David Moriarty's excellent The Missing Faces of Merion is now posted under IMO

[Mike_Cirba]

Finally, in January 1915, Lesley finally reported at the annual GAP meeting that the Cobb's deal was done, and again named a Committee of Golf Experts to design and build the course.   

In reporting about some of the men involved, long-time Philadelphia golf writer and GAP member William Evans, who had been at the January meeting stated;

"A committee made up of Hugh Wilson, the man responsible for the two Merion and new Seaview courses; Ab Smith, who has done much to stiffen and improve the Huntingdon Valley links, and George Klauder, who is partly repsonsible for the new Aronimink course, will aid the Park Engineers in laying out the course. "  (Crump and Meehan were also involved)

The Inquirer wrote;

"It is  the intention of those responsible for the laying out of the course to engage experts who will supervise the whole affair with a view of having a public golf course second to none in the country and equal of any in the world, according to President Lesley, who is also chairman of the COmmitteee of Presidents, who had the matter in hand.  "

From the Public Legder;

"Experts who lay out golf courses require from four to five months for the work.   The plans for the course have been drawn and these show the establshement of the eighteen holes in the northern part of the park at Garrettsford road and from there extend to the city line.   The plans are subject to change and will not be shown publicly until the Park Commission has formally approved them."

[Mike_Cirba]

"Such experts as Hugh Wilson, who laid out the Merion and Seaview courses, George Klauder, one of the constructors of the Aronimink course, and Ab Smith, who had done a lot for the Huntingdon Valley course, have laid out the course in Cobb's Creek park and work begin in early spring.   There are so many natural hazards that this problem has not been much of a bother to the golf architects.

[Phil_the_Author]

Mike,

I don't know if you saw my post on the other Merion thread regarding what I found in the April, 1910, issue of GOLF magazine. In threads filled with conjecture this certainly inspires a number of ideas. Its below:

From the April 1910 issue of GOLF magazine:

"A party of American professionals who have been spending the winter in Great Britain paid a visit to Walton heath Golf Club..." While reporting on some friendly matches being held, the writer tells of a "C. Bell, MERION, and W.L. Mackie, Barnehurst, beat Horace Rawlins, our 1895 Open champion, and Joshua taylor, Acton..."

Interesting to note that among the other "American Professionals" on this extended visit was one H.H. Barker...

Questions:

1- Who was C. Bell of Merion?
2- Is there any possibility that he was asked his advice about courses and holes in the UK when Merion decided to build the new courses shortly after this?
3- Is it possible that HIS several month's trip has been mixed in with later history as having been Wilson's?
4- Because of his realationship with Barker, and they must have had one as a result of this trip if not one before, could HE have RECOMMENDED Barker to be brought in for course design advice two months after this?

This long trip by Bell and connection to Barker and his examining the property two months after this seems far more than coincidental to whatever role he played.

[Mike_Cirba]

This last-named club (Philmont) for years was noted as a course where there was not a single artificial hazard.   The club feels that new greens are badly needed and that artificial hazards are essntial.   One of the leading members (Ellis Gimbel) had a great deal to do with the municipal course in Cobb's Creek Park, which was laid out by A.H. Smith, George Crump, Hugh Wilson, and others, and he was greatly impressed with what these experts did.  

[Mike_Cirba]

“The fact that there is a golf course at Cobb's Creek is due entirely to the hard efforts of the Philadelphia Golf Association. It took five years to convince the Fairmount Park Commissioners that there was an actual demand for a public links. And after the plans were decided upon Hugh Wilson, the man who laid out the two Merion courses, spent six months laying out the new public course. A.H. Smith, for years one of the most prominent members of the Huntingdon Valley Country Club, gave up his Sundays for as many months to the work of getting the course in shape.”

[Mike_Cirba]

Phil,

I saw that, but my search for anything on a C. Bell turned up empty, except that there was a C. Bell who played out of Brae Burn and Brookline at the time. 

Perhaps he was an assistant at Merion?   Or, perhaps Hugh Wilson knew we'd come looking for him all these years later and decided to go in disguise. 

