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.


Mike_Cirba

Merion's Early Timeline
« on: May 08, 2009, 10:32:29 AM »
Timelines are indeed valuable things when trying to reconstruct events...

When we last left off some were requesting to see an "alternative" timeline related to Merion, and while I have neither the expertise and internal knowledge of either Tom Paul or Wayne Morrison, I do wish to put my thoughts together in what I hope will be a constructive manner towards a greater overall understanding for all of us.

Over the break, I went back and re-read some of the materials including the personal account of Merion Committee-member Richard Francis and now believe I can prove that both the “Francis Land Swap” and the final course routing took place BEFORE C.B. Macdonald came down to visit on April 6th 1911 and helped the committee pick their best plan..

Why is this important?  Simply, to conclude that Macdonald and Whigham actually routed and designed the holes of the golf course at Merion they needed both motive and opportunity.   We know they were onsite at Merion only twice; first for a single day in June 1910 to inspect the property and then ten months later on April 6th, 1911.   We also know that their initial visit simply resulted in a one-page letter that recommended creation of a rote, 6000 yard “sporty” course, along with some agronomic suggestions.   Likely because the 117-acre property under consideration was questionable in size for even that modest goal, they also recommended the purchase of an additional 3 acres (owned by the P&W railroad) adjacent to the clubhouse and along the upper part of the lovely creek and bordering railroad tracks.
 
I will also show that there would have been no need on April 6th, 1911 for Macdonald to reiterate his July 1910 recommendation that Merion buy those 3 acres because that land was already included in at least one of the Merion Committee’s layout plans, including the one approved on that day.

We will also see through clear evidence that the design and routing of the golf course took place AFTER the property was purchased in January 1911 and that it was designed and routed by Hugh Wilson’s committee which was formed that month.
 
Why do I say that?    Well, I think a close reading of the timeline of events described in the MCC Minutes along with Richard Francis's account clearly tells us.  I’ve also included the accounts of both Hugh and Alan Wilson that are corroborative.


"Your committee desires to report that after laying out many different golf courses on the new ground, they went down to the National course with Mr. Macdonald and spent the evening going over his plans and the various data he had gathered abroad in regard to golf courses. The next day we spent on the ground studying......" - MCC Minutes April 19th, 1911

“We spent two days with Mr. Macdonald at his bungalow near the National Course and in one night absorbed more ideas on golf course construction than we had learned in all the years we had played.  Through sketches and explanations of the correct principles of the holes that form the famous courses abroad and had stood the test of time, we learned what was right and what we should try to accomplish with our natural conditions.”  – Hugh Wilson 1916

"On our return, we re-arranged the course and laid out five different plans.  On April 6th, Mr. Macdonald and Mr. Whigham came over and spent the day… “ - MCC Minutes, April 19th, 1911

“Those two good and kindly sportsmen, Charles B. Macdonald and H.J. Whigham…twice came to Haverford, first to go over the grounds and later to consider and advise about our plans”. – Alan Wilson 1926


Let's add to our understanding with the personal account of Richard Francis;

  
“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 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 with ANY golf layout (caps emphasis mine).  Perhaps we could swap it for some good use?”  

    
So, from Francis's perspective, his brainstorm happened while there were still multiple golf plans or "layout"(s) being considered, so it HAD to be before MacDonald’s April 6th return.   We know this because he doesn’t refer to “the” layout as something singular, already defined and determined, but refers to “any” golf layout they were still actively considering at the time, which by definition would be more than one.

Also, he tells us that BY THAT TIME they also already had the first THiRTEEN holes in place "with a help of a little ground on the north side of Ardmore avenue".
  
It has been awhile since I read Francis’s account and vaguely recall thinking previously that perhaps this was something he had incorrectly recalled....all those starting holes except number one being on the south side of Ardmore Avenue.....and Francis states that they had a pretty easy time with that part of the routing.
  
However, read carefully, he’s saying they actually had the first THIRTEEN holes routed and in place (using the additional 3 acres Macdonald had recommended they purchase back in July 1910) and that by the time he came up with the Francis Land Swap idea the Committee were only struggling with the location of last five holes, which his late-night idea helped solve.

I believe the following two illustrations are helpful in visualizing the land under consideration, as well as what they eventually conceived and built;




The property Merion initially purchased (drawn to scale) with picture running south to north, left to right in the “L-shape” as Francis described



The course as originally laid out, running in the same left to right, south to north orientation.   The green line (compared with the original property map above) shows my rough approximation of the original purchased property line and one can see how the Francis Land Swap altered that by looking at the final configuration of Club House Road, which “borrows” land-width on the north side to fit holes15 and 16 by “giving back” land down by hole number 1 and the clubhouse.    The red line indicates the 3-acre area originally recommended by Macdonald & Whigham in July 1910, and which was utilized in the final plan to “get the first 13 holes into the upright portion – with the help of a little ground on the north side of Ardmore Avenue” as Francis described .


