Merion's Early Timeline

[Bryan Izatt]

David Moriarty:

That three point explanation in Post #731 is a pretty interesting one but I think I see your point. I've got to go to a barbeque for a while but let me consider that answer and that maybe we are all in agreement that the Nov. 15, 1910 PROPOSED land plan is not of much use to us to determine certain things about the creation of Merion perhaps including when Francis' land swap happened.

I'll be back soon.

Let me save you some time on that one.   While I don't think the map was exactly dimensionally accurate, I do think it gives us a good idea of where they were planning on putting the golf course on that date.    I do not think they would have included the corner of land (whether or not to the exact dimensions) unless they were planning on putting something in there.   

Yesterday I made a somewhat similar statement to the one I bolded above, so I'll agree with David's statement.  Before the attacks begin, though, I'd make the point that I'm not inferring that it is the Francis land swap, or that there was a specific plan on what holes would go there or how they would be routed.  But somebody told the map drawer to draw the golf land that way.  I can only infer that that somebody thought some part of the course was going to go up there.  Otherwise why not use it for real estate development.

Questions (not rhetorical) to one and all,

a) What organization retained Pugh and Hubbard, Civil Engineers?

b) When would they have been contracted to do the land plan?

c)  Who would have been the point person in that organization that would have instructed Pugh and Hubbard as to the separation of golf and development land (since it was assuredly not left to the whimsy of the Engineers to decide)?

d) Would the point person likely have been driven by the needs of the championship golf course, or the needs of the real estate development?

[TEPaul]

"I know that this question will be an exercise in futility, as I'm going to be told to go look somewhere else for this information, but after twenty-some pages of this discussion, I find myself not really knowing what any of the principals on this thread are really trying to prove, or state, or declaim, or whatever word you want to use. Would it, at this point, be too much to ask for David, Brian, Tom, and Mike, to state their positions, their theories, etc? David, I'm trying to follow this, truly, but at this point, when you say that someone is ridiculing your theories, on some level I honestly don't know what you mean. If no one wants to take the time, then fine. But perhaps if someone could point me to a post or a page where I can read this information, or point me in the right direction, I'd appreciate it.



Kirk:

It would be no problem at all for me to state to you my position on this thread or any other like it:


It is to state, declaim, prove or any other concept like that, that David Moriaty's essay ON HERE is wholly and HISTORICALLY WRONG and INACCURATE!

Would you like me to elaborate? 
 
 
 
 

[Bryan Izatt]

Mike,

Most things in life are shades of gray.  The truth and usefulness of the 1910 land plan no doubt falls somewhere between a dimensionally correct factual plan and a piece of toilet paper.  It has some merit.  It is not at either extreme.

[DMoriarty]

Tom, HDC took title in Lloyd's name.  That is how Cuylers described it, or have you thrown his words out as well?   If you have FACTS to the contrary, I'd like to see them.

As for your ability or inability to read metes and bounds, the facts speak for themselves.   Earlier you speculated that the directions I had provided to Bryan from the 1928 documents were incorrect.   You've got the same documents, so either you were just making this garbage up, or you couldn't figure out how to confirm my directions.   

Also Tom, last time you were so sure of yourself about the meaning of a conveyance, you were telling me that you had definitive proof that MCC purchased the land for the course and a bunch of surrounding property in the summer of  1909.  Funny thing, the conveyance did not involve MCC or even the land for the golf course.   

So Tom, either you have been intentionally misrepresenting these documents to all of us, or you don't understand them.    I was trying to give you the benefit of the doubt, but if you say you understood them all along then I'll go with the first explanation. 

As for when and why I do or don't practice law, I guarantee you that you don't know shit about it, nor is there anything torrid to know.   But you are a classy guy to try and get another nasty rumor started about me.   I'll file it with the other laughable rumors you guys have tried to spread.   

You guys sure are a classy bunch, I've learned that much.

[DMoriarty]

Bryan,

I have a theory on what happened with that map, but it is partially speculation on my part, and I don't know that opening that can of worms would accomplish much positive at this point.

[Bryan Izatt]

"If you do get one, will you provide the metes so that we can visualize the location of the land transfer. In the meantime, will you provide the metes for the other land transfer in question, that you do have."