[Mike_Cirba]

Dave,

I completely understand your friendship with David, as well as your continual defense of his ideas in light of almost universal skepticism of what he has put forward here, and I respect you for that, and I respect him as well for doing some incredible research, as well as bringing to light some heretofore unknown information about the origins of that amazing golf course.

I think, despite some of the personal acrimony that I've unfortunately had my share of blame for, that it's been a good, healthy, and educational discussion, and there is still a good deal of information to be unearthed and disseminated.

But, despite all of that, I have to tell you that I've seen nothing to date that has changed what seems fundamentally and overwhelmingly true...that the Committees of Merion, largely led by Robert Lesley and Hugh Wilson, found the site, sought consultative advice, designed the course, laid out the course, built the course, refined the course, and put their hearts, souls, and bodies into the effort in a way that likely hasn't been seen prior or after.

Your post attempts to cast slings and arrows at the knowledge and standing of Hugh Wilson and those committee members, but let me ask a simple, and fundamental question that is at the heart of all of these discussions....

...if Hugh Wilson was a novice in 1911....and acted simply as a glorified construction foreman as head of a gentrified, figurehead "construction" committee that was simply tasked with laboring the earth to someone else's dream...someone else's master plan...someone else's instructions...and after planting seed and watching grass grow on someone else's vision for the next year between September 1911, and then opening someone else's course in September 1912...

...then what could he have possibly learned or accomplished during that time frame that suddenly made him a world-acknowledged expert in 1913, held on the same level as George Crump, who designed Pine Valley?

What would have been the magical alchemy that turned this simple, humble, "novice" insurance man into someone suddenly sought by the Kings of Industry...the Clarence Geists...the Robert Lesleys...the Ellis Gimbels...to build THEIR courses in 1912 and 1913?

What was it about this simple, humble, unassuming gentleman that caused cynical and hardened newsmen and sportsmen, and men as far flung as Max Behr, and AW Tillinghast, and Walter Travis, as well as the local reporters like William Evans and "Joe Bunker" to not only praise him as the man who had the insight and vision to build the course at Merion, but who recommended him to be the man for what was clearly the most important job in Philadelphia golf at that time...to finally design and build what was to instantly become the best public golf course in America, the course at Cobb's Creek, designed to be the developmental, proving, and testing ground for both growing the game in the city, as well as developing her future champions?

I realize David, that you tend to view things from the very cynical, jaundiced view of life in 2008, and your slighting words that diminish his accomplishments sound very refined and come from the politically refined viewpoint of someone who has lived through too much false hope and too much trumped hype, but they don't ring true for a simpler age when men were judged by what others thought of them, and what others wrote of them, and only a few sought to seek the center stage of publicity for trumpeting themselves, their accomplishments, and their dreams.

One can only wish that those simpler, more honest times had a closer reflection to today's realities.

[DMoriarty]

Mike,  If you think that Schmidt would side with me because of friendship, then you don't know him at all, nor have you noticed that this may be the first time he has ever even partially agreed with anything I have written in around six or seven years.

Given that you constantly state that my essay has not support, you may find it hard to believe that many found my essay to be at least somewhat convincing   They just prefer not to face this gauntlet.   

Is it any wonder?  Everyone who has found my essay the least bit compelling and has openly said so has been accused of bias and scolded for their uninformed interpretation.   Why is that?     

As for Wilson's experience, Shivas is exactly correct.   Between 1910 and the time he was called an expert, he studied with Macdonald and Whigham, built Merion East, continued to refine Merion East, directed the rebuilding of a number of features, traveled to europe to study design, corresponded with Piper and Oakley for a couple of years, and built Merion West. 

Yet you think since he was called an expert after all that, then he must have also been an expert in 1910?   Stretched logic, to say the very least.

[DMoriarty]

I haven't read all of what is above, but wanted to address a few things I picked up.

1.  Many are drawing conclusions about M&W's level of involvement based on the time they did (or did not) spend at Merion.  We do not know how much time M&W spent at Merion on either one of their visits.   Like so many things on these threads, this has just been misrepresented so much that people now believe it.

2.   It is a mistake to assume that two separate visits and three more days (according to Wilson) working with the construction committee, was not enough time to route the course and continue to revise the plans.  This was 1910-11, and these things were sometimes done in an afternoon.   Should we throw MacKenzie and others out of the history books because they spent less time than this on some of their jobs?