It is also likely that this event took place sometime after the committee’s visit to NGLA which Tom Paul tell us took place the first week or so of March, 1911.   The reason I say this is because we know Francis rode a “mile or so” on his bicycle at close to midnight, which would have likely been extremely cold in January or February.  Indeed, in April of 1911, A.W. Tillinghast reported;

“The lingering of winter in the lap of spring has seriously interfered with the opening of the courses, none of which have been really fit during the month of March, and indeed the middle of April finds them all very backward.”

In any case, it is now clear that this was all done PRIOR to Macdonald's April 6th return.   Whatever Macdonald and Whigham did on April 6th, 1911 it is clear that they did not route the first 13 holes that day, nor did they route the final five holes that day, nor did they need to re-recommend additional purchase of 3 adjacent acres along the railroad on that day of their final visit to Merion.  

Instead, as Alan Wilson stated, it seems that on April 6th, 1911, Macdonald simply “consider(ed) and advise(d) about our plans”.
 

Of course that makes perfect sense and is consistent with Macdonald’s bold exclamation during his one-day visit April 6th, 1911 when he stated that the last seven holes would be equal to any inland course in the world.   If Francis had not already solved the riddle of how to place these final holes prior to Macdonald’s visit that day, then how could Macdonald and Whigham have judged them to be of such high potential quality?

In all, I think it’s clear from the timeline, and from Richard Francis’s words that;

1)   That at least the first 13 holes were laid out prior to Macdonald's final visit to Merion April 6th, 1911.
2)   That the “Francis Land Swap” that solved the problem of locating the last five holes also happened prior to Macdonald’s final visit (while there were still multiple layouts under consideration).
3)   That the 3 acres Macdonald had suggested they purchase back in July 1910 were already in at least one of the Merion Committee’s developed plans before Macdonald’s April 1911 return, including the ultimately recommended and implemented plan.

Coupled with the timelines of the MCC Minutes, we now also know;

1)   That the Merion Committee laid out “many different courses” between January 1911 and early March 1911.
2)   That the Merion Committee visited Macdonald and Whigham at NGLA in early March and spent the evening “going over his plans and various data he had gathered abroad in regards to golf courses”, and the next day was spent touring and “studying” the NGLA golf course.
3)   That after their visit to NGLA, the Merion Committee “re-arranged the course and laid out five different plans.”
4)   That Macdonald and Whigham came down to Merion approximately a month after the Committee’s visit to NGLA, where they considered the various plans the Merion Committee had laid out, and recommended one in particular, of which they stated the last seven holes would be equal to any inland course in the world.   That plan then went to the Board for final approval on April 19th, 1911 and led to the ultimate construction of the original Merion East course.

C.B. Macdonald and H.J. Whigham originally visited the Merion property in June of 1910 and advised as to the suitability of the land for a golf course.   We know that their recommendation included a generically described 6,000 yard “sporty” golf course, the purchase of an adjacent three acres owned by the railroad, and they also recommended Merion take additional steps related to determining the suitability and adaptability of their inland soil.

We also know that the Merion Committee visited NGLA in early March 1911 and both Hugh Wilson above and the MCC Minutes indicate how they spent the evening and the next day.  Of course, one could try to suggest that Macdonald and Whigham spent some part of that evening creating a routing for the Merion course, but that would beg some logical questions;

1)   Why is there no mention of any Macdonald/Whigham routing for Merion in either the Merion minutes or the account of Hugh Wilson that both describe the events of that visit?  For that matter, why is there no mention of any Macdonald/Whigham routing for Merion at any time, in any club, personal, or reported accounts of the time?
2)   Why would the Merion Committee have “re-arranged the course and laid out five different plans” in the month between their NGLA visit and Macdonald’s April 6th return if they already had a routing from Macdonald in hand?   Why would they have “laid out many different courses” prior to the NGLA visit if they already had a routing from Macdonald in hand?
3)   We know they spent the evening of their visit going over Macdonald’s sketches of holes abroad and the next day touring and studying the NGLA course;  when exactly would they have time to create a routing for a course on land in Pennsylvania  they had only seen one previous day nine months prior?
4)   We can also confidently surmise that their trip to NGLA had some very beneficial impact, as the evidence suggests that whatever they learned they seemingly felt it was important enough to revise their plans accordingly, but again, is this creative authorship deserving architectural attribution or did they simply provide valuable consulting advice as the Merion records have always contended?  

Macdonald and Whigham came back for the last time on April 6th, 1911, and now thanks largely to Richard Francis’s account corroborated by the MCC Minutes and Alan Wilson, we also know exactly what they spent their time doing; “consider(ing) and advis(ing)” regarding multiple proposed  “plans” the Merion Committee had authored, re-arranged, and “laid out” for their new golf course.


