News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


TEPaul

I believe a really in-depth and objective discussion of all the details of Merion Construction Committee member Richard Francis' (a trained construction engineer) late night land swap idea and the events that preceded it and followed it, is central to a real understanding of the correct history of the architecture or Merion East (first phase) and who did it and when. I just don't think many following these Merion threads about Macdonald's part in it understand or are even aware of ALL the details in his story and how they have to relate to various important timelines which could definitely help all of us understand better what really happened and when.

I'd like to see David Moriarty engage us in a really objective and in-depth conversation ONLY on this Francis event and story and what ALL of it means which I think is pretty central to his own assumptions, premises etc in his essay on Merion, "The Missing Faces of Merion",  and certainly to his essay's conclusion that Macdonald offered Merion a routing and design plan that Wilson and his committee basically built (constructed) the course from or to.

I should preface by saying if David Moriarty gets into a good and objective conversation on this Francis event and Merion story that is very much a part of its history over the last 58 years and eventually just dismisses Francis and his story as hyperbole, forgetfulness or inaccuracy simply as he's apparently done with Alan Wilson's report and what precisely it says so that he may continue to support his conclusion by avoiding Francis' event and account of it, then I, for one, will be done with these threads discussing his essay and contention because I don't see it would serve any further purpose for us or Merion or even this website.

If Moriarty has some supporting material on his premise (in his essay or elsewhere or as part of what may be Part 2) on Francis' story of this event that Merion and none of us have ever seen or been aware of, I think he probably might come close to proving his conclusion and I said on another thread, at that point, I'd get very interested in trying to buy into it. But if he doesn't have any supporting material for his premise on that event, and he doesn't simply dismiss it altogether, I think what happened back then will become a lot more clear to all.

Are you ready to have an objective, in-depth and intelligent discussion on that Francis event ONLY, David Moriarty?

We are!
« Last Edit: May 04, 2008, 11:39:56 AM by TEPaul »

Kyle Harris

...Penn State!

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
TePaul,

I'll jump in, starting with posting DM's exact words from the IMO piece regarding the land swap:

Richard Francis Fixes the Routing Plan

According to Tolhurst’s excellent history, in 1950 Merion’s Richard Francis recalled his major contribution to the layout of the course.   Francis, an engineer, would serve on Wilson’s Construction Committee, and later become a foremost expert on the rules of golf, writing a groundbreaking book on the subject and serving for many years on the USGA Rules Committee.  But most importantly for our purposes, he was also the mastermind behind a crucial land exchange that enabled Merion to better fit the last five holes into the routing.

According to Tolhurst, Francis wrote:

The land was shaped like a capital “L” and it was not very difficult to get the first 13 holes into the upright portion – with the help of a little ground on the north side of Ardmore avenue – but the last five holes were another question.... The idea was this:  We had some property west of the present course which did not fit in with any golf layout.  Perhaps we could swap it for some good use?

Francis immediately ran the idea by H.G. Lloyd, proposing that Merion exchange land west of the routing for the land now used for the fifteenth green and sixteenth tee.  Lloyd agreed, and “a few days later the quarryman had his drills up where the 16th green now is and blasted off the top of the hill so that the green could be built as it is today.”   

Given Francis’ description of the timing of the quarryman’s blasting, and given that he eventually served on the Construction Committee, it has long been assumed that the “swap” occurred while Construction Committee was in the process of building the course.  But the supposed land exchange must have occurred much earlier, before Merion secured the land, which was before Merion appointed Wilson and his Construction Committee.
   
As quoted by Tolhurst, Francis wrote that Merion gave up “land west of the present course which did not fit in with any golf layout;” land which was later “covered by fine homes along Golf House Road.”  In exchange, Merion received a small section of “land about 130 yards wide by 190 yards long – the present location of the 15th green and the 16th tee.” No doubt Francis was describing the land between the present practice area and Golf House Road, a small triangle of land that perfectly matches Francis’ description.  More importantly, the land was acquired while Merion was putting the finishing touches on the routing plan for the course.  So the date of the supposed “swap” will allow us to determine when the final touches were being put on the initial routing plan.

Surprisingly, as one can see in the land plan above, Merion acquired this small projection of land as part of the 117-acre parcel designated “Merion Golf Course” in the Plan.  Merion optioned and purchased the land for the 15th green and 16th tee as part of their option and purchase of the bulk of the golf course property.[15]  Property records confirm this.[16]  The supposed land swap must have occurred prior to mid-November 1910, when Merion obtained an option from Haverford Development Company.  This was six weeks before the purchase was finalized and the Construction Committee appointed.  The “swap” was not a swap at all but actually a small but significant reshaping of the large parcel Merion intended to purchase from Haverford Development Company.  Before the purchase, the parties must have agreed to shave off a portion on the right side of the parcel and added the projection of land for the 15th green and 16th tee.

