Merion's Early Timeline

[TEPaul]

"Your factual basis is you think they had topo maps, and we haven't found them yet?"


No, they had contour maps of the property in 1911. Wilson himself said so. And we know they were blueprints.

[TEPaul]

"We know they probably existed in June 1910, because it would be typical to survey newly optioned property, and CBM references topo maps in his letter back to the committee.  If found, I supsect the drawing will be dated June 1910 or so, possibly with revsions at the various dates that the property lines changed."


Mr. Jeffrey:


No, we know in June 1910 they did not have topo or contour maps of any proposed property. C.B. Macdonald specifically said so in his June 29th 1910 letter to Horatio Gates Lloyd.

We also know there were no revisions to any property lines on any of the properties relevent to MCC or any land HDC was offering to MCC. They were merely app 4-5 properties which changed ownership between about 1907 and Dec. 19, 1910 (when Lloyd took 161 acres (the 140 acre Johnson farm and the 21 acre Dallas estate) into his own name).

There has been so much discussion on here of truly irrelevent things to this so-called Francis Land Swap it seems like the most important thing of all has been lost in the shuffle and ignored.

Why did Francis make that late night bike ride in the middle of the night to talk to Horatio Gates Lloyd about a land swap?

BECAUSE, Horatio Gates Lloyd OWNED the land, that's why! And when did Lloyd OWN the land? Between Dec. 19. 1910 and July, 21, 1911. Logically, that was the only timespan Lloyd could have given Francis permission for a land swap as he did and then have the top of the quarry drilled off in a day or two.   

[DMoriarty]

Thanks for the thoughts on the green Area B on my map.  I agree that the western boundary should be closer to GHR.  I think I've discovered the error of my ways.  The metes that you and Tom provided were different in the headings.  I was never comfortable with the heading as it related to the boundary.  What I had forgotten is that the headings were magnetic compass readings from almost 100 years.  Magnetic north wanders about over the years.  Hence the difference between yours and Tom's metes.  Through a little research I've determined that magnetic north in PHA has moved about 5*04' west since 1910.  So, the heading of 23*58' from 1910 provided by Tom needs to be adjusted to S29*02E' for todays map.  That'll move the Haverford College boundary to the east from where I had it before.  Hence, also moving the western boundary of the Johnson farm further east to the area where you drew it. 

More precise drawings and acreages to follow as I have time.

I understand what you are saying but I think that surveyors routinely correct for this error, and I think they have for 100's of years, so I wouldn't be so quick to calculate new headings.  Even if you do correct for the headings,  I still think we may have the other problem I mentioned. 

_________________________

Mike Cirba, 

How about it Mike, your theory that the 14th green, 15th tee and 15th fairway were part of the Francis land swap was solely based on information that you no longer find reliable, right?   So we can discard that theory can't we?   

Surely you can answer this simple question.  I really don't want to have to go through all this again down the road, so let's put it to rest.  How about it?

[TEPaul]

" As to 117 acres, that's what I'm trying to get to with my measurements.  Where the heck was a piece of property that fit that acreage.  After that then I might have some theories."


Bryan:

It was on the topographical contour survey maps they were using to route and design the golf course on 117 acres on. If the boundaries hadn't been on that, then why would they've had a problem in the first place on the last five holes and needed to ask permission from Lloyd for a land exchange for land ALREADY PURCHASED and an additional purchase of 3 acres for $7,500 from the board?

That is confirmed by the fact that we know MCC agreed to buy 117 acres from HDC in Nov, 1910 and when they actually did buy the land on July, 21, 1911 they bought 120.1 acres, and not 117 acres.

[TEPaul]

Bryan:

I believe your red area A, particularly that boundary of Haverford College, has got to be wrong. I know Merion did not play #16 for sixteen years with the corner of Haverford College's land touching the left front of the 16th fairway. The fairways back then were wider too.