« Last Edit: July 25, 2009, 10:21:18 AM by EnoughsEnuff »

TEPaul

Re: My attempt at the Timeline
« Reply #1 on: May 08, 2009, 03:44:48 PM »
Michael:

You spent a lot of time there with some pretty comprehensive information explaining why Francis's idea to solve the 15th green and 16th tee lack of space problem happened BEFORE April 6, 1911 when Macdonald/Whigam returned for the second time in ten months. You also did a good job of explaining HOW Francis apparently solved the problem by suggesting the redelineation of a proposed road (today's Club House Rd) that had not yet been built (that comprehensive explanation of how the proposed road was redelineated on the plan and Merion East property lines is in one of the Merion threads in the back pages from around a year ago).

But the real point here, at least in my mind, is not to just prove that Francis's idea happened BEFORE April 6, 1911, but that it DID NOT and frankly COULD NOT have happened BEFORE Nov. 15, 1910 which is exactly the conclusion the essay "The Missing Faces of Merion" reached and pretty much had to reach to continue on making the other premises it did make that the Wilson committee did not and could not have routed Merion East. There are a number of events and reasons that are not included in your post that I believe essentially prove the latter, and again, that to me is the most important thing of all to prove. It is extremely important in light of the conclusion that essay reached in that vein because the essay bases that premise on another premise----eg that Nov. 15, 1910 was before the Wilson Committee had even been formed and therefore Wilson's committee did not have the opportunity at that time to do a layout plan and that therefore Macdonald and Whigam (or Barker) must have done it with some help from Francis and Lloyd.

Of course it is just so illogical to me that someone would contend that Francis and Lloyd would be working with Macdonald/Whigam that early (1910) on a course routing and layout because they too would be on the Wilson Committee and of course it had not yet been formed in 1910.

So why did the author of the essay try to contend that Lloyd and particularly Francis had been working with Macdonald/Whigam on a routing that early (back somewhere around the middle of 1910 until before Nov. 15, 1910)?

Because:

1/ It is uncontested by everyone that Macdonald/Whigam would not return to Ardmore between June 1910 and April 6, 1911 and so he had to contend a routing was done by Macdonald/Whigam when they were there in June 1910.

2/ The Nov 15, 1910 land plan that went to the membership in Nov. 1910 shows that triangle in the north corner that the essay contends was the RESULT of Francis's land swap late night idea so obviously the essay had to put Francis's idea BEFORE that date (Nov. 15, 1910).

Of course that triangle was not the result of Francis's idea at all. In fact it was simply a portion of the original Johnson Farm that had been made to look like a triangle on the Nov. 15, 1910 plan by a proposed road on the plan from College Ave on the north to Ardmore Ave on the south that did not yet exist. By redelineating that road on the plan before it existed widened that triangle allowing #15 green and #16 tee to be where they are and where the Francis idea put them. But that was not the extent of the Francis land swap. The redelineation of the proposed road took land from the proposed real estate development to the west at the top (north), gave some back to the development along most of the length of 14th and then took some back down at the bottom as the road connected to Ardmore Ave on the south around the end of #1.

Did that entire redelineation of the proposed road (the future Club House Rd) from Francis's idea create a perfect net land swap between the golf course land and the residential real estate proposed development land to the west? That's hard to say but the fact is measuring it all out on the ground today could be done with accuracy to determine that given that November 15, 1910 proposed plan of the course and proposed real estate development to the west is scaled on the plan. But even if it didn't, the fact is by around the end of December 1910 Lloyd owned the entire Johnson Farm anyway including a piece that is now part of the residential development across Ardmore Ave from the 2nd hole. And that is not to even mention that by that time he and his MCC syndicate may've controlled most of the Haverford Development Co. too.

« Last Edit: May 08, 2009, 05:07:15 PM by TEPaul »

DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: My attempt at the Timeline
« Reply #2 on: May 08, 2009, 04:37:01 PM »
Mike and TEPaul,   We've gone over and over the land swap, and I have repeatedly explained the weaknesses of the the various interpretations, including my own.   I don't see anything new here at all.

Mike, I am not sure what point if any you are making with the sketch with the green and red lines on it.  Neither the underlying map or the lines are remotely close to scale.    The 1910 land plan is not perfect, but it it pretty close to accurate regarding the the relationship of the road to the HC land.

TEPaul,

I've asked a few times before, but hopefully the third time is charmed.   WHAT DO MCC'S AND/OR MERION'S ADMINISTRATIVE RECORDS SAY ABOUT THE LAND SWAP?

I asked you a number of questions a while back about the MCC records, and you seemed to be considering whether to answer them or not.  Can I expect answers?  If so, when? 
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)

Mike_Cirba

Re: My attempt at the Timeline
« Reply #3 on: May 08, 2009, 05:14:26 PM »
Mike, I am not sure what point if any you are making with the sketch with the green and red lines on it.  Neither the underlying map or the lines are remotely close to scale.    The 1910 land plan is not perfect, but it it pretty close to accurate regarding the the relationship of the road to the HC land.


David,

You're right, and as I noted my rough red-line sketch was simply to show a rough approximation of the original property line shape as drawn to scale on the 1910 Land Plan.   By understanding that "to-scale" shape, one can clearly see where land was "borrowed" from west of today's 15th hole to create a wide enough area to accommodate both the 15th fairway & green and 16th tee and fairway, and where that land was "given back" to the homeowners down by one where it didn't fit in with any golf plans, as per Mr. Francis's late night idea.

