exact meaning of "advice" in this case? What is the exact meaning of "valuable". What is the exact and specific meaning of "MORE". This really smells like a SIGNIFICANT INVOLVEMENT on Hutchinson's part on the layout, design and construction of NGLA, don't you think? THIS also smells like a dastardly "MIMIMIZATION CONSPIRACY, don't you think?

Don't you think we should have a forty page thread debating what the meaing of Hutchinson's 'more valuable advice' in the creation of NGLA means? Don't you think NGLA has totally minimized and discounted Horace Hutchinson's "involvement" in the creation of NGLA?

For Shame. You can't even seem to recognize a revealing new "hypothesis" in architecture when it is put right under your nose.

Furthermore it seems that Lord Brassey was in on this conspiracy to minimize Hutchinson in 1910 when he brought Horace over here from England on his yacht so you would never find Horace Hutchinson on the manifest of some steamship.

What is Tom MacWood going to say about this? This smells like a conspiracy in England to minimize Horace Hutchinson as the "Father of all golf architecture" according to Tom MacWood and perhaps to minimize Hutchinson as the single biggest proponent of the Arts and Crafts Movement's influence on golf course architecture.

And you call yourself a researcher?? Apparently you don't even recognize the most important new "Hypothesis" in architecture when it's put right under your nose!

For Shame!

Andy,

There are plenty of golf courses built by architectural novices and some very good ones recently such as Twisted Dune by Archie Struthers and Pine Barrens & Bayonne in NJ by Eric Bergstol.

If one were to consider all of the golf courses in the world, I'd bet the majority were designed by people who weren't professional architects.   My research files are filled with the John Benincasa's, the Joe Bosak's, and the Robert Strange's.  Now admittedly most of those courses are modest affairs and some are quite horrendous, but throughout history there have been any number of really good courses built with little more than heart, desire, funding, and an eagerness to learn.

You mentioned Shawnee, but in its time, it was considered a very good course.   The Shawnee that's there today is about 10% Tillinghast, unfortunately.

What separated some of the early non-architectural pioneers in my mind is a couple of things.   One, they had significant funding or large memberships to help support their efforts.  Two, they were men well connected in the world of golf, so they were not without the advice of others more educated in various components of course building, but each tended to be the final decison-maker, or "sifter" of information, as Max Behr described WIlson.   They also each had the luxury of years to refine and evolve their concepts; look how long it took to get both Merion and Pine Valley to their present forms and how much tweaking took place at each by their original designers.   Finally, they had a connection to the sound strategic concepts from the Old World, both through their playing of golf and study of same.   These were men who knew a good hole when they saw it, and they strived to emulate it; some like Macdonald (let's not forget that he was an amateur archie when he built NGLA, as well) through close adherence to the look and feel of the great holes overseas, and others like Wilson and Tillinghast who were more interested in creating original holes based on the principles of those holes, if not through the close reproduction of features.

"What was Wilson's "Old World" connection at the time they routed and consructed the course?"

That probably has to do with the elusive origin of the wicker baskets of Merion. Merion has always wondered about that and there are various theories and stories about where Wilson may've seen such a thing on the other side. One story has to do with a Merion lady who married an English lord and that Wilson saw the wicker basket at their English estate that had a golf course. The Merion history mentions this story has proved elusive.

The wicker basket of Merion (referred to as a "standard") was actually patented by William Flynn and another man.  

Shivas,

You wrote, "Please don't take this personally, but give it a REST already!  We get your point.  All too well.  Who gives a damn?"

"We" might have gotten my point, but Dave not only didn't but he kept responses coming to me that I felt needed replies.

I would have more respect for your sentiment if you had said, "Phil & David, your argument is stupid and childish and appears to be nothing more than a pissing match... give it a rest."

I did nothing but respond.

In addition, your further statement, "I like a good argument as much or more than the next guy, and the guy next to him and the guy next to him, but PLEASE, we all understand your point and nobody gives a damn.  We all know the difference between proof positive and proof that's good enough to draw conclusions that are well-reasoned, but not free from doubt..." shows that you DIDN'T understand my point.

I acknowledged that David quite a long time ago had stated that he was not stating it as fact. It was when he claimed that he had never stated that he BELIEVED that it was Wilson of Merion on the 1912 manifest that I took issue. He has argued consistently that it was and is, and yet claimed that I "misrepresented his position."