[TEPaul]

Bryan:

I'll talk to you tomorrow about it but I believe on your Area A and B above you have the entire old Johnson farm boundary on the top of the "L" way too far to the west and all the way from College to Ardmore Ave. I think there are a number of logical explanations for that I've never thought of before this. Among other things I think Golf House Road along #15 runs about down the old Johnson farm boundary and down near Ardmore Ave I think it runs right into a portion of the Taylor estate. I think that's why you got 35 acres when it should be much less, and probably about half that. Also, I think the top of the Johnson farm along College was 466 feet, not 566 feet. I'm also beginning to think that when Francis said: "The idea was this: We had some property west of the present course which did not fit in at all with the golf layout.." that he was talking about swapping land in that block of the old Johnson farm north of Ardmore across from the second green. Don't forget, between Dec, 19, 1910 and July 21, 1911 Lloyd owned that too. There are a couple of permanent landmarks that seem to indicate this such as the creek that crossed Ardmore Ave and on through the second hole and the lower part of the "L"

[Mike_Cirba]

Mike Cirba, 

How about it Mike, your theory that the 14th green, 15th tee and 15th fairway were part of the Francis land swap was solely based on information that you no longer find reliable, right?   So we can discard that theory can't we?   

Surely you can answer this simple question.  I really don't want to have to go through all this again down the road, so let's put it to rest.  How about it?

David,

Absolutely.   The question has already been asked and answered.

In your essay, you portrayed the 1910 Land Plan as a depiction of the separation between the real estate and golf components which were 221 and 117 acres, respectively.

I had no reason to doubt you, and when we determined the land along the approximate road was only 95 or so yards wide at the base of the triangle, I made what would be an otherwise logical assumption, as did everyone else including Bryan who spent a lot of time meticulously trying to fit the present golf course into that land area of the map.

I really wish you had told us all along that the map was erroneous.   It would have saved us a great deal of time and energy.

You stated the road was "approximate", but you never previously stated that you knew all along that it measured differently than 117 acres, as it was portrayed until I asked you that specific question today.

At this point, because the only evidence produced to date has turned out to be fatally flawed to draw any reasonable conclusion from, I have absolutely nothing to honestly base any understanding of the Francis Land Swap from except the timing of the transactions, and Francis's words.

I'm hoping that the land measurements clear up the matter.


p.s.

While we're asking and answering very simple, direct questions, can you tell us what holes on the original course at Merion were based wholly or in part on famous holes overseas?

So far I have the 3rd (redan), 10th, (Alps), and the 15th green portion of the hole (Eden).

We talked about the 6th as a Road Hole, and even though not one other soul in the past 100 years ever mentioned it, let's throw it in there.

Any others?

p.p.s.

Could you cite the source of the early 1912 article that cliaimed most every hole at Merion was based on some great hole overseas?

Sometimes finding the author of these stories proves valuable in validation.

Most of the Philly writers, even the ones who used pen names, were identifiable by how much they were on the inside or not.

So please, let's agree to honestly divulge simple stuff like that, ok?

[TEPaul]

"I really wish you had told us all along that the map was erroneous."


Mike Cirba:

Why would he have said that earlier if you read the following statement from his essay and consider ALL OF IT very carefully? 





"In exchange, Merion received a small section of “land about 130 yards wide by 190 yards long - the present location of the 15th green and the 16th tee.” No doubt Francis was describing the land between the present practice area and Golf House Road, a small triangle of land that perfectly matches Francis’ description. More importantly, the land was acquired while Merion was putting the finishing touches on the routing plan for the course. So the date of the supposed “swap” will allow us to determine when the final touches were being put on the initial routing plan.

Surprisingly, as one can see in the land plan above, Merion acquired this small projection of land as part of the 117-acre parcel designated “Merion Golf Course” in the Plan."



Also, look at the last post or so on the other thread. I think Bryan and everyone else has had the old western boundary of the Johnson farm much too far to the west.

[Mike_Cirba]

"In exchange, Merion received a small section of “land about 130 yards wide by 190 yards long - the present location of the 15th green and the 16th tee.” No doubt Francis was describing the land between the present practice area and Golf House Road, a small triangle of land that perfectly matches Francis’ description. More importantly, the land was acquired while Merion was putting the finishing touches on the routing plan for the course. So the date of the supposed “swap” will allow us to determine when the final touches were being put on the initial routing plan.

Surprisingly, as one can see in the land plan above, Merion acquired this small projection of land as part of the 117-acre parcel designated “Merion Golf Course” in the Plan."

Yeah, that's sort of what we all based a lot of assumptions on...

Guess we're the fools. 