I do believe that sketch I posted is the work of William Flynn.   It also leads to the question of whether the road was originally as sharply angled as he drew it there, but by 1924 it was more rounded as we know today.

Still, one can clearly see how's it's bowed in towards the clubhouse as a give-back to land borrowed further north for 15 & 16.

« Last Edit: May 08, 2009, 05:20:53 PM by MikeCirba »

DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: My attempt at the Timeline
« Reply #4 on: May 08, 2009, 05:28:56 PM »
I believe that Frances described the swapped land as the entire area west of the Haverford College rectangle, He even described the parcel down to the foot.  So if he is your guide, then the "borrowed land" is not accurately drawn or described in your post, regardless of problems with the scale.   You need to include the entirety of the land west of the the current location of the range.    The whole thing.  Then when add in the swap, your drawing should end up looking pretty much like the 1910 land plan.


Plus, the bow down by 14 already existed in the 1910 land plan. 
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)

TEPaul

Re: My attempt at the Timeline
« Reply #5 on: May 08, 2009, 05:41:13 PM »
David:

Whether we've been over it before on this website has nothing whatsoever to do with it. The only thing that matters is approximately when the idea came to Francis and when he went to see Lloyd for a resolution that created the necessary area at the top of the course on the north near College Ave. How it was actually done is of course most interesting as well and the point is the delineation of that proposed road on the plan when it was built was not at all the same as it was on the Nov 15 1910 plan no matter how much someone tries to rational this fact away by constantly stating the Nov. 15 1910 was not accurate. It was accurate and it was drawn to scale by a professional surveyor.

The point is anyone today can superimpose that Nov. 15 1910 plan that has a ton of "known points" on it still completely representative of property lines then and today, scale it all out and then put it right on top of an aerial of the course today with the Golf House Rd on it and see the difference in delineation of that proposed road on the plan and how it exists today all the way from College Ave on the north to Ardmore Ave on the south. That is really all that matters here; whether we've been over this before has nothing to do with it at this point and I'm pretty certain you both know that and that you know and understand why.

Matter of fact, it is additionally interesting to do this with the existing road compared to the proposed road on that Nov. 15 1910 plan not just to see how they got the additional land for #15 green and #16 tee but also how they could give land back along to the development along #14 where the routing and course plan did not need the width in that area that they had with that Nov. 15, 1910 proposed road delineation.

And the additional point is that Francis's idea did not happened before Nov. 15 1910 as your essay contends it did and that has Francis and Lloyd routing the course in conjunction with Macdonald and Whigam as your essay contends they did. It happened a good many month later after Francis had been appointed to the Wilson committee and after the Wilson committee and Francis had done a number of different layouts on the land that Lloyd had owned since around the end of the year (1910).

This is the accurate history of the laying out of Merion East and it is all in the records and meeting minutes which neither you nor we had when you published your essay on here just about a year ago.

If you truly want to get to the accurate facts of the creation of Merion East you are pretty much going to have to accept this or else your essay and the contentions in it will never be of much value to anyone.  

You asked when the land swap was approved by MCC? It was approved at the April 19, 1911 board meeting, the same meeting at which the board approved the selected plan of Merion East to be built. The land swap was approved by the board via a resolution by a board member by the name of Paul Thompson on hearing that the Wilson Committee report to the board that was presented to the board by Golf Chairman Robert Lesley was asking that the board approve that land swap as well as the purchase of the additional 3 acres we have always referred to as the P&W railroad property. Thompson's resolution simply asked the board to formally approve those requests of the Wilson committee and they were immediately approved by the board.
« Last Edit: May 08, 2009, 05:56:34 PM by TEPaul »

Mike_Cirba

Re: My attempt at the Timeline
« Reply #6 on: May 08, 2009, 05:49:35 PM »
David,

Are you saying that you disagree with Tom Paul's interpretation of the Francis Land Swap areas in question and therefore still contend that both the swap and the routing took place before Nov 1910?

I thought that was long ago determined here to have been decided by other evidence as well as a scale drawing overlay of the course as built that proved Tom's assertion?

DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: My attempt at the Timeline
« Reply #7 on: May 08, 2009, 06:01:33 PM »
TePaul

Thanks for the information but that was not my question.   What do the records say about the swap?


Mike,

I am not even sure what tepauls interpretation is, nor do I care to try and figure it out.  This is a factual question and there is no use arguing about it.   If tepaul has facts, then I'd love to see  them.


Again Mike,  your analysis conflicts with Francis' own words.
The only overlay I recall showed that if the 1910 plan was off then it was only slightly off, and that the features fit within it.
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)

Mike_Cirba

Re: My attempt at the Timeline
« Reply #8 on: May 08, 2009, 06:15:11 PM »
David,

Please don't tell me you don't understand Tom Paul's contention about the land swap.

