Fred Pickering - the "King of All Golf Course Constructors"

[Peter Pallotta]

David -

there was a lot of debate on past threads about what "laying out" meant back then, and I don't want to rehash that. But the question is a very important one, because as you say it might reflect both the 'socio-economic' realities of the times, as well as a then-changing concept of what it meant to design and create a golf course. That's why Mike C's first post on this thread and the articles he quoted about Pickering are so relevant. To me, it seems like the writers were going out of their way to praise Pickering, not in the sense of giving him undeserved credit but as if (as social-progressives) they were trying to tell their audience not to forget the working-class men who actually built the courses. Look at the language they use:

Pickering, "another golf expert, who had charge of the ACTUAL WORK OF BUILDING some 390 golf links..."

"Mr. Pickering has charge of ALL THE WORK OF CONSTRUCTION..."

"Just find Mr. Pickering, this veteran in the art of CONSTRUCTING courses...."

Pickering's "latest achievement far surpasses anything he has ever done in the CONSTRUCTION of golf links..." 

"Mr. Findlay will send here...Fred Pickering, the king of all golf course CONSTRUCTORS, and he will guarantee a course and 18 perfect putting greens of the most undulating kind to be in perfect shape on the first day of June 1915."

What I'm saying is that these quotes seem to come from expert observers who valued men who worked with their hands, who highly respected Mr. Pickering and his contributions in particular, and who wanted those contributions appreciated (perhaps for the first time). And yet, though I assume the term was in use at the time, not one of them used "laying out" to describe what Mr. Pickering did, and all of them focused on the actual building/construction of the course, as if it was clear and obvious to everyone that another man had DESIGNED/LAID OUT the course.   

I'm not trying to question what you've found in your researches. I'm saying that in this one very relevant example (i.e. Pickering) from exactly the time we're discussing and using only  contemporaneous reports/articles, it doesn't seem like there was much debate at all about what the concept of design meant.

Does this answer the question about how golf course architecture (and in particular, how good/great golf architecture and the 'art' of it) was understood and practiced back then? No, I don't think so. But it does seem to make clear the standard "division of labour" in those days...

Peter   

[Thomas MacWood]

That's why Mike C's first post on this thread and the articles he quoted about Pickering are so relevant. To me, it seems like the writers were going out of their way to praise Pickering, not in the sense of giving him undeserved credit but as if (as social-progressives) they were trying to tell their audience not to forget the working-class men who actually built the courses.

Huh? Please elaborate. Findlay and Bendelow weren't working class men?

[DMoriarty]

F.G. Pickering was in charge of the cricket grounds of the Boston Cricket Club at Franklin Fields when Willie Campbell laid out the links at the adjacent Franklin Park (1896). Does anyone know if Pickering was involved in the construction of the course or what impact, if any, it may have had upon his move from cricket to golf?

Tom Macwood,

Not sure if this helps, but your question may answer a question of mine.   I recall seeing reference to a plan for a second course at Franklin Park, and to a report to some committee or another.   According to the article two men had inspected the proposed site, the first was experienced in planning golf courses and the second was experienced in building them.  I thought that Campbell was a good bet for the first, but was curious about the second.   Perhaps Pickering was already building courses.   

I'll try to track down the article but having no luck right now. 

_________________________________

Peter,

First, I am not equating "laying out" a golf course with "constructing" a golf course.   There are three overlapping but sometimes distinct concepts:  Planning, laying out, and constructing.    It is a bit confusing, I am not sure I totally understand it, and am pretty sure that often-times those recording these things were still figuring out how to use the terminology.  Nonetheless, here is a quick and dirty, over-generalized, and oversimplified explanation, looking at the evolution historically:

        Once upon a time, golf links were just "laid out."   Some shepherd walked around the dunes, found some good grass, and put a hole in the ground, walked for a while, found another good chunk of grass, put another hole, etc.    He simply laid the course out on the ground.  Any "planning" that took place was part of the laying out.  Same goes for the "constructing," which might not have amounted to anything other than digging holes.   
        With the advent of man-made hazards and artificially leveled and/or contoured greens, the need for constructing arose.   With the game spreading around the globe to those without much experience with the game, the need for planning a golf course arose.   Somewhere in between was the concept of "laying the course out on the ground."  Sometimes part of planning, sometimes part of constructing, sometimes neither.

