"TE
Did you get your Willie Dunn info from C&W?"
Some of it but certainly not all of it. I spoke to Mr Cornish about what's contained in the book about architectural attribution and explanation about clubs and he said obviously most of it comes from the clubs themselves. Maybe you think you know more about the history of golf clubs architecture then they do, including Mayfield, because you certainly try to challenge them enough, but from your particular vantage point I would seriously always doubt you know what they do or you will ever know what they do. Your information is almost always direct and information from clubs generally isn't. Information in newspaper accounts logically emanated from the golf clubs themselves contemporaneously.
"The Phildelphia Inquirer reported that Lloyd sought the advice of Barker, Macdonald & Whigham."
I would like to see the wording of that but nevertheless, I think a far more reliable source about what actually happened with a Barker would be the actual committee reports themselves, their reports to the club's board and the club's board minutes. There certainly is no newspaper accounts that ever knew more about what actually happened then the people and the committees and boards that were actually involved in the search for and creation of those courses.
If Lloyd actually sought the advice of Barker himself, I've seen no indication of that from the Merion records and even if he did seek Barker's advice, one really would wonder why Connell was the recipient of that advice and why he paid for it and not MCC. In any case, Barker's advice was not followed up on at all, according to Merion's records. Maybe you think some Philadelphia newspaper reporters knew more about what was going on with Merion's project than the Merion people doing it but that's a pretty astounding assumption to make.
MCC's record certainly never attemtped to hide their relationship and negotiations with The Haverford Development Co (Connell) but the record of the architectural development of the course is quite clear and it does not involve Barker in any way. The club records do mention, however, that the club did need to act cautiously about potential land they might want to buy, so as not to raise the sale price.
This whole thing with your fixation about Macdonald's involvement in Merion East began about five and a half years ago with an article or two you said you found from a Philadelphia newspaper or whatever. Of course the club has always had those newspaper accounts and we've been aware of them for years and they are of no difference when it comes to Macdonald than what is reflected in Merion's committee reports and board meetings from whence those newspaper accounts probably came.
Apparently you are on the same campaign with Barker and Mayfield----eg to challenge the Mayfield GC's architectural attribution. Unless you have something much more concrete and indicative about Barker than you've heretofore reported, I'm afraid you're just on another of your wild goose chases.
You are a good speculator on the architectural history or golf clubs and architects and there is a place for that, particularly in the beginning of a research project but not when one tries to pass it off as truth or fact.