3.  Tom Paul is incorrect when he said there was never a mention of any plans pre-1916.   Barker sketched a proposed lay out.   Francis was studying plans.   M&W sent a letter describing what could have been done with the property.   He is correct about one thing.   I have never seen mention of any sort of plan by Wilson.  None at all.  He supposedly returned from Europe with reams of sketches and drawings, but at this point it is more likely those came from NGLA than from Europe.   
 
4.  TomPaul noted that CBM never did the drawings for his routings or courses.   Surely given this we cannot read too much into the lack of a drawing.  M&W could easily have described a routing in a letter, by referencing Barker's map, natural features, property lines, and/or even stakes.   We do not know how they described what could be done with the property, but we know that they did, and that the site committee was duly impressed and and acted accordingly, even sending the construction committee to meet further with M&W as one of their first orders of business.

5.  Many seem to be under the mistaken impression that early Merion repeatedly referred to Wilson as the designer of the East Course.   This again has been repeated so often that people believe it even though it has no basis in fact.   Similarly Mike cirba has repeatedly alluded to articles written near the time of the act that claim Wilson planned the course.  None have been produced.   A few things say he laid the course out, but he did do that.  As Lesley said he laid the course out upon the ground.   

[Peter Pallotta]

Shivas - you're in fine form this a.m. But:

The fact that CBM never did routing maps could explain why there is no CBM routing map for Merion. Of course, what could also (and more easily) explain it is that CBM didn't route Merion. Have you seen anything that suggests to you that he did? Do you believe he could offer something even close to a routing plan in the form of a letter?

(Actually, I can imagine it: "The great Macdonald, him being me, sees a Redan there, and not just any Redan but a Macdonald Redan, better it is than the original, according to Macdonald, the father of American architecture, who is me. And an Alps!)

Peter
 

[Patrick_Mucci]

Shivas - you're in fine form this a.m. But:

The fact that CBM never did routing maps could explain why there is no CBM routing map for Merion.

Peter, you state that it's a FACT that CBM never did routing maps.

Where did you obtain that information ?[/color]

Of course, what could also (and more easily) explain it is that CBM didn't route Merion. Have you seen anything that suggests to you that he did?


Have you ever seen a Wilson routing of Merion ?
Maybe you haven't because he didn't route Merion.[/color]

Do you believe he could offer something even close to a routing plan in the form of a letter?

(Actually, I can imagine it: "The great Macdonald, him being me, sees a Redan there, and not just any Redan but a Macdonald Redan, better it is than the original, according to Macdonald, the father of American architecture, who is me. And an Alps!)

That's correct, he did locate those holes in Southampton on the raw land, and many others.

And, there was a redan and an alps at Merion, although, the alps appears to be far more constructed, which is very interesting.

Why move so much dirt ?  Why create an "alps" when the land doesn't scream "alps" at you ?   Why construct a massive feature behind the green ?

Someone wanted to create a "template hole or two ... or more.

Who's the logical choice to do that ?

Philadelphia Inquiring minds want to know  [/color]

[Jeff_Brauer]

Peter,

The fact is, at this point, no one knows exactly what CBM did at Merion. He might have retired to the clubhouse for lemonade for all we know. Or, he might have spent more than a day.  The fact that the Merion guys spent more than a day at NGLA might suggest that two days or more was possible.

But again, speculation.

For all the talk, it sure would be nice to see what was in the letter than Merion largely adopted in moving forward to buy the property.  I tend to think that some routing ideas had to be in there because the property was so tight. For example, why buy the Dallas Estate without some idea how or even if you could fit golf holes on it?

On the other hand, the approximate road line agreed to when the land was sold to MCC suggests that a routing wasn't in place, or at least, wasn't finished to the satisfaction of MCC.  

In either case, I doubt we can credit CBM with anything other than getting the process started and perhaps getting a basic routing in place for the committee to tweak. But, he probably did have some influence.

And, I think the debate here is hung up on the all or nothing premise, when I can envision the club building on what CBM gave them to start.  The real story is usually a lot more complicated than the accepted versions, and I believe that to be the case at Merion, based on what I read.