Early on in this transition, before the planners were doing detailed plans or putting much of anything on paper, it seems like their contribution was easy to minimize or totally ignore.   The people getting their hands dirty are not mentioned much either.   It seems like the person in the middle, the one taking the planners advice and telling the builders what to build are the ones who got the most credit, usually for laying out the course.

Second, as for the articles about Pickering.  No doubt Pickering was a very important figure and was probably involved in many more great courses than we yet know, but for the most part history has overlooked him in the same manner that history has overlooked so many of the others who were paid for their hard work around the turn of the century.  To me the articles are interesting because they may be more the exception than the rule.  In many cases (including in at least one the blurbs) the clubmen in charge of of the lay out and construction are the ones who ultimately receive the lion's share of the credit.   If Pickering built even a fraction of the courses he claims to have built,  he was most often completely ignored.   A few factors you might want to consider when considering even these blurbs:

1.  At least one of the articles was written by Findlay, who had a business relationship with Pickering.   Praising Pickering may have been good for business.

2.  At least another of the articles appears to have been lifted by one the written by Findlay.

3.  I don't think you should assume that "expert observers" wrote these articles.   All of the blurbs are so effusive that they read more like press releases than journalism.   If one reads enough of these old articles one will find that about every course "will be the best in ___________, and great in every way."   One gets the feeling that these may be placed announcements rather than objective journalism.  (In fact, I think I mention in my essay that some of the articles on Merion closely track announcements to the members made by the clubs.)   Given that another of the articles also mentions that Findlay in involved, I wonder if Findlay figured out how to promote himself early on, and included Pickering as part of the promotion.

[Thomas MacWood]

I've always thought Wayne and TE were way too hard on him, their complete focus was the apparent troubles he had with the drink at Merion and Seaview (according to one letter). They left you with the impression he was some kind of derelict, but Wilson engaged him after Merion at Seaview, and he was working and buiding golf courses in the years following those 'troubles'. Ironically he ended his career being the long time greenkeeper at Myopia Hunt. I presume they thought he had his act together.

I have long been on the record on this site and in our Flynn book that Pickering was a very important figure in the development of Merion's first course in Ardmore.  I mentioned that Pickering's experience outweighed that of Barker, Macdonald and Whigham combined.  Their Macdonald theory was based on the erroneous fact that Wilson and Committee did not have enough experience or ability at the time to design and develop Merion's first Ardmore course without relying on Macdonald and Whigham.  The Club did rely on M&W in exactly the manner they've always credited them with.  Not as routers and designers of the golf course as MacWood and what's his name would have everyone believe despite evidence to the contrary.  I suggested Pickering may have worked for the outside construction crew hired by Merion to build the golf course.  I have suggested in the past that the contractors had a lot to do with the look and design details of the golf courses they built.  I championed the role of Pickering for many years while Tom MacWood ignored him and sought to bring attribution credit to Barker, Macdonald and Whigham; basically everybody but the true participants in the design and build process, namely Wilson and Committee and Pickering.  We did cite reasons for Pickering's dismissal and later problems at Seaview.  Pickering may have gotten his act together down the road, we did not explore his work after Seaview, for it had no relevance to the book we wrote on FLYNN.  We DID NOT address Pickering's role in a way that besmirches him in any way.  We told the truth in a rather sympathetic way.  His actions opened the doors to Flynn's greater role on the West Course and launched his career.  Sadly at the expense of Pickering.

It was the two princes of besmirch, MacWood and he who shall go unnamed, that long-ignored Pickering.  Now, when they wish to discredit and embarrass Tom Paul and I using a 5-year old obsolete manuscript draft in their knit-picking quest for rewriting minute details when they consistently get the big ones wrong--like completely misrepresenting Macdonald and Whigham's role at Merion based on suppositions and minimizing and getting completely wrong Wilson's initial role, based on fact.  Interestingly, MacWood and he who shall go unnamed, to this day do not for a minute think they just might be wrong and consider that evidence we have obtained may just upset their shaky house of cards model.  They see our withholding facts from THEM as indications that we are purposefully hiding facts that support their claims and smash our own.  Once again they are WRONG.  We have shown a number of people, mostly at MGC and MCC, but select others, the raw material.  One of the viewers of the raw material is a golfing buddy of the California component of the disastrous duo.  We deny these two guys the material because of their conduct, their process and their conclusions.  Someday they will have access to it, perhaps via the USGA, they could always come to MGC or MCC at some future date and ask for permission or they can go to Mike Hurdzan as he will surely have a copy, and one day the book in his impressive collection.   