If I tell you that you have misrepresented my position and you feel that you haven't, wouldn't you respond and try to prove it? Of course you would.

THAT is ALL that I did.

Hopefully you will allow me to let my comments on this end here.

"It almost seems like there must be some missing information somewhere.  Either that or someone way back in time invoked artistic license and spiced up the narrative to add interest and make a compelling story.    I am not really implying anything cynical at all, because if someone started with the impression (whether true or false) that Wilson was sent over before they started anything, then all the rest could pretty much fall into place."

David:

Welcome to the real world of researching these clubs and their histories. After you do it long enough you come to realize there are some really interesting crossroads of rumor that seemingly become reality, of material that has long been referred to that probably just doesn't exist any longer and of near misses with the deaths of people who could have helped out in the research. My experiences with some of those people who are close to 100 now is they do remember those people but the reality is they were not interested in or even aware of the things back then we concern ourselves with now.  With courses and architecture of this particular era we are right on the cusp now or losing everyone that had direct connections.

If one looks back over all the information that we have covered on these threads which may be all the available information extant at this point and wonders where the story that Wilson went to Europe in 1910 came from it very well may've all come from Alan Wilson's mention from his report for the first history writer of Merion in 1926-27, William Philler, that Hugh 'as a first step went to GB'. Philler may've just interpreted that to mean 1910 because that appears to have been the year that Wilson and Committee first met with Macdonald and Whigam on this project.

Welcome to the real world of golf architectural research of the histories of clubs that old.

To me the most valuable words dealing with the history of the creation of Merion East logically come from Hugh Wilson himself. He was certainly in a better positon to know what happen than anyone else. In my opinion, there logically can't be a better source of information than that. Obviously Hugh Wilson never realized when he wrote that report that someday people would be questioning all the details of that creation as we are now or I'm sure he would've been more comprehensive in what he wrote.

There is just no question at all that back then the thing he and all of those involved in those courses were most concerned about was not necessarily architecture or even not just how to grow grass but how to permanently establish healthy and enduring turf for golf and not necessarily architectural styles and such. All that is so easy for us today it's not of a passing concern to us anymore but that is not the way it was back then, and we need to really appreciate things like that if we are to ever really understand that era.

The sum and substance of what Hugh I. Wilson left for us and what those around him left for us makes that fact loud and clear. If we fail to understand that or if we fail to appreciate the significance of it then I feel we are not really doing an adequate job of analyzing history and historical events as they really were back then.

In my opinion, it is not really for us to speculate endlessly on things that concern only us today which may not of have been of primary importance to them back then. It is for us as historians and historical analysts to understand what concerned them.

Welcome to the real world of golf architectural research of that era. I can be maddening, it can be confusing and it can be frustrating and sometimes you find things that are really exciting that takes us back to some crossroads and lead us down roads that have long been forgotten or misunderstood perhaps going back decades and decades.  

If you do it long enough I feel you can get a real sense of where these people were coming from and going, and what really concerned them and the most interesting thing to me is it can be so very different from the way we think of things today including the way we think they thought back then.

Shivas:

Has it occured to you yet why both Alan and Hugh Wilson in their reports on the creation of Merion gave so much credit to that trip Wilson and his committee took for two days to NGLA and what they said about it? Both Merion and us on here have presented those reports on here long ago for all to consider. I'm not sure what makes any of you think that trip and the importance of it to Hugh Wilson and his committee has been minimized in any way. The only possible way one could assume any of us or Merion has minimized the importance of it is due to the incredibly tortured logic by some on here.

That trip and the significance of it to Merion has always been part of the Merion course record and it's been included in all its history books.

If some of you are now trying to suggest that Wilson and his committee were too much the novices to layout and build the golf course as Wilson said they did without having Macdonald come to Philadelphia to show them how to do it, I just don't see that logic at all. If that had been the case I see no reason whatsoever why Hugh Wilson and Alan Wilson, the committee and everyone else connected with Merion would not have made that very clear in their reports and in the Merion history.