BTW, I posted on another Merion thread that perhaps the Alps and Redan came about the single construction period site visit CBM made.  They happened to be building there and he exerted his influence. 

[Mike_Cirba]

Shivas,

You truly don't have a clue here.   I don't have the time today to burn down each of your strawmen, but I would simply say this;

Locals who had knowledge of golf courses were called "experts", not only in the press, but in club accounts and correspondence.   We also know that the men who layed out Merion, (and if you go back and read all of the quotes that I highlighted yesterday you'll see in no uncertain terms the way the phrases "Laid out" "constructed", "experts",  "etc., were used and what they meant at the time) had just come back in January (according to David's timeline) from consulting with other "experts" at NGLA. 

That doesn't mean that Macdonald laid out the golf course, nor does it mean he designed, routed, created, conceived, or planned it.   In fact, I would take the exact opposite view than you just did and say that if indeed the great Macdonald had designed, routed, created, conceived, or planned the course, the correspondence with members would have very clearly pointed that out.

Both you and David missed the point of the quotes I listed yesterday.   They were not to suggest that Hugh Wilson was an expert by 1913, although he was.

They were to prove two very related points;

1) The way the terms were used over and over again in the language and lexicon of the day and that EVERYONE knew exactly what was meant when it was reported that Hugh Wilson "layed out' Merion.   It meant he planned, conceived, routed, created, designed the golf course.  It's also clear how the term "experts" was used and understood by Robert Lesley of Merion and others in local golfdom at the time.  These meanings are all very clear and very irrefutable.

2) It was to make apparent the obvious question that you fail to answer above, which is, If he was just the construction foreman to someone else's plan, why would guys like Clarence Geist, who was building his palatial Seaview, or Ellis Gimbel, who needed to seriously upgrade his Philmont, or Robert Lesley, who evidently had used the great Macdonald for his first course....

Why would they have asked Hugh Wilson to design their courses right after he took off his hard hat, washed his hands, sent his laborers, home, and went back to see what Charlie had planned for him the next day?

Do you have any idea who these men were, or their wealth, their connections, and their spheres of influence??   They could have bought and paid for a new boat to bring Harry S. Colt and ALister Mackenzie themselves over if they were so inclined.   


One final thing;

David quotes "Far and Sure"'s review of Merion in "American Golfer", but listen again very carefully to how he describes the respective roles of Macdonald and Wilson in the creation of Merion when he played it right after it opened in Sept 1912.   The writer was either Travis or Tillinghast...I believe the latter and Phil disagrees, but no matter;

"Two years ago, Mr. Chas. B. Macdonald, who had been of great assistance in an advisory way, told me that Merion would have one of the best inland courses he had ever seen, but every new course is "one of the best in the country", and one must see to believe after trying it out."

That is the sole mention of Macdonald.   It doesn't say he created anything...whether the term is planned, conceived, laid out, constructed, designed...nada.   He VIEWED it, and offered great assistance in exactly the things that Site Committee recommended him for, and exactly what Hugh Wilson later gave him thanks for...CONSTRUCTION and AGRONOMY.


Then, what does he say about Wilson;

"It is too early to attempt an analytical criticism of the various holes for many of them are but rough drafts of the problems conceived by the construction committee, headed by Mr. Hugh I. Wilson."


So Shivas...I have to ask;  what is a construction foreman doing "conceiving the problems of golf holes"?    Isn't that a definition of Golf Course Architecture, 101?   

What's more, he points out that it's still a rough draft, with more details to be fleshed out later, but who does he say CONCEIVED the holes??

Are you trying to argue that Macdonald just routed the course but Wilson CONCEIVED the holes??   How would Macdonald know what to route where if he didn't even know what holes Hugh Wilson would CONCEIVE of??

If all the Construction Committee had to do was implement to Macdonald's plans for the course, whether written, verbal, in a letter, on a train, in a plane, with a fox, on a box, all they had to do was dig the ground and plant grass?   They would have had no business "CONCEIVING" of anything.   Why was it now 18 months after construction started and they were still only at the rough draft stage if they were just following Macdonald's well-crafted plans??

This was published in American Golfer in a several page spread right after the course opened.   I'm sure it was read by Macdonald and Whigham.   Why didn't they take issue?? 