Rather than figuring out where they may have gone wrong with their work to date, they deflect from their mistakes and now accuse Flynn's daughter of memory failure and our inclusion of information related by her--all taken from an old draft manuscript.  By the way, MacWood, Flynn was born and raised a Catholic (until he himself decided against following that Church at age 12).   Flynn's daughter told us that his father's ancestors came from Cork and not Northern Ireland even though one document that she saw and we have access to has Northern Ireland on it.  Our opinion, aided by Flynn's daughter, is that Flynn's father left Queenstown for America.  Someone from Northern Ireland would not do that.  You may have time to exhaustively search out the truth, we were content with Flynn's daughter's account and as it wasn't pivotal to Flynn's work in golf, we presented it.  MacWood seeks the elusive influences (purely subjective and interpretive) and thinks this data important.  Well, we had a 1700 page book to write and we were hoping to get it done in our lifetime.  Tom MacWood and what's his name would have us abandon work (well, me in any case) and push back the process to publish in order to explore to the end of the road the many thousands of information pieces.  Does anyone think that is rubbish?  Why are they considering the 3-5 year old draft of a manuscript (a mere fraction of the content the current version is) when there are plenty of books out their that are published with serious mistakes in them, including one on their beloved Macdonald?  It isn't because they are intellectually curious about Flynn, that is a thinly veiled attempt to camouflage their true ambition, to bring disrepute to Tom and I.  That is their motivation and goal.  Make no mistake about it.

Look, the fact is, we came up with 1700 pages of detailed information on Flynn.  Are we 100% accurate about everything?  No.  We don't claim to be.  We offer our best efforts and sometimes, though clearly stated, our opinions while providing citations.  The readers can decide for themselves.  We did not write the book as if we were being cross examined in court and providing testimony, though it feels that is the process on this website from MacWood and he who still remains nameless.  We did extensive due diligence on everything relating to golf course architecture.  Forgive us for trusting Flynn's daughter for family facts.  She and her niece studied this and we used their information, not to perpetuate myths or build legends as two would accuse us in their broken record fashion.  We did not do deep due diligence on every fact she provided.  I guess we are a bit more trusting of people than MacWood.  He has never met her, so he is removed from the situation.  Perhaps that is good, perhaps not.  Before he continues his quest to discredit her and her representations, perhaps he ought to consider what it has to do with our primary interest, golf architecture.  Leave her alone.  Point the blame at Tom and I if you must, but have the decency to leave her out of your maniacal frenzies.

Wayne
Who said anything about abandoning your work? I'm certain Flynn's daughter is wonderful resource and a direct connection to Flynn, but she is 80+ years old and your asking her to recount facts that occured before she was born. I would have thought trying to confirm the acccuracy of what she told you would be the prudent thing to do, especially when began to learn some of her memories were wrong, like when she told you Flynn's father died when he was a boy.

Obviously the architecture is your main focus but isn't it difficult to separate the man's life from his career? Aren't the two interrelated? You barely mention Pickering or his construction background in the article, focusing on the fact that he was sacked for drinking. He was one of the key figures in Flynn's architectural career. For years you only presented him as minor figure, it was only when M&W were introduced into the Merion picture more prominently that you began to emphasize his role. And I don't recall you ever mentioning Johnson Contracting until recently, so I'm not sure what you are talking about when you say you have suggested Pickering may have been with the outside construction crew. You haven't suggested anything, you have said he was THE construction person.

To my knowledge no one has suggested you abandon your work. Isn't it better this new information come out before you publish than after?