Bryan:

If do provide the metes and bounds of any deeds we may have would you mind PROVIDING to our satisfication what you THINK you can do with the information on them? Hopefully we can question you on what you think you might SPECIFICALLY accomplish with that information.  This reminds me of Halloween, back in the day, when I was asked to sing for my candies.  Do you still make the children sing for their candies on Halloween?    What do I think I'll do with the metes?  I'd plot them on today's aerials to visualize the property boundaries in the land transfers and to allow me to accurately measure the acreage of various subplots in the overall acreage. Satisfied?  Getting the metes for the Haverford College Boundary allowed us to all conclude that the 1910 Land Plan was dimensionally inaccurate.  What will result from knowing these metes I can't say yet, because I don't know.  Withholding publicly available information doesn't seem to me to be a good strategy for winning the hearts and minds of the GCA men and women in this debate.

If Moriarty really wants to know WHY some of us here like Wayne and I won't supply him with information, all he has to do is tell us on here that he doesn't mind us telling the TRUTH of why we aren't supplying information to him and probably never will!  A reminder; I am not David Moriarty. Nor are the rest of the people, however few or many, that are following this thread

[Bryan Izatt]

Kirk,

I really have no theories yet.  I'm still trying to figure out the "facts".  Sadly the other protagonists confuse their theories/conjecture/speculation for fact.  Stay tuned.  We should be through this in another 5 or 10 years.   

[TEPaul]

"This reminds me of Halloween, back in the day, when I was asked to sing for my candies.  Do you still make the children sing for their candies on Halloween?    What do I think I'll do with the metes?  I'd plot them on today's aerials to visualize the property boundaries in the land transfers and to allow me to accurately measure the acreage of various subplots in the overall acreage. Satisfied?  Getting the metes for the Haverford College Boundary allowed us to all conclude that the 1910 Land Plan was dimensionally inaccurate.  What will result from knowing these metes I can't say yet, because I don't know.  Withholding publicly available information doesn't seem to me to be a good strategy for winning the hearts and minds of the GCA men and women in this debate."


Bryan Izatt:

Let's just say that answer above doesn't exactly impress!

If you want all the metes and bounds of all the Merion Deeds throughout time why don't I just supply you with the Recorder of Deeds in Media Pennsylvania? Call them, send them the appropriate postage, and I'm pretty sure you can have what you wish as I think that stuff is all in the public domain.

Failing THAT are you going to call me an ASS too as Moriarty did today for failing to supply this information to him?  

[Bryan Izatt]

"This reminds me of Halloween, back in the day, when I was asked to sing for my candies.  Do you still make the children sing for their candies on Halloween?    What do I think I'll do with the metes?  I'd plot them on today's aerials to visualize the property boundaries in the land transfers and to allow me to accurately measure the acreage of various subplots in the overall acreage. Satisfied?  Getting the metes for the Haverford College Boundary allowed us to all conclude that the 1910 Land Plan was dimensionally inaccurate.  What will result from knowing these metes I can't say yet, because I don't know.  Withholding publicly available information doesn't seem to me to be a good strategy for winning the hearts and minds of the GCA men and women in this debate."


Bryan Izatt:

Let's just say that answer above doesn't exactly impress!

If you want all the metes and bounds of all the Merion Deeds throughout time why don't I just supply you with the Recorder of Deeds in Media Pennsylvania? Call them, send them the appropriate postage, and I'm pretty sure you can have what you wish as I think that stuff is all in the public domain.

Failing THAT are you going to call me an ASS too as Moriarty did today for failing to supply this information to him?  

This thread just hit the bottom.  I'm disgusted that my posts are mixed in with this crap.  Thanks Tom, for killing the interest.  Keep your metes, maps and deeds.

[TEPaul]

I agree with you Mike Cirba. I'm done here too. In the meantime how ironic is it really that perhaps the most valuable single "asset" to do with the early architectural history of Merion East just may be about to be run down. And who figured out how to run it down? The guy who found most everything else important to the course's architectural history in the first place----Merion's own architectural historian, WayneM! If we find it and anyone on here wants to see it and analyze it they should probably do what everyone on here should've done in the first place---make arrangements with Merion yourselves.

[JESII]

"2) LLoyd already owned the land through HDC, they could have blasted away any time they wanted once they determined this is where the holes were going...and the fact that LLoyd was the key to approving the idea further supports an earlier timing...prior to the December transfer to LLoyd/MCCGC from LLoyd/HDC..."


Sully:

Lloyd did NOT own the land untill Dec, 21, 1911 and in case you're as dense as Moriarty seems to be THAT date that lloyd actually owned the land (Dec. 19, 1910)  is AFTER Nov, 15, 1910. That essentially means one generally does NOT blast the top off of a quarry ONE DOES NOT ACTUALLY OWN!!!