Francis and Lloyd had been fine-tuning the layout plan before Merion secured the land.  Francis described his epiphany as having occurred while he was looking over a “map of the property.”  He also noted that the land Merion gave up “did not fit at all in any golf layout.”   So by this time the planning process was well underway, and the “swap” allowed them to better fit the last five holes into the plan for the routing.  “It was not very difficult to get the first 13 holes into the upright portion – with the help of a little ground on the north side of Ardmore avenue – but the last five holes were another question.”  The Francis land “swap” allowed them to complete the routing plan.  All before November 10, 1910.[17]   

So, by mid-November 1910, the layout had already been planned. I have found no evidence that Hugh Wilson had been at all involved in the purchase or the planning at this early date.  To the contrary, as will be discussed below, the historical record indicates that Wilson became involved in early 1911, after the purchase was finalized.

____________________________________________________________________________

I am going to assume that DM is correct that the property records show that there was a trianglular parcel up by 15 and 16, and the 11.15.10 Map confirms it.  It was created by a preliminary road design that featured a gentle curve as it entered the north end of the property.

The map also says Golf House Road is only in an approximate location, meaning that HDC and MCC may have agreed that some fine tuning was necessary, but at the same, felt pressure to acquire the land then.  The committee report did stress the need to act now. Perhaps there were some expiring options, tax benefits to HDC or whatever.

My take is that the land deal was basically done, but the parties were still friendly and the routing was known to need some tweaks to create the best golf course.

I don't think the entire 15 Green-16 Tee Triangle was swapped. I think it was enlarged by an acre to partially widen it to 130 yards. It was already 190 yards long.  If the land agreement allowed Merion 120 acres, with the flexibility to take what they needed, then the logical options were to find an acre to give back. or pay HDC for additional another $825 per acre for what might have been wasted land after the club had set a maximum purchase price for itself of $90,000.  Presumably, going back to the well was frowned upon, although I am sure it could have happened.
But it probably would have required new board action to raise funds and they simply wanted to avoid that.

Either way, I have been involved in many housing and golf developments.  Fine tuning of property lines to make sure there is no wasted land is common.  And it would have made sense then as well as now.  As an engineer, Francis realilzed that a small rerouting of Golf House Road - west at 15 green, and a bit east near 14 tee where the routing was only two holes wide (and where they had just secured the rights to the land from the RR for the 13th hole, could be reduced to offset the extra land used at 15 green.

All perfectly natural when trying to stay under 120 acres.  I get the sense that the Nov. 15, 1910 land agreement may have set the maximum acres and Francis simply had to keep under that acreage,  from both sides perspective.

The fact that Francis and Lloyd seem to have worked out the problems of the last five holes (and in contrast to DM's opinions, probably well after 11/10) certainly means they improved the routing on their own, whether portions of what they improved was originally concieved by Barker, CBM or the committee. I believe the land swap story proves the committee made serveral routing tweaks at a minimum. Left unresolved is who drew how much of the "bones" of the routing that they were tweaking, which is the interesting back story.

Last minute tweaks are famous in the world of gca and I agree that there is no reason to believe 15 and 16 at Merion wasn't one of them.
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

TEPaul

Thanks for posting that Jeff:

I'll get into what it means of one analyzes Francis' story differently (basically analyzing it just about the way he told it ALL) when I finish mowing the "lower forty".

TEPaul

Most of Francis' words from the Merion history book are in David Moriarty's essay but I don't believe all of them are. Here's the way his words read in the Tolhurst Merion history book;

          "Except for many hours over a drawing board, running instruments in the field and just plain talking, I made but one important contribution to the LAYOUT of the golf course.
          The land was shaped like a capital "L" and it was not very difficult to get the first 13 holes into the upright portion---with the help of a little ground on the north side of Ardmore Avenue---but the last five holes were another question.
           I was looking at a map of the property one night when I had an idea. Not realizing it was nearly midnight, I called Mr Lloyd on the telephone, found he had not gone to bed, got on my bicycle and rode a mile or so to see him. The idea was this: We had some property west of the present course which did not fit in at all with any golf layout. Perhaps we could swap it for some we could use?
          Mr. Lloyd agreed. The land now covered by fine homes along Golf House Road was exchanged for land about 130 yards wide by 190 yards long---the present location of the 15th green and the 16th tee. Within a day or two, the quarryman had his drills up where the the 16th green now is and blasted off the top of the hill so that, the green could be built as it is today."

TEPaul

I've been over all these words many times and some of them will be confusing to some for all kinds of reasons to do with a number of things but the thing that first jumped out at me was when David Moriarty's essay, "The Missing Faces of Merion" said that Francis must have been engaging in some hyperbole when he mentioned that a quarryman was up on the hill blasting the top off to make way for where the 16th green is today since the late night epiphany that led to that event in two days (by Francis's description) must have taken place before Nov. 11, 1910, AT LEAST!

If what the author suggests is the case that sure is some hyperoble considering the fact that Merion East would not even go into construction for at least six more months in the spring of 1911.

And considering that Francis also said that at that point they had already gotten the first 13 hole in (he doesn't say if 'getting the holes in' was on some plan or actually built on the ground). If it was the latter, it would seem to put this event well into the late summer of 1911 and perhaps up to nine months or more AFTER the author suggests it actually happened. That surely is some real hyperbole on Francis' part! Or is it actually some real hyperoble on the author's part?