[wsmorrison]

Tom,

So because Flynn's daughter was wrong about one piece of irrelevant information to our topic, one which we saw no need to fact check as a result, you are skeptical about her entire contribution.  I don't care.  In a 1700 page book on the work in golf by William Flynn we are not going to get every fact right.  I don't mind so much that we quoted Flynn's daughter as saying her grandfather died when her father was young and that appears to be incorrect (I too have the 1930 census reports) and comment on the remark in later versions of our manuscript.  You are absolutely correct that it does not appear in your OBSOLETE version.  Why you continue to criticize an obsolete manuscript is curious indeed, especially since all you seem to come up with for critiques are arcane facts.   You choose to constantly critique on this website.  If you think I sent you that DRAFT years ago to discredit me in public, I think you misunderstood the motivation to send it to you.  It was supposed to be a constructive confidential due diligence process not fodder for your public vendetta.  In any case, have at it with these minute corrections of an obsolete manuscript.  If you want to focus on that, fine.  I think the site sees exactly what you're attempting to do as you expose yourself as the petty expert researcher that you are.  Why you aren't correcting your protege's mistake laden essay, seems obvious.  You want to rewrite history for your own promotion at the expense of the truth.  By the way, by mistake laden, I'm talking big mistakes, not when the father of Wilson's second cousin twice removed died kind of mistakes.

Now, as for the Flynn article, what makes you think that the article as appeared in the Golf Architecture series was the entire manuscript I submitted?  How can you ignore the possibility that the piece was edited down?  It was a journal article, not the definitive treatise you would have it be.  That was one article of many in the journal and it was not at all intended to be the definitive study on Flynn and certainly not Pickering.  Neil had a difficult job given the amount of material I sent him.  I think he did a fantastic job of editing and presenting enough facts that people will be intrigued by Flynn and want to know more.  I am happy with the article on the whole.  Sorry you could not find any merits worth discussing, only faults that you relish discussing in public.  Such is your nature, disgusting as it may be.

As for my discussions of Pickering, you falsely characterize them.  It wasn't only when M&W were introduced that I took up the Pickering mantle.  I took up Pickering from the first time I heard of him by Flynn's daughter in November 2001 (I have the conversation recorded if you would like to confirm).  By the way, M&W wasn't introduced by you and your protege.  They were properly credited all along by the Merion chroniclers and by the participants themselves.  You two didn't introduce M&W, you completely fabricated and distorted their role along with mistakenly discrediting the actual participants in the locating, design and build teams.   You guys made serious mistakes of the kind a novice would make.  So, I've been talking about him for years, maybe not to you, but so what?  I don't talk to you.  Take a look at the thread on your protege's essay (I guess you're proud of that one since you fail to criticize it at all).  You'll see where I brought him up plenty of times and in proper perspective.  If you don't think I've been promoting him properly for years, you are wrong and twisting the truth to your own end.  By the way, even if I didn't promote him as much as you say I should, you ignored him completely.  In an attempt to prove that only M&W had the ability to pull off the design and construction of Merion's new Ardmore course, you failed miserably to include Pickering's expertise or even recognize him at all.  I brought that up right away in my careful and toned down analysis.  It didn't get combative until the reactions by the author demonstrated a lack of being able to handle constructive criticism.  Your criticism by the way is not constructive, it is intended to be destructive.  That's why you use old material and that's why you do so on this site.

By the way, M&W provided valuable advice at three pivotal stages, as has always been asserted by Merion, if only done so in general.  They DID NOT select the property, rout or design the golf course.  I don't care if you stick to your notions that they did.  You are WRONG and it will eventually come out.  You'll eat some flocks of crow at that point.  For now, we are not inclined, in deference to the clubs involved, to publish private raw data on this site.  In the meantime, you come off as stubborn zealots of your own mistake-riddled theories.  If you don't want Tom Paul or others to offer their opinions, I understand your motivation to censor them.  It isn't right, but your motives are transparent.   If you don't think Pickering got a proper amount of discussion in the Flynn book, you have no clue because your version is obsolete and a fraction of the current version.   Stop trying to discredit us with old manuscripts and edited articles.  You are providing no benefits and only attempt to bring us down to the gutter level in your zeal to take Tom Paul and I down.  Well guess what?  You won't bring us down to the gutter, nor the many levels below that where you and your protege dwell.

[TEPaul]

Mr. MacWood:

Your constant harping on Wayne about the inaccuracy of truly minor or irrelevent facts has become so transparent and frankly boring. It's so transparent because it seems to be the only vehicle left for you to promote yourself as a better researcher than Wayne or anyone else. This theme is pretty apparent in most every post you've made since returning to this website. In the process I'm afraid it has really only served to make everyone else see you are a pretty misguided golf architecture analyst.