Shivas...this history is much too important to take a revisionist approach and rush to judgement as you and Patrick have done without hard, solid, unshakeable evidence.   It's the GCA equivalent of a Murder One Capital trial, and the burden of proof really needs to be 100% before we send Hugh Wilson's reputation and memory to the gallows, because any other interpretation of events really calls both him and his brother Alan liars, and as much as we try to sugar coat it, there's no getting around that unforutnate fact.

[TEPaul]

"Peter, the world was flat for thousands of years.  It was an accepted truism.  Everybody believed it.  It was stated so many times, everybody just KNEW it."

Shivas:

The world was flat only to people who never sailed an ocean! That would be somewhat analogous to people who've never really seen Merion on this thread, I think. 

You know who first came up with the "story" that the earth was flat? Washington Irving did in some story he wrote in the 1880s almost four hundred years AFTER Columbus sailed.

Sailors never thought the earth was flat since they constantly watched ships slowly sinking out of sight on the horizon and next time they saw them it didn't really take them long to figure out they hadn't fallen off the earth!   

[Mike_Cirba]

I'd ask anyone out there familiar with the creative process of golf course architecture;

Isn't "conceiving", or "conception" the real, original, unique, individualistic part of the creative, artistic process??  Isn't it the "art", as opposed to the craft??

Or perhaps Hugh Wilson got his wife pregnant?   

con·ceive  (kn-sv)
v. con·ceived, con·ceiv·ing, con·ceives
v.tr.
1. To become pregnant with (offspring).
2. To form or develop in the mind; devise: conceive a plan to increase profits.
3. To apprehend mentally; understand: couldn't conceive the meaning of that sentence.
4. To be of the opinion that; think: didn't conceive such a tragedy could occur.
5. To begin or originate in a specific way: a political movement conceived in the ferment of the 1960s.
v.intr.
1. To form or hold an idea: Ancient peoples conceived of the earth as flat.
2. To become pregnant.

[Peter Pallotta]

"Show me one contemporaneous writing where "lay out" says that the person conceptualized a design.  Just one."

Shivas -

Herbert Fowler, architect, wrote in the April 1920 Golf Illustrated:

“These rushes [plants] are found only at Westward Ho! and at Saunton the other side of the Taw, where the writer has just laid out a new seaside course which will soon surpass even Westward Ho!”

That sounds like the architect means by “laid out” what we’d mean by routing or designing.

Max Behr, architect, from the February 1915 Golf Illustrated:

“It is well to remember that a course once laid out can rarely be changed without large expense. This is because most of us have to economize in land and fit in our holes like parts of a Chinese puzzle. Consequently it is impossible to change one hole without interfering greatly with several others.”

That sounds like the architect means to include in the concept/act of “laying out” something close to what we’d mean by routing or designing.

Peter

[DMoriarty]

But while we are looking at the article, perhaps you can explain something to me.    Far and Sure states:

"[/i]Two years ago, Mr. Chas. B. Macdonald, who had been of great assistance in an advisory way, told me that Merion would have one of the best inland courses he had ever seen, but every new course is 'one of the best in the country' and one must see to believe after trying it out."[/i]

The article was published in January 1913.   Assuming Phillip Young's approx. six week lag time that would mean he was writing sometime in November 1912.Two years before November 1912 was November 1910 the same month that Merion's purchase had become public, so Far and Sure was likely curious about it around that time. 

But how could have Macdonald have said that Merion would have one of the best inland courses he had ever seen in November 1910?   How could he know what kind of course Merion would have if Hugh I. Wilson had not even been appointed to design it yet?   Was he just commenting on the raw land?    Was he just pretending to know something he did not?   

Of course not.  The routing was already planned in Nov. 1912, and Macdonald (at least) had helped plan it.  so he knew it was going to be a good one.
__________________

Peter,

Mike Cirba believes we should look to people like Lesley to figure out what they meant by layout.   I agree.   

Lesley wrote:

"The ground was found adapted for golf and "a course was laid out upon it" about three years ago by
the following committee. . . who had as advisers" M&W.

They laid the course out upon the ground.   

As I have explained, one could plan a course while laying it out upon the ground, by staking it and marking it, but one could also plan a course in words or on paper and lay it out upon the ground at some future date. 