Tom,

I was under the assumption that HDC owned the Johnson farm well before December 1910...is this correct?

I was also told, by you, that LLoyd recapitalized HDC to the tune of approximately $300,000 early on...is this still a fact? When did he do that? Surely the paperwork that told you he did it had a date on it...

I am looking for one reason why this entire project wasn't engineered through HGL from 1909 on but through veiled entities and individuals so as not to be too transparent and haven't found one yet.

This is the basis for all of my curiosities on here that make it, among other things, preposterous for me to believe that in November 1910 the Site Committee presented a proposal to the membership seeking funds for 117 acres of difficult to deal with land if they didn't know pretty well where they were going to put the golf holes...


My theory: Pure speculation, which should fit in good here, but I'm curious if it can be disproven.

1) Lloyd takes the reins on behalf of Merion Cricket, in an intentionally informal/covert effort to find land for a new golf course.
2) Lloyd works with a syndicate of developers on a business plan which will identify a large plot of land usable for golf and homes.
3) The developers identify the ~340 acres being discussed and purchase, or option it, in one or several transactions and identify a desired return on investment.
4) Lloyd identifies the total price the golf club will be able to pay for its golf course before determining the amount of land needed.
5) Once the course boundaries are pretty well identified, they measure the land to 117 acres and divide out the per acre price...which dictates the per acre price for the developers land so they can make their profit.
6) The other individuals involved in the Site search and Contruction committees saw the land the golf course used for many months in advance of the November 15 meeting, the December 19 transfer to MCCGC and especially the formal establishment of the "Construction Committee"...or whatever its name was.

It is perfectly reasonable to go through the legal hoops they did, it is perfectly unreasonable, in my opinion to assume that is all that happened as well as exactly when it all happened.

Tom and Mike,

You have chastised me, among others for timing the Francis Land Swap prior to 11/15/1910 because they didn't own the land yet and who would blast up a quarry they didn't own? He said the Quarryman was up there..."within a couple of days"...well Tom, if you're going to tell me the Thompson resolution was the Francis Land Swap and they didn't yet have approval from the club and we are going to lay out this timeline on facts alone then we have to assume the board had not yet approved the swap and so they certainly wouldn't have wasted their time and money blasting away if they might not get approval.

Anyway, if you all are going to choose to end th econversation as opposed to acting like adults I guess that's fine...just unfortunate.

[TEPaul]

Sully:

I believe your post #786 is a very fine sort of "abstract" of the events going on around Merion Ardmore in 1910 and 1911, particularly as it relates to Lloyd.

As for Horatio Gates Lloyd's part in all of it, I can only tell you the facts I know about that which I pretty much already have on these Merion threads. I'm not withholding anything at all about him and what-all he did there from his involvement with MCC, HDC and certainly his own purchase at that time of what would become the impressive 75 acre estate ALLGATES right on the border of all this on Cooperstown Rd.

What is my own feeling about his part in all of that? I feel his fingerprints were pretty much everywhere. It is complete speculation on my part, for sure, but I feel if for whatever their reasons MCC did not approve of the move to Ardmore, Lloyd probably would've engineered some club there anyway. That's how involved I think he was back then around that site.

As far as precisely WHEN MCC began to seriously develop a golf course layout on that site, it's just very hard to know. What we do know now (from some material from MCC within the last year) is that it really does look like Wilson's committee that included Lloyd, Griscom, Francis and Toulmin was basically formed or at least BEGAN to layout courses and plans around January 1911 even if there is no recording of a formal committee to that effect in the records. I think the committee was simply what we call an "Ad Hoc" committee that was basically working under either the permanent Golf Committee that Lesley chaired or else this committee that was referred to in meeting minutes in Nov. 1910 called The Committee on New Golf Grounds. That may've been what Wilson came to be chairman of even if Lloyd was recorded as the chairman of it in that Nov. 1910 meeting but that may've just been because he happened to be at that meeting as he was on the board of governors too.

That the Wilson Committee was EVER intended by MCC to be merely "constructors" of a plan from someone else is just not the case at all----not even close, and again that material found within the last year at MCC ("the Wilson Committee report to the April 19, 1911 board meeting) proves that in spades, in my opinion. There really just isn't any way of looking at it otherwise, no matter how anyone parses it or analyzes it. They were charged with routing and designing the golf course first, and they reported that in that Wilson Committee report, and then overseeing the building of it following that. As we know that went on for a few more years at least with that particular committee. And then they did it again with the West course.