I hope you don't view this as another example of me trying to attack you personally because it isn't that at all----it's only about architectural information and analysis. I would hope one of these days you come to see what you are doing for what it really is. I say that because it has become so silly on your part---and it shows that the only one hurting your own reputation on here and elsewhere is you.

[Thomas MacWood]

Wayne
Anyone interested in knowing how you and TE have characterized Pickering over the years can do a simple search.

Regarding Flynn's daughters accuracy, I'm quite a bit younger than 86 years old and I have difficulty remember what I did ten years ago much less what my father did in 1910. Not only is it asking too much for her to remember the details of her father's life, there were a number of stories that made absolutely no sense. For example, who hires a 19-year old high school golfer to design a golf course? Or that Flynn and the multi-millionaire Plunkett had some kind of relationship or that the son of a day laborer marries into the one the wealthiest Boston families (I suspect that tale was a TE invention). These were not unimportant events in his career, I would have thought they deserved a little further scrutiny, not to mention accuracy.

Again, as I explained at the beginning of the Flynn thread, I was not referring to information from your old manuscript, this was information contained in your article that came out last summer. And since when is correcting the record dragging you down in to the gutter?

[TEPaul]

"Regarding Flynn's daughters accuracy, I'm quite a bit younger than 86 years old and I have difficulty remember what I did ten years ago much less what my father did in 1910. Not only is it asking too much for her to remember the details of her father's life, there were a number of stories that made absolutely no sense. For example, who hires a 19-year old high school golfer to design a golf course? Or that Flynn and the multi-millionaire Plunkett had some kind of relationship or that the son of a day laborer marries into the one the wealthiest Boston families (I suspect that tale was a TE invention). These were not unimportant events in his career, I would have thought they deserved a little further scrutiny, not to mention accuracy."


Mr. MacWood:

When you say there were a number of stories that made absolutely no sense, we are aware that they make no sense to you but thankfully many of the things that make sense to you and don't make sense to you are not exactly based in fact or reality.

As far as Flynn marrying into the Gardner family I'm referring to, I never said Flynn married one of the weathier Gardners. Apparently the most simple logic immaginable has never occured to you in this vein. The Gardner family I'm talking about has been in America for close to 250 years and has been extremely prominent for a lot of reasons throughout but if one thinks about that generational extrapolation despite the fact all the progeny through the centuries are related not all of them may've been wealthy at any particular point in time. This is just another example of why your logic and your responses are so bizarre and not really worthy of much credibility.

[wsmorrison]

Tom MacWood,

Simply wait for the book to come out.  Trash it all you want then.  For now, you are premature and not sufficiently informed to do so with any accuracy or credibility.  So until then, let us, by all means go our separate ways.  To do so, it would be best not to keep going after me.  I promise to leave you alone if you would only do the same for me.  I offer you an olive branch.  I hope you'll take it.  If you would rather smoke a peace pipe, I'll try and find some stuff to fill it and gladly light it for you if you don't Bogart it and are willing to pass it back to me.
Fare the well.
Wayne

[Thomas MacWood]

TE
Evidently you forgot this exchange between Wayne & yourself, and in his article Wayne said Flynn married into the august Gardner family of Boston. Speculation is fine when your posting something on GCA, but I would think you'd confirm it before you put into a book or an article.


WM:  William Flynn (of Milton, MA) was married to a Gardner, one of the most prominent families in Boston.  It would not surprise me that his wife's family were of the same family tree.  Fascinating that a young Irish-American lad of working-class parents married into that family.  I guess being captain of the Milton HS golf, basketball, baseball and football teams made the Boston Brahman lass swoon a bit.

TP:    You're right there about the Gardners of Boston. It definitely took me by surprise when Connie L told us her mother was a Gardner and she traced her American roots back to the Mayflower. That's pretty much a dead giveaway that it's the same family tree. Believe me if you're part of the whole Mayflower Society thing they check your family history with a fine-toothed comb. The Gardners are a really big generational Boston family though, but it is totally Old Boston. I went to school up there with a guy called Peabody (Peabo) Gardner and that's the name that sort of the filters through the family's American history.
WM: . . . You don't want to hear about connections among the small world of the movers and shakers in the early 1900s.  That doesn't mean there isn't anything interesting there including the marriage of a working class Irishman with an upper crust elite Boston Brahman debutante.  It just so happens that a member of her family helped create the golf course at TCC.  Several decades later her husband significantly remodeled and designed holes for TCC. . . .