This weird "hypothesis" that Macdonald and Whigam's advice and involvement in Merion has been underplayed, minimized and discounted has got to stop. There is nothing to suggest that happened. The record of Merion and the reports of the Wilsons should be taken on face value. Nothing has been produced on here or anywhere else to suggest otherwise, no matter when Wilson went to Europe. When one begins to suggest on here that Hugh Wilson himself was in some way attempting to inaccurately minimize in his 1916 report anything that Macdonald and Whigam did to help Merion is when I begin to take serious exception. There is notthing and no reason to suggest that. To suggest that is speculation of the worst form, in my opinion.

Even if Wilson did not go to GB until after 1911 nothing has been presented on here to suggest and certainly nothing that proves that he and his commitee did not 'layout and built 18 greens and 15 fairways in 1911 as he said they did in his 1916 report.

Again, if any of you begin to suggest again that he may've been lying in that report I will, of course continue to take serious exception to that claim. That is highly speculative and without foundation given what all has been presented on here.

I hope we don't see again the suggestion that he and his committee must have been much too much the novices to do that. The fact is whatever you think about them being novices they did it anyway just as others like them did---including Leeds, Emmet, Fownes and Crump and probably Tillinghast, Thomas and even Macdonald too.

" Since we're talking about ideas, rather than vigilance or effort, it strikes me that CBM is the logical place to start, since he was the one the Committee sought out in the first place for ideas...."

Shivas:

Of course he's the logical place to start. He always was the logical place to start in the history of the creation of Merion East. Nothing about the Merion record indicates otherwise, it never has and it does not now. None of us on these threads have ever indicated otherwise.

Why was he the logical place for a Merion to start even with the very first formations of their site selection committee and then their Construction Committee of members with Wilson as the chairman? The site selection committee was probably formed before the construction committee and both before going to see Macdonald. Do you suppose they did NOT have Macdonald and the way he went about NGLA in mind in the very beginning when they realized they should move? I would seriously doubt that they did not have him in mind in the very beginning when the entire idea first began to occur to them.

This is precisely what I've been saying on this thread. No one seems to notice in this constant fixation on ship's manifests and trips to GB and such.

It was the logical place to start and the thing to do, in my opinion, for the simple reason not just that Macdonald had neared completion on a remarkable new course and style of architecture at NGLA but for the way he went about doing it all in the first place. This man Macdonald was an amateur architect first and foremost.

Who had really done something like that before in America? Emmet had remodeled a rudimentary course at GCGC before that and Leeds had done the same thing at Myopia. But who had gone about it the way Macdonald did at NGLA before that? A site search, the formation of a committee of amateur advisors, and the dedication to take at least 4-5 years to work on the golf course before opening it for play?

Not to mention the fact, as I said previously, that the likes of Robert Lesley, Rodman Griscom obviously had to know Macdonald well. The reason for that, at the very least, was the Lesley Cup. That competition was in no way at all insignificant in those days. It was huge---in all the papers and including the best players in America from the Northeast coast. The fact the Lesley Cup also had an inordinate amount of amateurs interested in architecture is not to be overlooked.

There's no question in my mind that they understood if Macdonald could pull it off as he did beginning in the early part of the century basically beginning as a novice too there was no real reason they couldn't do the same thing too at Merion. I'm sure the same basic idea had occured to Fownes, Leeds, Emmet, Thomas, Tilliinghast, Travis and Wilson. I think it wasn't so much what he'd done at NGLA but the way he went about it. That was much of what was such a breakthrough in an architectural process in America.

The only difference with Merion is they were moving an existing membership to a new site and not starting a new club the way Macdonald had done with NGLA.

Last night, I had a dream.  It was in the form of a play, theater of the absurd, I think it is called.   Anyways, I was sitting there next to Dr Katz, who was explaining all this stuff in the play to me, because I am way too dumb to understand this stuff myself.  The play took place on the Merion golf course 18th green at midnight, in total darkness.  The audience was crowded around the green, US Open style.  There was a chorus of actors reciting long sillogisms explaining a tragic event.  The props swung into the stage from out of the darkness, only illuminated when they reached to green center.  The spot lights shifted from one chorus actor to the other to the props, which were maniquins of MacDonald and Wilson.  So, because I'm not too literary at all, I went to Wikepedia to look up what a tragedy was.  And then I fit the relevant pieces of the dream I had..  here in brackets is what I came up with...  