But why would the author say that Francis was using hyperbole and that this event must have taken place about nine months BEFORE Francis seem to say it did? Because if the author doesn't say that then he can't get Francis and this event back into a timeframe before the land acquisition was finalized, and into a timeframe before the committee Francis would serve on was formed, and particularly into a timeframe where a routing and design was already done by Macdonald before Hugh Wilson could become involved to simply build the course to C.B. Macdonald's routing and design and consequently not be able to have been involved in the routing and design of the course HIMSELF!

I'm beginning to wonder if the author may think, at this point, that perhaps it should not be Wilson who should share architectural attribution for this golf course with Charles Blair Macdonald, but that it should really be RICHARD FRANCIS!   ;)
« Last Edit: May 04, 2008, 07:55:47 PM by TEPaul »

Mike_Cirba

Tom,

I'm very interested to see where this is going, but already on the face of it there is proof that Macdonald didn't route the course.

It's very elementary, my dear Mr. Paul, which is why it will likely totally escape the investigative team of Moriarty, Mucci, and Schmidt.  ;)

Here it is, as simple as I can type it.

CB Macdonald came to Merion in June 1910.

Richard Francis found the way to route the last five holes sometime after that.

Francis mentions that the land off Golf House Road that they swapped, which was PART OF THE LAND MACDONALD RECOMMENDED FOR PURCHASE "wasn't part of any golf plan, which indicates that there were a couple of plans that were under consideration and being worked out at the time and Macdonalds' WASN'T ONE OF THEM!!!.

This was land Macdonald wanted and NOW IT WASNT PART OF ANY GOLF PLAN.

PERIOD.

DICE AND MINCE THAT ONE GUYS!!!  ;D



Of course, as simple and logical as that is, I suspect they'll devote the next 500 posts to asking "what were the qualifications of the Merion Committee??", as if Hugh Wilson and friends should be on trial for actually having the temerity to design a great course without the constant oversight of CB Macdonald, who seems to have been there two days over the three years it was bought, constructed, and built.   

Better yet, we'll soon see a manifest, indicating that because Francis never smelled the Bents of Le Touquet that even though he was an Engineer and Surveyor he couldn't have possibly figured out the logistics of where to place the Quarry holes, which...if you look real close, seem to be a hybrid mix of Cape/Leven/Alps/Double Plateau/Redan/and the previously unknown "Winky the Killer Mole" Hole, which Macdonald never got to actually put on the ground any place but at Merion. 

What I'm really hoping is that they take my challenge of trying to route Macdonald's MYTHICAL 120 acre routing into a 6200 yard course, based precisely on the land Macdonald recommended for purchase in 1910.

This is sort of fun, but then I'm sort of peevish at this point, and a sucker to boot for continuing this nonsense for this long.
« Last Edit: May 04, 2008, 08:22:38 PM by MPC »

TEPaul

"Here it is, as simple as I can type it.
CB Macdonald came to Merion in June 1910.
Richard Francis found the way to route the last five holes sometime after that.
Francis mentions that the land off Golf House Road that they swapped, "wasn't part of any golf plan, which indicates that there were a couple that were under consideration and being worked out at the time."


MikeC:

We will need to get Francis' words exactly as they were written in the Merion history books because people will be parsing their meaning, I'm sure. What Francis actually said is not that the land they swapped "wasn't part of any golf plan", but, 'We had property west of the the present course which did not fit in at all with any golf layout.'

It certainly is hard to imagine exactly which land he may've been referring to that did not fit in at all with any golf layout.

Mike_Cirba

"Here it is, as simple as I can type it.
CB Macdonald came to Merion in June 1910.
Richard Francis found the way to route the last five holes sometime after that.
Francis mentions that the land off Golf House Road that they swapped, "wasn't part of any golf plan, which indicates that there were a couple that were under consideration and being worked out at the time."


MikeC:

We will need to get Francis' words exactly as they were written in the Merion history books because people will be parsing their meaning, I'm sure. What Francis actually said is not that the land they swapped "wasn't part of any golf plan", but, 'We had property west of the the present course which did not fit in at all with any golf layout.'

It certainly is hard to imagine exactly which land he may've been referring to that did not fit in at all with any golf layout.


Tom,

I added to my last post, so please see what I'm saying in entirety.

"Did not fit in at all with any golf layout."

Kinda has a nice ring to it.  ;)

Let me try this again;


Tom,

I'm very interested to see where this is going, but already on the face of it there is ABSOLUTE PROOF that Macdonald didn't route the course.

It's very elementary, my dear Mr. Paul, which is why it will likely totally escape the investigative team of Moriarty, Mucci, and Schmidt.  ;D

Here it is, as simple as I can type it.


1) CB Macdonald came to Merion in June 1910.

2) David's entire premise rests on his contention that CB created a routing AT THAT TIME, but also recommended purchase of VERY SPECIFIC land to accommodate his brilliant routing on 120 acres.   Remember, because of the profit motive of the real estate portion of the deal, no land for golf could be wasted.