[TEPaul]

Mr MacWood:

I haven't forgotten that exchange at all. I believe Mrs Flynn was from that very same Gardner family. My only point to you was to correct you when you claimed I said Mrs. Flynn was wealthy. I didn't say that. You're the only one who said I said that. What I said to you is it's pretty illogical of you to ASSUME that ALL the numerous members of that Gardner family who have been here for about 250 years were all wealthy! 

Both you and David Moriarty are complete disasters when it comes to constantly assigning words and ideas to people they never said and never expressed or implied. Why do you suppose the both of you continuously do that on this discussion forum?   

[Thomas MacWood]

Mr MacWood:

I haven't forgotten that exchange at all. I believe Mrs Flynn was from that very same Gardner family. My only point to you was to correct you when you claimed I said Mrs. Flynn was wealthy. I didn't say that. You're the only one who said I said that. What I said to you is it's pretty illogical of you to ASSUME that ALL the numerous members of that Gardner family who have been here for about 250 years were all wealthy! 

Both you and David Moriarty are complete disasters when it comes to constantly assigning words and ideas to people they never said and never expressed or implied. Why do you suppose the both of you continuously do that on this discussion forum?   

TE
I'm affraid your assumption was wrong - two different families. AP Gardner is a descendant of Thomas Gardner who came over in 1626 and settled in Salem. Lillian Gardner is a descendant of John Gardner who came over in 1650 and settled in Hingham.

[Thomas MacWood]

Tom MacWood,

Simply wait for the book to come out.  Trash it all you want then.  For now, you are premature and not sufficiently informed to do so with any accuracy or credibility.  So until then, let us, by all means go our separate ways.  To do so, it would be best not to keep going after me.  I promise to leave you alone if you would only do the same for me.  I offer you an olive branch.  I hope you'll take it.  If you would rather smoke a peace pipe, I'll try and find some stuff to fill it and gladly light it for you if you don't Bogart it and are willing to pass it back to me.
Fare the well.
Wayne

Wayne
I always come in peace. I try to avoid the name calling and personal stuff. My focus is on trying to discover what really happened, not trashing anything or anybody.

[TEPaul]

"TE
I'm affraid your assumption was wrong - two different families. AP Gardner is a descendant of Thomas Gardner who came over in 1626 and settled in Salem. Lillian Gardner is a descendant of John Gardner who came over in 1650 and settled in Hingham."

Mr. MacWood:

Thank you for that information. Believe me that kind of info is much appreciated. I will be glad to take it to Connie Lagerman and check it out with her. She has always seemed extremely interested in her Gardner family heritage and its significance in America. The Gardner family line I'm speaking of and thinking about is the Boston family line that includes Augustus Peabody Gardner and also George Peabody (Peabo) Gardner who I went to school with and who unfortunately died last year after a most respectable life and time.

The Gardner family I'm speaking of and thinking about is related to the Cabots, Lodges, Lowells, Welds, Peabodys and probably the Winthrops too, all extremely prominent Boston families for generations. Perhaps you have heard of some or all of them.

Most all of those families and those names have been in and around those clubs we are discussing, particularly Myopia, for generations and frankly still are.

But perhaps the most significant one to our discussions of Myopia's early golf architectural history is Appleton. Your recent characterisation of him is so off the mark and illogical as to be laughable.

[Thomas MacWood]

TE
I've got to give you credit, for someone who is wrong so often, it sure doesn't seem to deter you. I suppose you figure eventually you'll be right. A blind pig finds an acorn once in a while.

[TEPaul]

"TE
I've got to give you credit, for someone who is wrong so often, it sure doesn't seem to deter you. I suppose you figure eventually you'll be right. A blind pig finds an acorn once in a while."


Mr. MacWood:

I have to be honest and admit that your complete lack of logic, you're almost total proven lack of intelligent deduction to do with commonsensical architecture analysis and your overbearing arrogance that has become so obvious to so many on here and throughout INTERNET land actually gives me great pleasure because you really do deserve every bit of it!   

I will never, EVER, stop trailing you and pointing out your failings that are and have always revolved around your never-ending attempts at self-promotion with virtually nothing to support it or deserve it.   