Greek tragedy contains seven components: plot, [WAS THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF MERION THE PRIMARY RESULT OF A FOCUSED COMMITTEE EFFORT LED BY H. WILSON, WITH SOME ADVICE AND COUNCIL OF OTHERS] characters, [MacDONALD, WHIGHAM, TILLINGHAST, HUGH AND AL WILSON], a chorus, [TOM PAUL, DAVID MORIARITY, PHIL YOUNG, MIKE CIRBA, ANDY HUGHES, DAVE SCHMIDT] thought, [THE TEXT OF A 1000 PAGES OF GCA.COM TO BE READ BY THE CHORUS AS IT HAPPENED ON THE THREAD] diction, [HIGH ENGLISH CIRCA 1900] music, [KENNY G. SOUNDTRACK PLAYING IN BACKGROUND] and spectacle. [THE PLAY STAGE SET ON THE 18TH HOLE Of MERION, IN THE DARKNESS OF THE MIDNIGHT HOUR, WITH SPOTLIGHTS TO SHINE ONLY ON THE CHARACTERS AS THEY ENTER AND THE CHORUS AS EACH ACTOR SPEAKS]  these plot is the most important. According to Aristotle, "the plot is the soul of tragedy." Plot is communicated to the audience primarily by means of words. [THAT WE HAVE ENOUGH WORDS ON THIS THREAD TO LAST TILL DAWN, THERE IS NO DOUBT]
A favorite theatrical device of many ancient Greek tragedians was the ekkyklêma, a cart hidden behind the scenery which could be rolled out to display the aftermath of some event which had happened out of sight of the audience. [THE LOST LETTERS AND MANUSCRIPTS OF ALL THE DEAD ARCHITECT GUYS DESCRIBING THE BUILDING AND FOUNDING OF MERION] This event was frequently a brutal murder of some sort, an act of violence which could not be effectively portrayed visually, but an action of which the other characters must see the effects in order for it to have meaning and emotional resonance. [THE ACCUSATION THAT WILSON WAS NOT THE SOUL AND INSPRIATION AND CREATOR OF MERION GOLF CLUB] Another reason that the violence happened off stage was that the theatre was considered a holy place, [THE MERION GOLF COURSE] so to kill someone on stage is to kill them in the real world. [DETRACTION OF WILSON’S REPUTATION IN FAVOR OF MACDONALD’S INVOLVEMENT, A SHAMELESS ACT OF FALSE REATTRIBUTION OR THE RECLAMATION OF WHAT WAS RIGHTFULLY MACDONALD’]  A prime example of the use of the ekkyklêma is after the murder of Agamemnon in the first play of Aeschylus' Oresteia, when the king's butchered body is wheeled out in a grand display for all to see. [WILSON DOLL IS WHEELED OUT WITH A BLOODY KNIFE IN HIS BACK] Variations on the ekkyklêma are used in tragedies and other forms to this day, as writers still find it a useful and often powerful device for showing the consequences of extreme human actions. [GOLF CLUB ATLAS THREADS INTO INFINITY DEBATING HOW MANY ANGELS CAN DANCE ON THE HEAD OF A PIN]  Another such device was a crane, the mechane, which served to hoist a god or goddess on stage when they were supposed to arrive flying. [STATUTES OF THE GHOST OF MACDONALD AND WILSON COME FLYING IN FROM THE OFF STAGE  DARKNESS, HOISTED ON STEAMSHOVEL BANKS’S CRANE]  This device gave origin to the phrase "deus ex machina" ("god out of a machine"), that is, the surprise intervention of an unforeseen external factor that changes the outcome of an event. [WHEN WILSON APPEARS FROM THE DARKNESS HOISTED ON THE CRANE, HE HAS A PASSENGER MANIFEST PINNED TO HIS LAPEL]  Greek tragedies also sometimes included a chorus composed of singers to advance and fill in detail of the plot.  [OH, WE HAVE A CHORUS OF THESBIANS(sic) HERE, ALL WITH ELOQUENT SYLOGISMS TO BE READ AS THE BODY OF THE PLAY]

Shivas:

You got me pal. I don't know what CBM said to Hugh but if he said this agronomy mess is going to turn me into a reclusive loner asshole that wouldn't surprise me either.