And, one could lay a course out on the ground based on someone else's plan. 

To the extent that a plan is on paper, it is never the lay out.   It is a "lay out plan" or a "proposed lay out"  (Barker's words,) a "lay out map," a "blueprint" but it is not the lay out.   Laying a course out involved arranging it on the ground.   The plan involves deciding how to lay it out on the ground.    Unless one does it in one fell swoop with stakes and markers, they are distinct.

The term was misused and is misused, but Lesley was careful with his words above.

________________________
Unintentionally left out of earlier post and added back later:

Mike:

As to your reading of the article:
1.  The article acknowledges that the the first time the Author had even seen the course was after the opening.   In other words, he was not there.  His account was second or third hand at best.  Plus, ironically, his source seems to have been CBM, who you claim was only involved for agronomy expertise?!?
2.  Look at the context.   Far and Sure is talking about the fact that many of the bunkers and hazards were added later (after Wilson's trip) and were to be still be added.  Of course Wilson and his committee were involved in conceiving these problems.  They had intentionally left them off and planned to conceive of them when they had more information.
3.  I always said that Wilson was likely involved with working out the details of the holes.  In fact this is what I think they were doing at NGLA with M&W-- taking  the basic routing and figuring out how to incorporate the its concepts in the routing into the golf holes.    Then they returned, laid them out on the ground, and M&W came back again before construction.


Now, how about you answer what CBM was doing in Nov. 1910 talking about a course that had yet to be built. 

[DMoriarty]

If anyone cares, I unintentionally left out a section of my post above, and have added it upon discovery of the omission. 

[Mike_Cirba]

David,

I don't believe it was two years ago.

I believe it was 18 months ago, at the time Macdonald visited Merion in April 1911.   

At that time, he was quoted as saying that seven of the holes would be as good as anything in the country, even though construction hadn't begun.

[Rich Goodale]

Fellow amateur wordsmiths.....

If you want a precontemporaneous reference to the meaning of "lay out," I shall offer again the definition from my 1907 Webster's dictionary:

"to plan in detail"

I can't see that meaning "construct."  And yet.....

....that same dictionary has as synonymns of "construct" both "devise" and "invent."  So, maybe "our" problem is that we are applying a 21st Century meaning "The Construction Committee" which is far narrower than what it might have meant c. 1910.

[Patrick_Mucci]

"Show me one contemporaneous writing where "lay out" says that the person conceptualized a design.  Just one."

Shivas -

Herbert Fowler, architect, wrote in the April 1920 Golf Illustrated:

“These rushes [plants] are found only at Westward Ho! and at Saunton the other side of the Taw, where the writer has just laid out a new seaside course which will soon surpass even Westward Ho!”

If the course at Saunton was built when the article was written, then, I'd say that Fowler was referencing it as it's "in the ground", an "as built" if you will, and not while it was on the drawing boards[/color]

That sounds like the architect means by “laid out” what we’d mean by routing or designing.

It doesn't sound like that to me.
It sounds like he's referencing a golf course that's already been built.
[/color]

Max Behr, architect, from the February 1915 Golf Illustrated:

“It is well to remember that a course once laid out[/color] can rarely be changed without large expense. This is because most of us have to economize in land and fit in our holes like parts of a Chinese puzzle. Consequently it is impossible to change one hole without interfering greatly with several others.”

That sounds like the architect means to include in the concept/act of “laying out” something close to what we’d mean by routing or designing.

How can you say that ?
There's NO "large expense" involved in revising plans to rerout a course or redesign a hole before it's built.

He's referencing the "large expense" in the context of once the course was built, or, in the ground, not routed or designed on paper.

Surely, you understand that he was referencing a "large expense" in the context of reconstruction, not redrafting.

There's NO substantive, "large expense" to changing the plans involving the routing and individual hole designs.

The "large expesnse" is what's incurred should you want to alter a course after it's been built.[/color]

[Mark Bourgeois]

Rich -- and I haven't followed this thread closely at all but did catch your post --

You could be dealing with specification error, species Type II.  My OED lists 61 categories of definitions for the verb "lay."  "Lay out" is found at #56, and is disambiguated (word choice?) into 13 definitions.