Again, back to Lloyd and his involvment. I think he was all over everything but I do think in the latter half of 1910 essentially he and MCC felt that they had enough good land to design a good course. And for that they had depended upon Macdonald/Whigam to tell them so or not. The board records and committee report say this specifically! In Macdonald's June 29, 1910 letter to Lloyd reviewing his visit he tells Lloyd just that about the site and that's about all. He literally tells them "The most difficult problem YOU have to contend with is to get in eighteen holes that will be first class in the acreage YOU propose buying." Macdonald did not say the problem he or Whigam had to contend with, he said the problem THEY had to contend with! And then Macdonald mentioned he could tell them no more without a contour map on hand. Macdonald/Whigam would not be involved at all again until that Wilson Committee visit to NGLA in early March, 1911 and then their second and final site visit on April 6, 1911. That was the extent of Macdonald/Whigam's involvement with MCC and their advise and help was noted by Lloyd at the board level. Essentially he asked the board to note that they had helped MCC feel comfortable that the site was suitable for THEM (MCC) to design and built a golf course on. This is not speculation on my part, this is what the actuall MCC record show.

So, I think they felt comfortable enough with the land they were looking at to buy and then they just started designing the course and holes of it in the beginning of 1911 as the records of MCC I mentioned show.

And if there needed to be some boundary adjustment for whatever reason the fascinating thing is we have the proof that Lloyd put himself in the position to do precisely that and of course that opportunity did come along for him when Francis came to him with his idea for a land swap which we believe was well into the Wilson Committee's designing process probably in the early spring of 1911 but neither Francis or the MCC records mentions precisely when. However, the MCC board records and committee report do not ever mention a thing about Francis being out there before he was actually appointed to the committee he served on. There is absolutely no evidence anywhere to indicate that. Nothing.

You asked if they needed board approval to blow the top off that quarry. That's a good question and we have nothing at all that addresses that but personally I doubt it, as MCC charged them with designing a course and I see no evidence at all that the Board required the Wilson Committee to come to THEM for any and every design decision they needed to make out there.

I hope that helps to answer your questions. They had to start designing at some point and it looks like the actual factual records of MCC are telling us when that time was.

[Ran Morrissett]

Mike offers good advice and this acrimonious thread will be deleted within two hours. In the future, for those that get stuck on a Tom and David thread, please realize that there is a great chance that it will lead nowhere and ultimately be deleted. You might elect to spend your time accordingly.

 

[TEPaul]

Ran:

If this thread gets totally deleted I sure hope it will be saved somewhere. My God a lot of time and effort went into the information on this thread. Perhaps the acrimonous posts can be removed from it by those who posted them but to see all this go is really sad to me.

Some of us feel very strongly that the essay on here "The Missing Faces of Merion" really does need to be challenged and this is certainly one of the places to do it or would you prefer to have just a sort of "counterpoint" In My Opinion piece along side it?

[DMoriarty]

Ran,

It's not the thread that has to go, it is Tom Paul.  He knows no bounds of common courtesy, decency, or civility, and attacks and berates anyone who dares disagree with him.  I mean for God's sake the man just falsely accused me of being involved in a murder, and leaving the practice of law under the threat of disbarment.  We know how far he will go in his quest to discredit me, but my question for you is, why on earth do you put up with it?  Why after all these years do you allow it to continue?  

You have a good thing going here, and have taken pains to insulate this sight from outside advertisers and forces that may unduly influence the site, but then you have completely ceded all Philadelphia-related topics to these creeps, and they bully and smear anyone who tries to honestly discuss anything that they might have an interest in.  Why should anyone have to pay this kind of price just to simply discuss a golf course?  Why the hell do you put up with it?     As it is, our only choice is to stay silent or face this kind of garbage.   That is not a reasonable choice on a website that is supposed to be about open and frank commentary on golf course design.

You encouraged me to post my piece on Merion, and I always have and always will accept criticism and counterpoint to the facts and analysis presented.  But they have few facts and little reasonable analysis; just insults, attacks, and character assassination.    I left the site for a number of months but the character assassination continued without me, both on and off the website.   So what is up Ran?  Is this a place to openly and frankly discuss architecture?  Or are you going to let an overgrown child run your website like a third grade bully runs a playground?      

In an ideal world we would behave like gentlemen, and our friends and colleagues wouldn't put up with this nonsense.  But with TEPaul it is different.  People either are beholden to him, or afraid of him, or want absolutely nothing to do with him, and everyone - friends and enemies - knows better than to cross him.   He is in control, not you, and that is not the way it should be.