[wsmorrison]

Tom MacWood,

Your general dismissals of Flynn's daughter's accounts of her family history are in error and your assessment of her as a factual source need revision.  You suggested Flynn's father was born in Northern Ireland and suggested he was not a Catholic.  He was born in Cork, Republic of Ireland, just as Flynn's daughter stated.  William was a Roman Catholic until he opted out of the Church at a rather young age.  You suggested that Flynn's father lived on much later than Flynn's daughter related to us.  I don't recall that she said he died as a young boy.  In any case, he did not die when Flynn was a boy.  He died in 1915, when Flynn was 24 years old.  Maybe that was in the manuscript you have, but of course that is several years old.  His mother, Julia nee Furey was from Galway, Republic of Ireland.

[Mike_Cirba]

Fred Pickering was a Rock Star.   He was Keith Richards before rhythym and blues.

I'm hoping to find out quite a bit more about him soon.

[wsmorrison]

Mike,

Pickering was born in Boston, England the middle of three boys.  I believe Pickering left England at age 16 when his mother died.  Pickering met Flynn's sister, Margaret, when he was working at Wollaston.  Flynn's sister worked in the clubhouse as did Flynn's mother, who may have been the club cook.

[Mike_Cirba]

Oh Man... I know about middle children, being one.

Wayne...let's discuss more this weekend.    It's surely an interesting story.

[Thomas MacWood]

Tom MacWood,

Your general dismissals of Flynn's daughter's accounts of her family history are in error and your assessment of her as a factual source need revision.  You suggested Flynn's father was born in Northern Ireland and suggested he was not a Catholic.  He was born in Cork, Republic of Ireland, just as Flynn's daughter stated.  William was a Roman Catholic until he opted out of the Church at a rather young age.  You suggested that Flynn's father lived on much later than Flynn's daughter related to us.  I don't recall that she said he died as a young boy.  In any case, he did not die when Flynn was a boy.  He died in 1915, when Flynn was 24 years old.  Maybe that was in the manuscript you have, but of course that is several years old.  His mother, Julia nee Furey was from Galway, Republic of Ireland.

We have since learned many more facts about Fred Pickering and if anything, his base nature had been minimized.  He had a number of affairs, children out of wedlock and skipped out on his marriage with Flynn's sister early on, returning to Massachusetts when he was fired from his job at Merion.   By the way, Pickering was from Boston, England.  We know this from Pickering's great granddaughter who will be visiting Merion this Fall, something you have yet to do.  She is very interested in the life of her great grandfather, warts and all.  The family has no illusions about the man's drinking, deceptions and wandering ways.

Wayne
Where did I suggest Flynn was not Catholic and his father was born in N. Ireland?

Good to see you're back to dragging Pickering through the mud.

[Mike_Cirba]

I love it.

This from the guy who argued that knowing that Leeds was living with Parker was vital to understanding his designs.   

[wsmorrison]

MacWood,

If Pickering's family desires and can accept the truth, is actively seeking it and don't mind it being made public, why are you so taken aback?  You didn't openly state Flynn's family was from Northern Ireland, but you did strongly suggest it when you took exception to my statement about Flynn being a working class Irish Catholic lad.  And you made no attempt to hide your mistrust of the family history provided by Flynn's daughter.  You were wrong to do so by the facts and in the way you chose to discredit her.

[Thomas MacWood]

Wayne
Since when is asking you to support your claim against me being taken back? Especially when that claim is incorrect. Did you find where I suggested those things...the GCA search engine works well.

If you go back and read what I wrote about Flynn's daughter, I said I'm sure she was wonderful resource, my criticisms were pointed toward you and TE for accepting the memory of 80+ year old person without any attempt collaborate. I have difficulty remembering what I did last week, much less dates that occured ten years before I was born. If you recall I said it was unreasonable to expect her to get those kind of facts completely accurate, and that when you learned for example that she was wrong about her grandfather dying when Flynn was a boy, you should have had even more reason to check things out. 

[wsmorrison]

Wayne
Where did I suggest Flynn was not Catholic and his father was born in N. Ireland?

In the thread on William Flynn's influences.  When you said,

Flynn's parents were from N.Ireland, Pickering (his brother in law) was from England, Hugh Wilson travelled overseas, aren't the odds good he travelled to the UK? Did he serve in WWI?

Wayne
I just took a quick glance at your early version of the Flynn book and there is no mention of his Irish background or his parents roots. Did you address that in your more recent version? Was Flynn an Irish Catholic?