3) Richard Francis found the way to route the last five holes sometime after that.

4) Francis mentions that the land off Golf House Road that they swapped, which according to David was PART OF THE LAND MACDONALD RECOMMENDED FOR PURCHASE "didn't fit in at all with any golf layout", which indicates that there were a couple of LAYOUTS that were under consideration and being worked out at the time and Macdonalds' WASN'T ONE OF THEM!!!.

This was land Macdonald wanted and NOW IT WASNT PART OF ANY GOLF LAYOUT.

PERIOD.

Of course, as simple and logical as that is, I suspect they'll devote the next 500 posts to asking "what were the qualifications of the Merion Committee??", as if Hugh Wilson and friends should be on trial for actually having the temerity to design a great course without the constant oversight of CB Macdonald, who seems to have been there two days over the three years it was bought, constructed, and built.   

Better yet, we'll soon see a manifest, indicating that because Francis never smelled the Bents of Le Touquet that even though he was an Engineer and Surveyor he couldn't have possibly figured out the logistics of where to place the Quarry holes, which...if you look real close, seem to be a hybrid mix of Cape/Leven/Alps/Double Plateau/Redan/and the previously unknown "Winky the Killer Mole" Hole, which Macdonald never got to actually put on the ground any place but at Merion. 

I'm still hoping they try my 120 acre exercise, Tom, only because after all of this time and frustration I could use a good chuckle.  ;D
« Last Edit: May 04, 2008, 10:08:12 PM by MPC »

TEPaul

"4) Francis mentions that the land off Golf House Road that they swapped, which was PART OF THE LAND MACDONALD RECOMMENDED FOR PURCHASE "didn't fit in at all with any golf layout", which indicates that there were a couple of LAYOUTS that were under consideration and being worked out at the time and Macdonalds' WASN'T ONE OF THEM!!!."


MikeC:

So as not to totally confuse people trying to figure out what really did go on back then let's not interweave words into a sentence on here that were not Francis'. Maybe I've missed it somewhere along the line in the study of Merion in the last ten years but I do not recall anyone at any time connected to Merion ever saying that Macdonald made any recommendations at all to Merion about what parcels of land to purchase for their golf course or any other reason. I believe that idea was first developed and offered by David Moriarty in his essay. If he has any evidence at all in actual documentary form that says that or even any evidence in actual documentary form that anyone from Merion who was involved or around back then said that, I'd love to see it. I'm quite sure we all would.

« Last Edit: May 04, 2008, 09:03:11 PM by TEPaul »

Mike_Cirba

Tom,

I'll cease and desist mixing my observations here with where you want to drive this thread, but I had noticed that wording "any golf layout" earlier and thought it noteworthy.

I should have said;

"4) Francis mentions that the land off Golf House Road that they swapped, which according to David was PART OF THE LAND MACDONALD RECOMMENDED FOR PURCHASE "didn't fit in at all with any golf layout", which indicates that there were a couple of LAYOUTS that were under consideration and being worked out at the time and Macdonalds' WASN'T ONE OF THEM!!!."


Carry on.  ;)
« Last Edit: May 04, 2008, 10:09:05 PM by MPC »

DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Tom and Jeff,

I am glad to have a discussion about this issue, but it seems largely factual to me, and thus does not leave too much to discuss.

Francis' words, in context with the Nov. 15 plan, make a strong case for concluding that the land swap (and therefore the routing) took place before this date. 

You guys have focused on the position of the road, but the border I am concerned with was not the western border but the northern border.  According to Francis, the pre-swap golf course land should have cut off at the bottom of Haverford College’s property.  In other words, the southern border of Haverford College property should extend in to the road, cutting off the golf course land from the developer’s land.  The golf course was to be south of that line, the developers land, north.  The absence of this northern border is not explained by “approximate road."

And Jeff, your conclusion that the entire parcel was not involved in the swap is just not supported by the facts.  Francis said it was a 130 x 190 yard parcel, and that was the measure of the entire area.   Surely we ought to take him at his word?

Let me try to put it in terms Jeff will understand.  The area west of Haverford College is marked as part of the golf course land on the map.   Has a developer ever just given you 5 acres of land bordering a beautiful college campus and the golf course, even though you were not planning on using the land as part of your course?

Even with regard to the approximate road, I did not read nearly as much into it as you,  other than that the map might not have exactly reflected the final border.  You suggest one interpretation but another is that the deal had just come together and they did not have the time (or take time) to make sure that road on the map perfectly reflected “swap.”   

The plan is dated Nov. 15, 1910, the same day it was distributed.  This to me implies that there may have been a rush for one reason or another; as if they had it drawn up that day so they could get it out.   

I did not extrapolate in my essay, but one thing odd about this deal was that it was announced in the newspaper on November 14, 1910, yet the letter to the members did not go out until the next day.  The article lavishly praised the development and even listed the costs of homes, so it is not too hard to figure out from where the information in the article came.