By the way, there were moments when this conversation almost became productive, most notably when TEPaul had claimed he was canceling his registration and was not participating.  Unfortunately that did not last.  

[DMoriarty]

What Tom did yesterday was uncalled for and wrong, which is why I called for this thread to be pulled.

So are your continued insults and belittling of everyone who doesn't agree with you.   

"Creeps"??   Who else might you be referring to?

This thread was my attempt at civil dialogue and counter-balance to your essay.

Once again, we ALL share the blame for the trainwreck it's become.   

The creeps are Tom Paul and Wayne, who is obviously pulling his strings, and who has his own history of unbelievably offensive behavior relating to these issues.

We don't all share the blame.   I've tried to address your arguments and understanding of the facts, and have done the same with everyone else.   I have tried to be patient but it has become very, very, frustrating and the frustration shows I am sure, but I'd say that at this point the frustration is justified.  But to put my frustrated attempts at moving the conversation in the same boat with this garbage is beyond the pale.   Where have I stooped to this level?  Where are these insults?   

[Mike_Cirba]

David,

I don't want to get into he said/she said.     

ALL of us are seemingly way to personally invested into diametrically opposing camps for any productive dialogue to take place, and that's ultimately the genesis for the frustration, increasingly intermperate language, and last night's explosion.

It's a shame, because I think both sides being unwilling to cede an inch means we all lose.

[Rich Goodale]

Mike

How does an inch (ceded or otherwise) relate to a mete and/or a bound?

Others

Look in the mirror.  If you really think you are blameless, remember what Swift said:

"Satire is a mirror in which one sees everybody but themselves."

Ran

Thanks for shutting this thread down.  Please use the lessons learned on this thread to improve the the quality of discourse here, which has declined precipitously over the past few months, and even the past few years.  One simple step might work wonders--don't let people edit any of their posts, as it used to be on this site.  It's far too easy to post crap and/or bile if you know that you can delete your vitriol at will.  Please hold us to a higher standard, as you once did.

Rich

[TEPaul]

Take it easy boys. Take it easy! Do you really feel a bunch of post mortems are necessary at this point?

For my part with some of the insults on these threads, I'm sorry; it won't happen again. I'm sorry to the people on here and the website. Of course our passions can run high about some of the courses we really love and know so well around here, like Merion. We always felt, but only AFTER reading that essay that something like that should never have gotten on here and I don't believe our feelings on that will ever change, and either will Merion's. It is obviously pretty hard to explain to many on here who don't know Merion particularly well just how fallacious that essay is. The entire thing just took a tact that has almost no basis in fact or reality but that's hard for people who don't know Merion or any other club well to pick up on apparently.

Merion is dedicated to the truth of its history----all of it----and so are we who have helped work on that history. We have nothing at all about its architect or architectural history to hide---nothing. It's really just become a matter of how anyone goes about trying to get it. If any good came out of these Merion/Macdonald threads and that essay it was to confirm and then reconfirm something that never was a question in the first place----That Hugh I. Wilson was and deserves to be given the credit as its primary architect.

As for me, its raining like hell out there right now but I'm off to The Recorder of Deeds in Media, Pa, the County Seat of Delaware county in which Merion GC resides. I'm going to get that Dec. 19, 1910 deed when Horatio Gates Lloyd took 161 acres that would include all of Merion East golf course and more into his own name. I think it will tell me and Merion some things and apparently Merion has never actually had it in their archives. Now they will.

And Wayne, the other creep?! He and I will be talking to Yerkes & Co; at the moment their treasurer is searching the company's records to see if they actually have one of those topographical survey maps of Merion East (and West) that Hugh and his committee used back then in perhaps late 1910 but certainly in early 1911 to layout courses and plans of the golf course on. At the very least it could give us PRE-CONSTRUCTION contour lines of the place before they designed and built it so nutcases like us can actually figure out what was natural and what they actually made back then.

How cool would that be? It's a remarkable club and a remarkable golf course and it will still be there long after all our shreeking has fallen into silence.

Thanks Hugh I. Wilson; you weren't amongst us long enough, that's for sure, and Good Night, Mrs. Callabash, wherever you are.