Wayne
What city or town in Ireland did Flynn's father come from?

You are WRONG.  Perhaps your analysis of Ancestry.com ship manifests, census reports and birth certificates is simply not very good and you put too much credibility in them.  In any case, Michael Flynn was born in County Cork and Julia Flynn was born in Galway.  He didn't die when you said he did either.  However, you were right about Pickering, he was born in Boston, England.

Here are some other gems of yours from the Influence thread and the Flynn/Peters thread:

Wayne
You are going to base Flynn designing Kilkare on his daughter's word? You choose to igonore all the other facts she got wrong?


Wayne
Flynn's daughter has been wrong before. She thought Flynn's father, her grandfather, died when Flynn was a boy. He did not.

You present a pattern of disrespect and discrediting Flynn's daughter.  She was right about nearly everything and you were wrong in dismissing her and relying on your analysis of Ancestry.com. 


Speaking of proteges...do you consider Pickering Flynn's mentor?


Analyzing history is not an exact science...it involves making subjective and hopefully well-educated judgments.

Your analysis is biased, subjective is too tame a word for it.  Oh, and you make poor judgments.  Your analysis of history needs drastic improvement.  Start with working with families and clubs.  That is a significant piece of the puzzle we're all trying to put together.  Do you cheat with puzzles as well?  You probably cut the pieces to fit 

Wayne
I just took a quick glance at your early version of the Flynn book and there is no mention of his Irish background or his parents roots. Did you address that in your more recent version? Was Flynn an Irish Catholic?

I think I have a pretty good handle on Flynn's early life in Boston, but one thing I've never been able to figure out is how Flynn (and Pinkering) ended up in Philadelphia.

I don't think you do have a pretty good handle.

Flynn's daughter claimed Flynn's father (her grandfather) died when Flynn was a boy. He did not, if fact he was doing quite well when she was born in 1922. I'm not sure when grandpa died but he was going strong in 1930. I also suspect she is the source of the story about Flynn being a tennis pro and the Hartwellville legend. Also your dates are off by a year or more on some the important events of his life. No doubt she is an excellent source of information but memories dim and facts get blurred over multiple decades. I think confirmation would be in order.

He died in 1915.  You are incorrect when you say he was going strong in 1930.  You're good at digging up death certificates.  You should be able to correct your error.

You and Wayne went a bit beyond claiming Lillian Gardner was decedant of the Mayflower.

She may not have been wealthy, but did you prove she was not a descendent?  Flynn's daughter was the local chapter president of the DAR.  If all her relatives came over in the 1800s, how could that be?

TE
Lillian Gardner's father was a common laborer. She grew up in the same working class neighborhood of Milton as Flynn. While the story you and Wayne painted about the young man from the other side of the tracks marrying a Boston blueblood is a good one, its not true. Did your info come from Flynn's daughter or did you just figure a Gardner is a Gardner?

In Flynn's case Wayne & TE claim that Flynn graduated from HS in 1909 and then married the wealthy Miss Gardner that summer. They then have the couple moving to Hartwellville, Vt. It was there, they claim, at the age of 19, Flynn designed his first golf course, Kilkare, for the very wealthy WB Plunkett, and his career was off and running.

Perhaps that claim is in your several years old version of the Flynn manuscript.  For the fiftieth time, it is outdated and obsolete.

Who did what at Merion is about as clear as TE & Wayne's account of Flynn's early career.

That obituary and C&W's attribution are the two main sources for Flynn designing Kilkare. The source of Cornish's information is Flynn's daughter (I'm not sure if she is the source of the incorrect date too). Often times the family supplies the information for obits as well.

Beyond Flynn's daughter's story there is no direct evidence suggesting Flynn designed the golf course or any golf course during that period of his career. Also there is no evidence that Flynn had any relationship with Plunkett.

I don't think you should be criticizing anyone's historic accuracy. It is pretty apparent now why you've chosen not to put your Merion report on GCA. There is no doubt in my mind if you were confident in it it would have been on the site weeks ago.

Now please don't ask me to prove myself anymore.  Your recollection of your own statements are poor.  You did discredit Flynn's daughter and you can easily be proved wrong.  The family has their history a lot more accurate than you do.  Interestingly, clubs have their histories a lot more accurate than you do as well.