The November 14th article contains a number of inaccuracies and a few statements that probably interested some of the Members. The letter said that “a clubhouse will be erected and no effort or expense will be spared by Merion Cricket Club in the construction of this course, while every endeavor will be made to have this the leading championship course of America.”

I imagine that there were some questions among the membership the morning of November 15, especially among the non-golfing members who may not have been interested in paying for the nation's greatest golf course or another clubhouse.  The golfing members who were not “in the know” were probably pretty curious as well.   

It is at least possible that the Francis deal had just been struck and/or reported, thus altering position of the road, and with everything coming together quickly, the plan was rushed out without an exact road.  It would have been quicker for the engineer to draw an approximate road than to get a surveyor to give the exact coordinates and draw the road in the exact location. 

This might also explain the timing of the blasting of the site for the 16th green.

________________________________________________________

Mike, 

I assure you that the "any plan" language has not gone unnoticed.  But some of us dont just type and post everything that crosses our minds.

Do you really believe that the existence of more than one plan would mean that Macdonald did not play a part in routing the course?   

Let's see.  H.H. Barker did a plan.  That is number one.   And M&W provided their views on what could be done with the property.  That is number . . . what were we up to?  I lost track. 

Your conclusion that Macdonald necessarily wanted to use land that no one else wanted to use is absolutely bizarre, unsupported, and unsupportable.   
Golf history can be quite interesting if you just let your favorite legends go and allow the truth to take you where it will.
--Tom MacWood (1958-2012)

DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Jeff and TEPaul, 

Here is an overlay with the 1910 Property plan, showing the location of the roads on a later map, traced in blue to make them visible.  I created it over a year ago, at the time is was  as accurate as I could get it.   (I recall that it was difficult to do, because many aspects of the 1910 plan do not match the properties or roads later maps.   I think the entire map was pretty rough.   

As you can see, one reason the neck looks too narrow on the plan is that the neck is longer in the plan than on later maps. Otherwise the dimensions up in the corner look pretty close, and there was room for the 15th green and 16th tee even in this drawing. 

Also the road does pinch in, but not because of a later trade.  It looks as if Merion lost land  across from the clubhouse, and up in the corner. 
   

« Last Edit: May 05, 2008, 01:37:24 AM by DMoriarty »
Golf history can be quite interesting if you just let your favorite legends go and allow the truth to take you where it will.
--Tom MacWood (1958-2012)

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
David,

Thanks for that overlay. I was hoping someone would have or do one.  If accurate, and I guess it is, then yes, the triangle adjacent to Haverford was never contemplated in earlier routings and I can see where you would believe that the swap had to occur prior to Nov 14, 1910 in the planning stage. However, that would seem to make the Francis recollection of blasting within a few days wrong, as you suggest.  It was taken several years later, and that recollection could be inaccurate.

And, it means MCC had the final routing, but of course still doesn't answer the question of what CBM did or didn't do in his June 1910 letter.  He may have actually routed some holes, but certainly not 15 or 16 or probably 14 either, since it would have shifted in.
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
A couple of points I see with this conversation...which I think probably is important but I cannot get my hands around why...

1) The 15th green and 16th tee could certainly have fit in the triangle on the Nov. 1910 overhard map...they just don't take up that much space and fudging the line/road some modest amount west isn't what they needed. I am inclined to believe the land swap was for the whole triangle, not just widening it.

2) The statement by Francis that the quarrymen were blasting away within a few days also doesn't mean they were in the closing stretch of building the course in the late summer of 1911...it doesn't preclude it, but it doesn't guarantee it.

3) I think too much accuracy has been attributed to the proportions of that 1910 overhead, there is no reason to believe it was produced with exact detail required.

4) This parcel is 3 acres, not 5 (as David suggests 3 posts ago).

5) Based on the people involved with Merion and this Haverford Development Company and the reality that so many knew each other well, I think the exact timing of the real estate transactions would be less than unquestionable in determining a timeline of land purchases and golf course planning. In other words, a verbal option for land may have preceeded the actual transaction by months or just days and these guys were trying to plan a golf course the whole time...


TEPaul

"Tom and Jeff,
I am glad to have a discussion about this issue, but it seems largely factual to me, and thus does not leave too much to discuss."


David:

Thank you and I'm very glad you are. I hope it carries on with a really in-depth discussion that is backed up by some real facts that may be determined by continuing to analyze various events and the words from their source and also material we already have but perhaps have not looked at carefully enough as it pertains to various dates and such.

Your responses below are good ones, and ones around with I think we can have a good and in-depth discussion and while I don't necessarily agree with them I will try to show that the way you've looked at them and continue to look at them distorts what they may mean and may say, and consequently the facts involving them.

One, is, of course, going to be prone to this problem in an analysis of Merion's architectural history of distorting facts if he tries to simply fit some of these events and they way they are described into a particular scenario that may not have happened (your assumption that Macdonald routed and designed the course which Wilson and his committee used to construct the course to). That's why I think some real detailed "timelining" is necessary here and why I started this thread on the Francis event---eg to really analyze ALL of what he said about what he did together and not just take SOME of what he said on its own which can easily take the entire event out of context and vastly out of the actual time it took place.