[Bryan Izatt]

Ran,

I know the last thing that you want is more advice on how to run your site, but I too would hate to lose the informative parts of this thread.  Could I suggest an approach based on our (Canadian) national game - give them both "five for fighting".  Suspend their posting privileges for 5 hours, or 5 days, or 5 weeks.  Suggest anger management counseling.  And, notify them of escalating suspensions for relapses into the boorish behaviour.

[DMoriarty]

We always felt, but only AFTER reading that essay that something like that should never have gotten on here and I don't believe our feelings on that will ever change, and either will Merion's.  It is obviously pretty hard to explain to many on here who don't know Merion particularly well just how fallacious that essay is. The entire thing just took a tact that has almost no basis in fact or reality but that's hard for people who don't know Merion or any other club well to pick up on apparently.

This is the problem here, in a nutshell.  In these guys' minds, my essay should have never been allowed to see the light of day, and there should be no conversation about Merion's history.   Their problem is that I have dared to try and discuss Merion at all.   They think they own Merion's history; only they can truly understand it; and the truth is for them and them alone to decide.   

Never mind that my Essay is by far the most accurate and most complete account ever brought to light of the the early history of the creation of Merion East.  Never mind that my essay relied on numerous sources that had never before seen the light of day.   Never mind that I remain willing to change or correct any actual errors, omissions, and/or misunderstandings, provided that there is a factual basis for doing so.  Never mind that both Wayne and Tom demanded that I post my essay.    The problem in their minds has nothing to do with truth or accuracy or facts.  It iis that I wrote the Essay, and not Wayne, not Tom, not Merion.   It is about power and control.  Big surprise. 

They decide the "truth" for Merion, and any attempts at conversation will be beaten down.  As TEPaul said, their feelings about my Essay will never change.    So what do facts matter when your mind is already made up?

So much for an open and frank discussion of golf course design.

Merion is dedicated to the truth of its history----all of it----and so are we who have helped work on that history. We have nothing at all about its architect or architectural history to hide---nothing.

I don't doubt this about Merion, but if the two of you had nothing to hide you would back up your absurd claims with facts, so that they can be thoroughly vetted and challenged, and so that I could defend myself against your insults and attacks.   

[Mike_Cirba]

Mike, how long are you going to persist with this goofy talk about the majority of the Merion members not being able to make a carry to the front of the green that ranges from (a) 110 yards if you snuggle right up to the quarry to (b) about 140 yards, assuming you can hit a 220 yard drive from the middle of the 16th tee (and why would a short hitter play from tees any further back than that)?

This theory that the alternate route around the quarry was necessary for a majority of the members is complete nonsense, assuming you're still sticking to the notion that the final 5 holes had to be world-class championship holes.  I don't think back then it was too much to ask for a 110-140 yard carry on a world class golf hole, even back then.   

Shivas,

The hole was listed as 433 yards.

In an age of hickory and gutta percha, how many club players could carry their second shot over 400 yards.

Much of the yardage players of that era gained was due to limited irrigation and the run of the ball.

Did you read this descrption of the 16th prior to posting and calling the fact that it's a strategic hole with TWO options for the approach shot "goofy" and "nonsense"??

[Mike_Cirba]

Who owned or was going to own the road?  Why would Merion not want their property to have direct ingress and egress to College Avenue, particularly since (as you pointed out) one of the railroad stations was at (I believe you said "by") College Avenue?

Lloyd, HDC, and the Merion Membership, as well as whoever bought shares in HDC, which was first offered to members.

There was no reason for the golf course to extend to College Avenue as it does on that 1910 Land Plan..HDC with Lloyd already controlled all the land and thus Merion by definition already had ingress and egress.

The approximate road goes to College Avenue and all that land is marked as golf course on that 1910 "Land Plan" simply because a slow, curving, equidistant, "approxmiate" line was drawn up through the northern part of the Johnson Farm, which itself always ran all the way to College Avenue.

Why are we trying to turn this preliminary map into something it clearly wasn't?

Are you actually saying that Merion needed to identify, purchase, and then set aside  acreage of 137 yards of wasted real estate for fear they couldn't get to the tracks?

[Mike_Cirba]

Shivas,

Are you telling us that HG Lloyd, one of the richest men in the world, and the clear driver behind the whole shebang couldn't afford any of this?

I'm not sure your post makes sense.   I'm asking why they would hire and pay Pugh and Hubbard, Land Surveyors to draw them an APPROXIMATE map of the property AFTER Merion member Richard Francis supposedly surveyed the whole thing for free as part of routing the golf course prior to November 1910?

[JESII]

Mike,

What makes you think Francis surveyed the whole thing?