I'm not sure which OED edition Moriarty used; I can't find his definition in mine (2nd ed.) so perhaps it's one of the abridged versions, which could produce a sort of lexicological Type I specification error. Talk may be cheap but pulp ain't!

A better way to examine the meaning of "lay out" is to find contemporaneous usage in a golf-specific context.

Here are several passages:

1. "It will be news of interest to metropolitan golfers to learn that the well-known Richmond County Country Club of Staten Island is about to lay out a practically new golf course that will be an improvement upon its present links." (NY Times, Feb 4, 1909, p7.)  This seems to support Moriarty's definition.

2. "Public golf links are evidently growing in favor, although outside of New York and Boston the courses are not kept in the best playing condition.  The latest indication in this respect is that the Denver, Col., golfers are making arrangements to lay out a public course in the suburbs of that city." (NY Times Jan 21, 1900, p20.)  This usage too appears supportive, in particular the preceding sentence's topic of "playing condition" as well as the distinction of "arrangements" from "lay out."

3. "[Macdonald] has the backing of a wealthy group of golfers, but the rich men are also gaining or planning courses on their own account, for John D. Rockefeller has two of them and John W. Gates has announced that he will lay out the finest course in the world on a Texas property." (Wash Post, Sep 13, 1908, pS4.)  This usage appears inconclusive or possibly leaning against, insofar as "lay out" could mean a conflation of plan or design with construct.

In sum, Moriarty's interpretation of the term can be supported by contemporaneous usage, but not conclusively.  How can such a term provide a high degree of precision in any regard?  The bottom line is people on both sides appear keen to use the English language as a drunk uses a lamppost: for support not illumination.

Etymologically yours,
Mark

[DMoriarty]

Fellow amateur wordsmiths.....

If you want a precontemporaneous reference to the meaning of "lay out," I shall offer again the definition from my 1907 Webster's dictionary:

"to plan in detail"

I can't see that meaning "construct."  And yet.....

....that same dictionary has as synonymns of "construct" both "devise" and "invent."  So, maybe "our" problem is that we are applying a 21st Century meaning "The Construction Committee" which is far narrower than what it might have meant c. 1910.

Never said it meant construct.  Didn't we cover this before?  Yes we did.

But your definitions are getting shorter as these threads get longer.

The first time the definition referenced something about arranging a garden, did it not?  It also omitted a. and b. and whatever comes after c. 

Mark,

Would this quote by Robert Lesley from 1914 qualify as contemporaneous usage?

“The ground was found adapted for golf and a course was laid out upon it about three years ago by the following committee: Hugh I. Wilson, chairman, R. S. Francis, H. G. Lloyd, R. E. Griscom, and Dr. Hal Toulmin, who had as advisers, Charles B. Macdonald and H. J. Whigham . . ."

Mark and Rich,

The ground was found adapted for golf.   Does that not imply that the ground had been changed to make it more suitable for golf?   Rich, how does your old dictionary define adapt?

[Rich Goodale]

David

I get shorter in homage to the limited attention span of the participants on this thread.  I didn't think anybody read my previous post.  Thanks for doing so.

Mark and David

Isn't there somewhere in the thread a quote from HH Barker to the extent that he "laid out" a course for the Merion land?  Since this could only have applied to whatever plans he had drawn up (nobody has tried to argue that he was involved in the construction process, yet......), doesn't this argue for the "to plan..." definition?

Mark

Do you not agree that my 1907 printing of Websters would be more authoritative as to contemporaneous usage than today's OED?

PS--My 2,300+ page Webster's has only 5 alternative definitions for "lay out" one of which is:

"To prepare for burial"

Maybe we should "lay out" all these Merion threads and get back to the discussion of golf course architecture.......

[DMoriarty]

Isn't there somewhere in the thread a quote from HH Barker to the extent that he "laid out" a course for the Merion land?  Since this could only have applied to whatever plans he had drawn up (nobody has tried to argue that he was involved in the construction process, yet......), doesn't this argue for the "to plan..." definition?

No.  He says he sketched a proposed lay out.   Call it a proposed lay out, call it a layout plan,  or call it a lay out by mistake, but it is not really a lay out until it is laid out on the ground.