Mike, I am not sure we read the same report, but since it is long gone now, I may never know.
1. AWilson did not say M&W were helpful in "the process" or with "irrigation, agronomy, and a host of other construction matters," or with “advice on his overseas trip,” or with “the concepts of the great strategic holes of the game,” or even in “getting the process off on sure footing.” Alan Wilson said (my bolds):
"their advice and suggestions as to the lay-out of the East Course were of the greatest help and value.”You think these guys were precise with their word usage? Well then why doesn’t
“as to the lay-out of the East Course” mean
as to the lay-out of the East Course? So far Tillinghast, Travis, Lesley, Alan Wilson, and more have all said that M&W advised about
laying out the East Course. Yet you still insist this was really all about preparing for the Europe trip or just about anything but what they actually said.
Call me crazy, but I just do not think that when all these men said
THE LAY-OUT THE EAST COURSE, they really meant
WHAT TO SEE IN EUROPE.2. AWilson did not say that M&W advice was not helpful, or ultimately rejected, or politely rejected, or even that “in the end the committee did not find it useful.” They said that (my bolds): "their advice and suggestions as to the lay-out of the East Course were of
the greatest help and value.”
And, again, I do not think that when Tillinghast, Travis, Leslie, Alan Wilson and others referred to M&W’s advice and suggestions about laying out the East Course as helpful and as
THE GREATEST HELP AND VALUE, that they actually meant
NOT USEFUL. or
ULTIMATELY IGNORED.You are saying these things. Alan Wilson is not.
3. You attach unfounded importance to Alan Wilson’s insistence that the committee deserves the credit for the design and construction of Merion East. In so doing you overlook the three words that immediately follow the description of M&W’s involvement (my bolds and caps):
”EXCEPT FOR THIS, the entire responsibility for the design and construction of the two courses rests upon the Special Construction Commitee, composed of R.S. Francis, R.E.Griscom, H.G. Lloyd, Dr, Harry Toulmin, and the late Hugh I. Wilson, Chairman."
The committee is entirely responsible, except for the valuable help M&W gave them.
However, it's also clear that Alan Wilson, and seemingly the other members of the Merion Committee, didn't feel that Macdonald's role and input was significant enough to warrant credit for anything directly relating to the design and construction of the final product.
Alan Wilson thought M&W’s role was significant enough to warrant credit. Credit for all that he mentions, including (but not limited to) providing advice and suggestions that were of the greatest help and value in laying out Merion East. Since when does laying out a golf course not directly relate to the design and construction of its final product?
[As an aside, I don’t think that Alan Wilson was on the committee.]
4. As for your “coup de grace,” let’s take a look . . .
"The land for the East Course was found in 1910 and as a first step, Mr. Wilson was sent abroad to study the more famous links in Scotland and England. On his return the plan was gradually evolved and while largely helped by many excellent suggestions and much good advice from other members of the Committee, they have each told me that he is the person in the main responsible for the architecture both of this and of the West course."
a. He does not say “
ALL of the excellent suggestions and good advice in the final product came from the committee.” In fact, he doesn’t exclude the possibility of other suggestions or advice in the least bit. Rather he merely says that the committee members gave “many excellent suggestions” and “much good advice,” and that Wilson was “largely helped.”
How does this exclude the possibility of M&W’s also offering good advice which was used in the final product?
b. It seems that, in this paragraph, Alan Wilson is simply making a case that his recently deceased brother deserves more credit for the design than the rest of the committee members, and that even the committee members themselves think it so.
You try to read this simple report as some esoteric code rightfully purging M&W from any credit for actually contributing to the laying out of the course. Your reading is stretched well past the breaking point.
__________________
Jeff,
As you can probably tell, I do not agree with Mike's assessment of what this is all about. As you can also probably tell, we do have real differences on what MacDonald deserves credit for.
And Mike was one of the more reasonable ones on the issue.
-- Mr. Morrison insisted that there was no information suggesting that CBM was involved past Wilson's visit to NGLA before the overseas trip.
-- TEPaul thought that most every bit of credit for the early Merion East ought to stay with those who were there every day, and that giving M&W any credit was taking credit away from Wilson and the others who were there.
Don't believe me? Check their posts.
A few pages back I wrote a summary of my take on the entire thing. It is a little long, but if you want to understand where the differences fall, it may be worth looking at.