Perhaps now that I've put a much larger copy of that land plan image on here perhaps some enterprising young man can provide us with a better overlay of the existing course than what was originally posted if you believe it was that close.

DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: My attempt at the Timeline
« Reply #9 on: May 08, 2009, 06:27:28 PM »
Mike,

Please don't tell me that you are going to get indignant about what I do and don't understand.     

I know it was that close, especially when compared to Francis' words.   There are overlays in the archives.  If you think they matter then pull them up.
« Last Edit: May 08, 2009, 06:30:29 PM 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)

Mike_Cirba

Re: My attempt at the Timeline
« Reply #10 on: May 08, 2009, 06:38:07 PM »
David,

No indignation here at all; I'm simply pointing out the obvious that everyone here knows you're much smarter than that. 

Also, the original overlay was done on the rather small copy you originally posted with your piece and details were very rough at best.

If anyone out there knows how to do this well, I could provide them with an even larger version, still to scale, of course.

Anybody good with visual graphic overlays?

TEPaul

Re: My attempt at the Timeline
« Reply #11 on: May 08, 2009, 06:45:13 PM »
"I believe that Frances described the swapped land as the entire area west of the Haverford College rectangle, He even described the parcel down to the foot.  So if he is your guide, then the "borrowed land" is not accurately drawn or described in your post, regardless of problems with the scale.   You need to include the entirety of the land west of the the current location of the range.    The whole thing.  Then when add in the swap, your drawing should end up looking pretty much like the 1910 land plan.


Plus, the bow down by 14 already existed in the 1910 land plan."



David:

Firstly, no Francis in his land swap idea story written in 1950 (thirty nine years after the event) did not say the land gotten was the entire area west of the Haverford College rectangle (that created the original triangle on the Nov. 15, 1910 land plan). He never used the words "Haverford College rectangle property" (to the east of #15 and #16) in his story. I suppose I can understand why you have assumed that for so long because obviously that's what you thought he meant.

He didn't because he couldn't have given the rest of the supporting information that has come forward within the last year about the chain of events of MCC's creation of their golf structure (The MCC Golf Association Company) created on the specific legal advice of one T. DeWitt Cuyler (MCC's lawyer) after Nov. 15. 1910 and the position Lloyd was purposefully put in by Cuyler and the club to effect future boundaries changes if necessary.  

Francis, in his 1950 story, certainly did say the land (that Lloyd owned at that point) was swapped along Golf House Road back to the development to the west for enough land to widen the existing triangle (that Lloyd also owned at that point) and that the dimension was 130 yards wide by 190 yards long. By that of course he meant the ultimate width of the land necessary to create #15 green and #16 tee. He did not mean to say that the entire 130 yard wide by 190 yard long triangle was created in that land swap. We know that now because there is virtually no way possible given the rest of the information that has come forward that it could have been that or that he could have meant that.

And when you say the bow to the east down along #14 existed in the November 15, 1910 plan just as it does today you just could not be more wrong; there is no question at all of that. Not only was it NOT that narrow in that area on the Nov. 15, 1910 plan but it is probably around half as wide in there today as it was on that Nov. 15, 1910 plan.

But the point is they fitted the holes on the plan they offered to the board for approval through the redelineation of Golf House Road (a road yet to be built at that point) via that so-called "land swap" and they are the holes that are there today as the result of that entire from College Ave on the north to Ardmore Ave on the south road redelineation. The entire thing encompassed a "take some more on top, give some back in the middle and take some more at the bottom" redelineation of Golf House Road that was yet to be built. And even if that didn't net out exactly along the road (if MCC net gained some or even lost some acreage) that probably didn't matter much to Lloyd, who, at that point, owned the entire original Johnson Farm that in fact was larger than Merion East is today!  ;)
« Last Edit: May 08, 2009, 06:56:48 PM by TEPaul »

DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: My attempt at the Timeline
« Reply #12 on: May 08, 2009, 07:05:53 PM »
You are wrong Mike.  I am not smart enough to make sense of it.   And the more tepaul explains, the less sense it makes.   

Like the post above, where he substitutes what he thinks happened for what Francis said happened.  I am not smart enough to understand that we can ignore the source material and replace it with our own beliefs.   I am not smart enough to do anything but accept Francis at his word, unless the FACTS indicate otherwise.  And I am certainly not smart enough to figure out for certain what parts of what TEPaul tells me are actual fact, and what parts are his understanding.  Are you?   If so you are way ahead of me.

Now if there are FACTS that we can consider, then that would be a different story.  For example, have you noticed how many times I have asked what the records say about the land swap?    I am looking for FACTS that would shed some light on the subject, provided we could verify them.

But I cannot get an answer even as to whether the records even mention the swap.  Instead I am told what I should believe.   You'd think by now you guys would know that when someone tells me what to believe I am a little slow on the uptake.