I'm just really sorry either we or Merion doesn't have a really good video/audio tape of the two days they spent up there at NGLA in 1910 or so. I'm just sorry that the most of the rest of Hugh's life and times and his whereabouts at all times isn't better known.

I think the most important post in all these Merion threads by David Moriarty is the one just above by RJ Daley.

But the point is CBM's part in Merion has not been mnimized by Merion or by us and Wilson and his committee laid out, designed and built the East Course between the spring of 1911 and September 1911, seeded it, let it grow in for a year and opened it for play in September 1912. Shortly thereafter they bought more land down the street and laid out the West course beginning construction in March 1913 and seeding it in May 1913, and opening it for play in May 1914. The East cost $45,000 to do and the West cost $30,000 to do.

(In his report Hugh Wilson got most of the dates of Merion West off by a year, a year too early in fact, but hey, I guess that was just Hugh---sounds to me like he was a really talented and efficient guy who most of the time may not have known what year it was).

Actually, it seems like Merion itself has never been all that swift on dates. They think the year of the creation of Merion Cricket Club was 1896 but Wayne has just proved it was actually 1895.

You know what they say about Philadelphia---"If the world comes to an end come to Philadelphia because it's about thirty years behind times".

Furthemore, Shivas, we don't have jambalaya here in Philly and we wouldn't know Andouille sausage from a Daschhound. You must be thinking of New Orleans. But we sure do know Cheese Steaks and believe me, pal, they may taste good but you DO NOT WANT TO KNOW what's in them.

Patrick:

The so-called "Merion Construction Committee" charged with creating Merion East was made up of Rodman E. Griscom, Richard S. Francis, Horatio Gates Lloyd, Dr Henry Toulmin, and HUgh I. Wilson, the chariman.

Rodman Griscom, was a wealthy Philadelphian, son of Clement A. Griscom, a shipping magnate who owned the place (Dolabran) next to the original Merion Cricket Club nine hole course. Clement Griscom made available to the club enough land for the club to expand the original course to 18 holes. Rodman Griscom, Clement's son, was a very good player--eg he won the Philadephia Amateur in 1905 and was a big man on the Lesley Cup. Rodman served on the Executive Committee of the USGA and his sister, Frances Griscom, became Merion's first national champion in golf. He was the first president of Merion Golf Club at his death in 1944.

Richard S. Francis was an officer in a construction company and was a surveyor and engineer by trade. This apparently was very useful to the Committee.

Hugh Wilson, owned an insurance company with his brother Alan. Hugh was a good player, and captain of the Princeton golf team from which he graduated in 1902.

Horatio Gates Llyod was from a very prominent Philadelphia family with a relative who was a famous admiral in the United States Navy, sort of America's answer Britain's Lord Nelson. Horatio himself became a prominent Indian fighter primarily in the southwest before retiring back to Philadelphia with what was said to be about 300 Indian slaves that he kept on a massive farm in Chester County. It is said Horatio's slaves built the first Merion course in Bryn Mawr, and were going to do the East course until they were replaced by Italian laborers under the direction of Guieseppe Valentino (Joe Valentine)---see the next committee member.

Dr. Henry Toulmin, was an extraordinary character with charm, charisma and panache. His origins are not well known but they feel he came to Philadelpha by way of French West Aftrica and perhaps Guadalupe. He had very strong connections all over Europe and was said to have brought the famous Italian laborers in to Merion (there's a story that is unattributed that says he traded 200 of his Indians slaves in Italy for 97 Italian slaves, or what was referred to at that time as indentured servants). He was the most famous gynecologist in Philadelphia, and quite a ladies man to boot. Gynecology was the front of his office., In the back he was known to have the cleanest establishment in the city for illegal abortions. And in the building across the street he operated one of the largest traveling call girl operations known in America at that time. Basically Toulmin was America's most prominent pimp and in his spare time to boot.

It was a good committee with some real diversity of talent. With or without Macdonald they were geared up and ready to rock and roll and create one of America's first really good inland golf courses beginning in the spring of 1911.

TEPaul,

The Committee would appear to be amply qualified.

Did any of the committee members play or study any courses in the UK prior to the design and construction of Merion ?