You said:
"Francis' words, in context with the Nov. 15 plan, make a strong case for concluding that the land swap (and therefore the routing) took place before this date."


That is really the meat of this thread, and perhaps a real key to the validity, or lack of it, of your essay's assumptions and conclusion. I do not believe that ALL OF FRANCIS' WORDS in which he explains that entire event (as his story was written in the Merion history book) fit into the time-frame or context of that Nov. 15 plan at all, and consequently a Macdonald routing and designing of the course before that date! And that is obviously precisely why you found it necessary to explain away  how and why Francis's actual words explaining that event DON'T fit into that Nov. 15, 1910 date----eg by USING YOUR ASSUMPTION that he engaged in a fairly blatant amount of HYPERBOLE!

It is my contention that any intelligent analysis of this event and the events surrounding it, and ultimately including who really did route and design this course must also be looked at in the context that Francis WAS NOT engaging in HYPERBOLE and that in fact his explanation of events is REALLY THE WAY THINGS HAPPENED. There is certainly nothing unintelligent or unproductve about one looking at this in this way-----eg by assuming that Francis TOLD THE TRUTH and reported the facts correctly!!



"You guys have focused on the position of the road, but the border I am concerned with was not the western border but the northern border.  According to Francis, the pre-swap golf course land should have cut off at the bottom of Haverford College’s property.  In other words, the southern border of Haverford College property should extend in to the road, cutting off the golf course land from the developer’s land.  The golf course was to be south of that line, the developers land, north.  The absence of this northern border is not explained by “approximate road.""


I have focused on the road to some extent because it certainly does seem it is not "as built" configured as it was drawn on that 1910 PRE-CONSTRUCTION plan. I think that is very telling as to how those last five holes were finally planned and built. I'm pretty comfortable with that interpretation (because it's virtually impossible to miss by comparing that 1910 plan's road configuration to an aerial of how the road was built in relation to how the golf course was built) even though I certainly do recognize it may not be all important to the understanding of how and why that so-called triangle on the northwest corner of the property came into being for use for this golf course. I look at the road configuration as built vs the "approximate road" as drawn on the plan AND when and for what reason that triangle came into being NOT as "EITHER/OR" events of importance but perhaps ones that should continue to be looked at TOGETHER!

In other words, it seems to me that triangle may've been there even preceding June 1910 and when finally analyzed for golf was simply found to be too narrow to fit the 15th green and 16th tee up into and for that reason was added to and expanded by the configuration of that road as it was built versus the way that road was drawn on the 1910 plan as an "approximate road."

I do admit that I am not aware, at this time, of any particular specific land-swap transactions and the documents that support them that indicate that triangle did not exist in a particular deed with portions of land below it (perhaps as the "Johnson Farm" deed) prior to say June 1910. Maybe you have such documents or you think you do. I believe they should be very carefully reanalyzed too, particularly given the roll of a man like Horatio Gates Lloyd who clearly was getting involved in not just the land configuration of the golf course but of the land configuration of the entire future residential community surrounding it (it is certainly not lost on me that Lloyd created his own massive and famous estate "Allgates" (75 acres) inside that HDC residential development)!

That is another matter that really does need to be reanalyzed with this subject of Merion Ardmore. Lloyd's role in all this particularly with the so-called Haverford Development Company (HDC) may ultimately be responsible for a real understanding of Merion East and how it came into being. Just to virtually prove that might be the case is it really any wonder in Francis' late night land-swap idea that he said it was Horatio Gates Lloyd that he bicycled over to see one midnight, and got immediate approval from for his idea?!?

I've been trying to impress upon people on here for weeks, it seems, what this man Horatio Gates Lloyd may've meant and what he might be to our understanding all this. He was extremely rich and he was certainly interested in all phases of Merion's golf course move (the only man who served on all committees) including the development of the community surrounding Merion East and West. To someone like that, the assumption that time and mortgages and such may need to be handled in a normal or traditional way may not be true at all. And the reason for that just may be that in various ways (his corporations or interests or stock holding in them as well as his seeming roll as MCC's "angel" or "financial facilitator") Horatio Gates Lloyd either owned or controlled "both sides of the fence", as it were!!
« Last Edit: May 05, 2008, 09:29:14 AM by TEPaul »

TEPaul

"As you can see, one reason the neck looks too narrow on the plan is that the neck is longer in the plan than on later maps. Otherwise the dimensions up in the corner look pretty close, and there was room for the 15th green and 16th tee even in this drawing. 

Also the road does pinch in, but not because of a later trade.  It looks as if Merion lost land  across from the clubhouse, and up in the corner."


David:

I do not believe that blue pencil drawing you created is an accurate reflection of the way the top of Club House Road was built and configured. That's one of the reasons I thought of this idea in the first place that the course may've picked up land to the west they needed on the top side of the course and gave it back on the south. I do not believe that triangle is the same size as the course was built as it was on that 1910 plan (the way you show it with your blue line).