That being said,  I may be smart enough to save someone some effort.    If I had a snapshot of a map that was taken with a handheld camera, it doesn't make much sense for me to  consider the map "to scale," no matter how big I blow up the photograph.     And I wouldn't waste a lot of time with fancy overlays since my underlying source is necessarily unreliable.  I should try it first and see if I like the result, and then decide if it makes sense.  But I am a little dumb that way as well.

_______________________

By the way Mike,   did you see an actual photocopy of the minutes, or just someone's notes about what the minutes said?
« Last Edit: May 08, 2009, 07:14:46 PM 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)

TEPaul

Re: My attempt at the Timeline
« Reply #13 on: May 08, 2009, 07:27:03 PM »
“Mike,
Please don't tell me that you are going to get indignant about what I do and don't understand.”



David:

Please let’s not have any talk from you or from us about indignation again. We have a new “suite” on here now thanks to Ran and let’s turn over a new leaf and just stick to the facts. That’s what you’ve always said you wanted after-all.     





“TePaul
Thanks for the information but that was not my question.   What do the records say about the swap?”





The records say precisely what I just told you they said but if you want them word for word I don’t have a problem with that.

However, in my opinion, perhaps the most conclusive evidence of all comes from the afore-mentioned T. DeWitt Cuyler, who I am quite sure none of us had ever even heard of a year ago. What he said in a December 21, 1910 letter, in the opinions of many people from and around Merion is massively significant, particularly in how it affects the timing and facts of the “Francis story.”

On that note, if you want to know what he said you are pretty much going to have to agree to some of my requests of you that were on some of these threads recently and that in my opinion you sort of slough off or ignored as you seem to do so often with pertinent information and important situations from sOME of us here in Philadelphia that may disagree with your notions or your essay and particularly with the way you seem to come at this entire issue of ACCESS to Merion Golf's or MCC PRIVATE records and your demands to have them made available to you. We are going to need to get into that and on this Discussion Group and publicly. If you ignore this or try to rationalize it away again, I see no reason at all why I should consider cooperating with you with this information I have that should clear up to most anyone’s satisfaction what really happened back then with the Wilson committee and the creation of Merion East.

The ball is now in your court, and so, if you really do want to get to the facts of the original creation of Merion East which you have for so long claimed is your ultimate interest, you are going to have to cooperate with me this time if you expect me to cooperate with your requests of me. This time to do it you are going to need to deal with us as we would like to deal with you fairly and civilly, and as I think most realize, at this point, you should have with us long ago; I’m even sure you realize this to be true! I very much consider the foregoing to an olive branch and the best facilitation possible of these long-running Merion subjects you have been involved in, and have, in fact, promoted and perpetuated over the last few years!



« Last Edit: May 08, 2009, 07:36:35 PM by TEPaul »

TEPaul

Re: My attempt at the Timeline
« Reply #14 on: May 08, 2009, 07:39:58 PM »
"And the more tepaul explains, the less sense it makes."


David:

You've made some requests of information from me today. If you want me to supply it for you I'm going to need to have a retraction and apology from you on that remark of yours above.

The ball is in your court!

DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: My attempt at the Timeline
« Reply #15 on: May 08, 2009, 09:30:01 PM »
“Mike,
Please don't tell me that you are going to get indignant about what I do and don't understand.”



David:

Please let’s not have any talk from you or from us about indignation again. We have a new “suite” on here now thanks to Ran and let’s turn over a new leaf and just stick to the facts. That’s what you’ve always said you wanted after-all.     





“TePaul
Thanks for the information but that was not my question.   What do the records say about the swap?”





The records say precisely what I just told you they said but if you want them word for word I don’t have a problem with that.

However, in my opinion, perhaps the most conclusive evidence of all comes from the afore-mentioned T. DeWitt Cuyler, who I am quite sure none of us had ever even heard of a year ago. What he said in a December 21, 1910 letter, in the opinions of many people from and around Merion is massively significant, particularly in how it affects the timing and facts of the “Francis story.”

On that note, if you want to know what he said you are pretty much going to have to agree to some of my requests of you that were on some of these threads recently and that in my opinion you sort of slough off or ignored as you seem to do so often with pertinent information and important situations from sOME of us here in Philadelphia that may disagree with your notions or your essay and particularly with the way you seem to come at this entire issue of ACCESS to Merion Golf's or MCC PRIVATE records and your demands to have them made available to you. We are going to need to get into that and on this Discussion Group and publicly. If you ignore this or try to rationalize it away again, I see no reason at all why I should consider cooperating with you with this information I have that should clear up to most anyone’s satisfaction what really happened back then with the Wilson committee and the creation of Merion East.

The ball is now in your court, and so, if you really do want to get to the facts of the original creation of Merion East which you have for so long claimed is your ultimate interest, you are going to have to cooperate with me this time if you expect me to cooperate with your requests of me. This time to do it you are going to need to deal with us as we would like to deal with you fairly and civilly, and as I think most realize, at this point, you should have with us long ago; I’m even sure you realize this to be true! I very much consider the foregoing to an olive branch and the best facilitation possible of these long-running Merion subjects you have been involved in, and have, in fact, promoted and perpetuated over the last few years!




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
Re: My attempt at the Timeline
« Reply #16 on: May 08, 2009, 09:33:32 PM »
TEPaul,

You've lost me. Three or four times you have written that the ball is in my court.  I still haven't the faintest idea what you are talking about.   You have also written that I need "to agree to some of my requests of you that were on some of these threads recently and that in my opinion you sort of slough off or ignored . . .."   Again you are going to have to be a lot more specific, because I have no clue.

I have always been willing civilly discuss what happened at Merion, so long it is a factual discussion and so long as all the facts can be reasonably verified.   I have no interest in having someone else's understanding of the facts dictated to me along with the demand that I accept them without question.   I'll never agree to that.

I find these posts of yours to be pretty confusing.  They do not seem to have anything to do with respecting Merion's and MCC's specific instructions regarding their documents and information.    As far as I am concerned, that is the only issue.   I can think of no other legitimate reason for concealing this information.   Can you?  Can anyone?

Can anyone else think of any legitimate reason for concealing information about Merion's origins, other than to honor Merion's and MCC's specific instructions?

Come to think of it, shouldn't I be having this conversation with a representative of Merion, MCC, or both?   And why would they want to have this conversation in public?As I said above, lately your posts have brought me more confusion than clarity. 

So Tom, the ball is in your court.   What is it, exactly, that you want from me?   And what do your requests have to do with respecting the specific wishes of Merion and MCC? 

"And the more tepaul explains, the less sense it makes."

David:

You've made some requests of information from me today. If you want me to supply it for you I'm going to need to have a retraction and apology from you on that remark of yours above.

The ball is in your court!

Sorry to disappoint you Tom, but I've got nothing for which to apologize.   I don't understand your take on the land swap.  As you have tried to explain it more, I understand it less.  It just does not jibe with my my understanding of the FACTS.   And as I said in that same post, the FACTS will likely clear everything up for me. 

But again, Tom, what does this ultimatum have to do with honoring Merion's and MCC's specific instructions regarding the dissemination of their information?
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)

TEPaul

Re: My attempt at the Timeline
« Reply #17 on: May 08, 2009, 09:55:13 PM »
David Moriarty:

I posted precisely the same thing you did on the post before you. Is there some particular reason one should be aware of that you posted the same thing (just quoting me) with nothing more?  ;)

On the other hand, you might try responding to some of my concerns that I have put to you on here about the way things go with you on here that you just seem to automatically ignore. Is there some particular reason you can't or won't do that? You do want the information you've requested of me don't you? If so, it's going to have to be a two way street or you ain't gonna get it.

Mike_Cirba

Re: My attempt at the Timeline
« Reply #18 on: May 08, 2009, 10:03:14 PM »
David,

What you're failing to understand about the Francis Land Swap is that the "Johnson Farm" included all the land between Ardmore Ave. and College Ave. west of that little block of land owned then by Haverford College that is part of today's driving range.   It's not like they decided to only buy the Johnson Farm land going north halfway up the 15th fairway hill and then stopped 190 yards short of the whole kaboodle, and then had to buy triangle later after realizing they had an oopsie.   

That road as drawn on the land plan in 1910 was simply the original proposed boundary.   The only reason it shows as a triangle is because someone decided the aesthetic of the road should be long, slow, sweeping curves.   Once Lloyd assumed control of all that property they could move the line or the boundaries as they wished.
« Last Edit: May 08, 2009, 10:07:52 PM by MikeCirba »

TEPaul

Re: My attempt at the Timeline
« Reply #19 on: May 08, 2009, 10:05:14 PM »
"You've lost me. Three or four times you have written that the ball is in my court.  I still haven't the faintest idea what you are talking about.   You have also written that I need "to agree to some of my requests of you that were on some of these threads recently and that in my opinion you sort of slough off or ignored . . .."   Again you are going to have to be a lot more specific, because I have no clue."


OK, David, I will definitely make the effort one more time to find those posts on those other threads that asked you to consider such things as the information access you've demanded of Merion and Wayne and me and PUT THEM BACK ON HERE. I will definitely do that one more time but after that if I get a response from you like the one above---THEN I guarantee you that your requests for information will be ignored and never be forthecoming again. Do you understand this even a little bit and if not why not??

Do you even understand that Merion's true history is not about DAVID MORIARTY's interest and education in learning about what really happened at Merion in 1910-11, it's only about what really did happen back then? And do you even understand and appreciate that it has been essentially undisputed for close to a century for seemingly very good  and factual reasons?

« Last Edit: May 08, 2009, 10:33:10 PM by TEPaul »

Mike_Cirba

Re: My attempt at the Timeline
« Reply #20 on: May 08, 2009, 10:09:50 PM »
David,

What you're failing to understand about the Francis Land Swap is that the "Johnson Farm" included all the land between Ardmore Ave. and College Ave. west of that little block of land owned then by Haverford College that is part of today's driving range.   It's not like they decided to only buy the Johnson Farm land going north halfway up the 15th fairway hill and then stopped 190 yards short of the whole kaboodle, and then had to buy that triangle-shaped plot later after realizing they had an oopsie.   