The reason I feel that is the people who own the property bordering College Ave and Clubhouse Road are friends of mine (I parked in their place every day of the 2005 US Amateur) and I was surprised to see how much Club House Road turns west as it divides the bottom of their property and the top of the 15th hole! You can do all the measuring and blue pencil drawing you want to do but nothing beats looking at this area right on the ground and comparing it to an aerial. Those things really are facts!
« Last Edit: May 05, 2008, 09:46:23 AM by TEPaul »

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Tom,

Why would you think that aerial drawing of the whole area in 1910 is deadly accurate and a realistic basis for arguing what is exactly there today? It looks like a crude drawing to me. Is there something about the creation of it that should engender such confidence in its accuracy of details like the exact angle of curve of the road?

Mike_Cirba

Tom,

I don't want to take this off-course, but does anyone know the specific location of what was known as the "Johnson Farm" that was purchased?

Is this the basic L, less the top portion by 16 and the Dallas estate??

TEPaul

JeffB:

I do not believe David Moriarty's blue pencil line is an accurate dimensional reflection in that so-called triangle or below it as the 15th hole is laid out. And David Moriarty did not push Francis' report of the immediate blasting of the top of the quarry back a couple of years,  he pushed it back up to perhaps nine months to a year!

Pushing Francis' event back that far also raises a number of other questions of logic---including why in the world was Francis doing what he also described in this story as; "Except for many hours over a drawing board, running instruments in the field and just plaining talking...." when the committee he would serve on to create this course WOULD NOT even be FORMED until Jan. 1911.

I just can't understand why anyone cannot see how illogical that is, particularly when this essay suggests that the chairman he would serve under, Hugh Wilson, did not do ANYTHING UNTIL 1911. And WHY does the author make the ASSUMPTION that the chairman of the committee didn't do ANYTHING before Jan. 1911??? Apparently because his COMMITTEE had not yet BEEN FORMED!!! What in the world is this anyway---some incredible rationalization that chairmen of committees like that must sit on the sidelines while members of their YET-TO-BE-FORMED committee go out and do a bunch of work to train for their roll of serving under the chairman of the FUTURE committee?!?!

I mean, come on, how can anyone really buy that kind of completely tortured logic seemingly done MERELY for the CONVENIENCE of maintaining some alternative conclusion of who created a routing and design without real physical evidence that PROVES it!!!

And why does the author of this essay set Francis' event back that early and before the formation of the committee or the participation of the chairman who would run it? Isn't it obvious----eg he has to do that to get this story which he obviously can't AVOID into a time-frame that is the ONLY timeframe that Macdonald could have routed and designed this course and to also make Hugh Wilson appear to be a complete NOVICE!

Why is this essay allowing one Richard Francis to do all this routing and architectural work before his committee is even formed? It's simply because THAT is the only way the author can explain this land-swap story and preserve his conclusion about Macdonald AND about Wilson, the complete NOVICE in Jan. 1911!
« Last Edit: May 05, 2008, 10:17:52 AM by TEPaul »

TEPaul

"Tom,
Why would you think that aerial drawing of the whole area in 1910 is deadly accurate and a realistic basis for arguing what is exactly there today? It looks like a crude drawing to me. Is there something about the creation of it that should engender such confidence in its accuracy of details like the exact angle of curve of the road?"

Sully:

Not really. It may've been larger than it appears on that proposed 1910 drawing or it may've been smaller and narrower.

But what I believe I do know and what does not seem to be contemplated in David Moriarty's essay is that once this Construction Committee got underway back at Ardmore probably around the beginning of Feb. 1911 (and I do have direct evidence why I use that date) it is obvious that Hugh Wilson and his committee had CONTOURED TOPO MAPS they would use to route, design and construct this golf course on a particular dimensional piece of property. I know that because Wilson offered to send one to C.V. Piper in a letter on Feb 1, 1911.

So, I don't know how those dimensions on those contour topo maps that they used (and was probably the very thing that Francis had on his drawing board) got tranlated from that 1910 plan. The dimensions in that triangle could've been smaller and narrower as easily as they could've been larger.  And what I do know from Francis' story is that this narrowness apparently became a problem to resolve AFTER about 2/3 of the course had already been drawn to their satisfaction or actually built to their satisfaction because that's precisely what Francis says!

I just can't see quarrymen blasting off the top of that quarry up to six months before the course even went into construction and before the committee to do it was even formed.

The only alternative explanation and the one the author used, seeminly to preserve the rest of his conclusion' is that Francis had a really bad memory or was prone to some real exaggeration (hyperbole). Two days is a whole long way from up to 1/2 to 3/4 of a YEAR!

I just don't buy that has happening with Francis in that story. I think all that is about is some really serious literary and analytical LICENSE for the sole purpose of maintaining what's probably an unsupportable story and conclusion.

TEPaul

"Tom,
I don't want to take this off-course, but does anyone know the specific location of what was known as the "Johnson Farm" that was purchased?
Is this the basic L, less the top portion by 16 and the Dallas estate??"


MikeC:

That is exactly the question I've been suggesting for a while now. Frankly, I never heard of the Dallas Estate before David Moriarty mentioned it and I've still never seen any deed evidence of it.