That road as drawn on the land plan in 1910 was simply the original proposed boundary.   The only reason it shows as a triangle is because someone decided the aesthetic of the road should be long, slow, sweeping curves.   Once Lloyd assumed control of all that property they could move the line or the boundaries as they wished.

Tom Paul,

I'm really trying to explain this to David because I think it might be the key to a lot of his misunderstanding overall.

Do you think my explanation here boils it into soup?

Mike_Cirba

Re: My attempt at the Timeline
« Reply #21 on: May 08, 2009, 10:27:54 PM »
Perhaps this will help.

I've drawn a rough outline of the original Johnson Farm property which was purchased in Blue.

As you can see, they had already purchased all the land going north from Ardmore Avenue up to College Avenue that was part of the Johnson Farm. 

There was no need for a later purchase of the 190x130 triangle north up in the corner that they had somehow forgotten to buy, or that was somehow excluded from the deal.   That triangle was already under their control.   The triangle at that time was illusory anyway, as no road existed....only a moveable imaginary east/west boundary between the golf course and the land to be developed with homes.


« Last Edit: May 08, 2009, 10:31:07 PM by MikeCirba »

TEPaul

Re: My attempt at the Timeline
« Reply #22 on: May 08, 2009, 11:37:43 PM »
Mike:

There is no need to go through any explanation with this future road redelineation or what was part of the Johnson Farm or even what Lloyd owned at the time with me since I'm the one who figured it out in the first place around a year ago. As far as convincing David Moriarty of the truth and significance of it----well that is a whole different subject that has nothing to do with what really hapened at Merion in 1910 and 1911.

T. DeWitt Cuylers Dec. 21 1910 letter could pretty much seal this whole deal but Moriarty ain't gettin' that from me if he's going to continue on the way he's going on these threads.   
« Last Edit: May 08, 2009, 11:51:54 PM by TEPaul »

Mike_Cirba

Re: My attempt at the Timeline
« Reply #23 on: May 08, 2009, 11:42:29 PM »
Mike:

There is no need to go through any explanation with this future road redelineation with me since I'm the one who figured it out in the first place around a year ago. As far as convincing David Moriarty of the truth and significance of it----well that is a whole different subject that has nothing to do with what really hapened at Merion in 1910 and 1911.

Tom,

I know you figured it out.  Didn't I just ask David if he disagreed with YOUR assertion of how the Francis Land Swap took place?  ;)

David was going on and on about how he was confused by the whole thing and how he didn't understand what you were saying so I thought perhaps a picture was worth us trying to put another 10,000 words on here for him. 

In fact, that's why I started this whole thread in the first place.   I thought you had clearly established that the Francis Land Swap never happened before November 1910, and that David at some point had tacitly admitted the same.

I thought we were down to David trying to assert that Macdonald perhaps routed the course on his single day visit in April 1911, or while the Merion Committe visited with him at NGLA.

I didn't realize he was still clinging to his original essay belief that all of this was fait accompli before the property was even purchased....my lord, I thought the producing of the original CB Macdonald letter from July 1910 would have ended that pointless speculation, not to mention about 100 pieces of additional evidence after then!   ::)

« Last Edit: May 08, 2009, 11:48:39 PM by MikeCirba »

DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: My attempt at the Timeline
« Reply #24 on: May 08, 2009, 11:52:35 PM »
OK, David, I will definitely make the effort one more time to find those posts on those other threads that asked you to consider such things as the information access you've demanded of Merion and Wayne and me and PUT THEM BACK ON HERE. I will definitely do that one more time but after that if I get a response from you like the one above---THEN I guarantee you that your requests for information will be ignored and never be forthecoming again. Do you understand this even a little bit and if not why not??

Do you even understand that Merion's true history is not about DAVID MORIARTY's interest and education in learning about what really happened at Merion in 1910-11, it's only about what really did happen back then? And do you even understand and appreciate that it has been essentially undisputed for close to a century for seemingly very good  and factual reasons?

I don't want you to waste your time looking for old posts.  So far as I know I already responded to them.    Why not just come out and tell me what it is want me to say?

What is with these ultimatum's Tom?  What do they have to do with respecting Merion's and MCC's specific instructions regarding their documents and information.   As I said that is the only issue i care about.   

Why are you continuing to conceal this information, Tom?   I can't imagine this is at MCC's or Merion's directive, is it? 

What is it, exactly, that you want from me?   And what do your requests have to do with respecting the specific wishes of Merion and MCC?

____________
Mike. 

How about you?  Can you think of any legitimate reason why this information should be concealed, other than to honor Merion's and MCC's specific requests?

Do you think it ought to depend upon whether I apologize for not understanding TEPaul's theory on the land swap?   

Seriously, I'd like to know?

__________________


« Last Edit: May 08, 2009, 11:54:40 PM 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)