And I have been saying that I doubt anyone has ever shown what the dimensions of the Johnson Farm were previous to the considerations of MCC to move over there. And I've never seen any land-swap deed transaction that may've created that triangle at some point.

It looks like the author refers to them but I don't know how specific or accurate he's been with them. I know I've never seen them and he hasn't exactly produced any evidence of them other than in an explanation of some minor land alteration and deeds that may've taken place about 18 years later with the Haverford College land somehow. We do know that the entire Merion practice range is what once belonged to Haverford College and what is the block that shows up on the top right of that 1910 plan.

There very well may be a way to prove what the dimensions of the Johnson Farm were because I know it was purchased in a real estate deal between the Johnson family and some developers that included Connell. That preceded the deal with MCC that was probably done BY Lloyd et al under the aegis of this entity called HDC (which frankly Lloyd probably either created himself or just eventually bought controlling interest in through the purchase of its stock or else he may've just started buying up or optioning parcels of land from a company called something like the "Ardmore Land Company" which those preceding real estate developers controlled or used).

So it may be safe to say that what was once all of the Johnson Farm is incorporated into what is now Merion golf course, but I'm not yet sure of that.

The way this could be proved is through an exact study of the "metes and bounds" of the Johnson Farm or other real estate included and specifically explained on some of the land transaction contracts (indentures) I have. One of the problems is the indenture I have that probably shows that original Johnson Farm was handwritten in 1909 and it is REEEALLY hard to read! On the other hand, that 1909 indenture may include more than just the Johnson Farm.

I mean, although I'm extremely interested in coming to some better understanding of how Merion was created and certainly looking into Moriarty's assumptions and conclusions I just don't see myself going half blind trying to read every word of that 1909 indenture and then going out there on the ground crashing around all over Merion Golf course and the approximate 200 acres that is the surrounding development created out of HDC looking for little "monument" stones in the ground all over the place which is exactly what Yerkes and Co. (land surveyors) did back before 1910 or earlier!  ;)


Mrs. Sniffenbritches:
"Sir, what are you doing in my bedroom when I'm trying to have sex with the pool boy??"

TEPaul:
"Sorry, Mrs. Sniffenbritches, I believe there's an old metes and bounds "monument" stone from the specific metes and bounds survey description by Yerkes & Co. in a 1909 indenture under your bed and I really must see its exactly location because there is virtually no other way to prove OR NOT whether The GREAT Charles Blair Macdonald routed and designed Merion East golf course. Carry on, and do not mind me, I won't take long under your bed."
« Last Edit: May 05, 2008, 11:30:20 AM by TEPaul »

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Tom,

With all due respect, I cannot see moving a road some amount up on the north edn of that property being the key to the entire routing. It just seems so obvious to me that when that triangle up there opened up for the golf course the rest just fell into place.

Your suggestion that what is on that drawing cannot be wide enough for the 15th green and 16th tee is wrong if we think in the context of them trying to get two full length holes in there, and not neccisarily the holes we know today.

If they owned the land, but it was some fractional amount narrower than what is there today, the green and tee could still have fit...not as perfectly as today, but they could have easily fit.

To my reading, the dates are skewed because the land seems to have been aquired by this land swap prior to that map being drawn up...or at least the agreement to swap the land had been made. Assuming Merion already had the land where the 16th green was, what would stop the quarrymen from blasting away as soon as possible?

Mike_Cirba

Tom,

David states that the Johnson Farm was 140 acres on College Avenue;

Later, he says;

The bulk of Merion’s purchase (about 96 acres) had come from the 140 acre “Johnson Farm” parcel, west of Cobbs Creek on both sides of Ardmore Avenue.  The development company had owned this tract outright for a number of years, and it is likely that this was the bulk of the 100 acres that Haverford Development Company had originally offered Merion for their golf course.  The rest came from the just acquired Dallas Estate, bringing the size of the parcel to 117 acres.


This sounds like the basic L to me, but I'm not sure.

TEPaul

MikeC:

I don't know what David Moriarty has as far as old land transaction contracts or some evidence of them but whatever he has he should definitely make all of them available to some of us here if we ever want to come to some factual understanding of how and when this real estate got parceled up to create Merion golf course. I'll guarantee you one thing, David Moriarty sure as hell does not know that land and particularly it's surrounding neighborhood which came out of this course move and HDC half as well as I do. After all, I've been all around it for over thirty five years, I know about twenty people who live in there and I used to sell real estate including some of it!

Unfortunately, the author of this essay we are discussing, may not, at this time, feel that it is in his best interest, for whatever reason, to let someone who could resolve all this see whatever he's got or even become aware of what he doesn't have!

But I will tell you one thing, I firmly believe that arriving at the whole truth of ALL the details of this Francis story really will resolve this entire issue which is the subject and conclusion of this essay "The Missing Faces of Merion". And it is becoming increasingly clear to me why so many either do not now and have not understood why.
« Last Edit: May 05, 2008, 11:45:53 AM by TEPaul »