[TEPaul]

Do you notice how Bryan has the old western border of the Johnson farm to the west of Club House Road and Ardmore Ave? I think it was actually east of Club House Road and Ardmore Ave. I think some of Club House Road even goes into what was the old Taylor estate but obviously by the time MCC agreed to buy 117 acres from HDC those boundary lines had been extinguished in principle if not yet actually be deed and on the Nov. 15, 1910 land plan and everything to the west of what would become Club House Road was just HDC land (no more Taylor and Davis properties----except of course what Lloyd would own of the old Johnson farm block across from the second green. I think technically that may've been part of what was swapped for HDC land. At that point the old boundary lines didn't matter anymore and the only thing important was for MCC to get 117 acres that included the top of the "L" to the east of Club House Road. Actually they needed to add three more acres to the top of the "L" from what their topo survey maps were originally giving them.

Again, something was limiting them in those last five holes and it had to be the way Club House Road was drawn on their topo survery maps. The obviousness of this just makes that Nov. 15, 1911 land plan all the more irrelevent. That was just an illustrative example of sort of what a 117 acre area for a golf course would look like.

I think this is all heading back to a particular fact----eg that Wilson's committee really wasn't even formed until around the beginning of January, 1911 and obviously that includes Richard Francis too.

The fact is there never has been a single bit of evidence that Richard Francis was even out there designing or doing anything in 1910.

[Mike_Cirba]

Do you notice how Bryan has the old western border of the Johnson farm to the west of Club House Road and Ardmore Ave? I think it was actually east of Club House Road and Ardmore Ave. I think some of Club House Road even goes into what was the old Taylor estate but obviously by the time MCC agreed to buy 117 acres from HDC those boundary lines had been extinguished in principle if not yet actually be deed and on the Nov. 15, 1910 land plan and everything to the west of what would become Club House Road was just HDC land (no more Taylor and Davis properties----except of course what Lloyd would own of the old Johnson farm block across from the second green. I think technically that may've been part of what was swapped for HDC land. At that point the old boundary lines didn't matter any more and the only think important was for MCC to get 117 acres that included the top of the "L" to the east of Club House Road. Actually the needed to add three more acres to the top of the "L" from what their topo survey maps were originally giving them.

Tom,

I'm all ears on where this one is going.

The other day, after I realized that the Land Plan was toilet tissue, I started wondering about the rectangular block of the Johnson Farm out across the street from the 2nd green, but you guys know this stuff way more than I do.   

Back to the bleachers for me.   But, I sense you're onto something.

[TEPaul]

I think it's about to go in a whole lot of different places which have been under our noses for years and essentially just have to do with what MCC actually said and did and that includes Lloyd and Cuylers.

All this other revisionist speculation that is not based on any fact at all has just got to go out the window as we look at ONLY what they were saying and doing in that overall timeline. THOSE are the REAL FACTS of the creation of Merion East. Moriarty has a funny way of trying to make some of the things HE THINKS and speculates about look like FACTS! They just aren't.

For instance, one of the primary reasons he claims Francis was doing what he did in 1910 is because he saw that triangle on the Nov.15, 1910 land plan and he tried to make us think Francis' idea created that simply because Francis told that story. But Francis never said he was out there in 1910. Nobody ever has said that or thought it except David Moriarty. For God Sakes if that problem was solved before Nov. 15, 1910 then the Merion Cricket Club Golf Association Corporation could've just bought the land themselves after they were registered in the beginning of Dec. 1910. If they had a close to finalized plan, at that point, as Moriarty is trying to imply, they wouldn't have even needed to consider putting Lloyd in the position he was in for the next seven months to move boundary lines around.

Also that Thompson resolution becomes more important because it reflects the ONLY boundary adjustment that was ever considered by MCC between Dec, 19, 1921 and July 21, 1911 in which MCC came out with an "exchange" (swap) for land ALREADY PURCHASED AND three more acres. There sure as hell are no land transfer deeds for any other exchanges or purchases or sales on that entire 117 acre boundary ever executed during that timeframe. If border adjustments had been made during that time there would have to be deeds unless of course the same person controlled both sides of the transfer. That's also probably why Moriarty thought today that some of this sounds like MCC was swapping land with themselves!!   

And then there is another important thing to consider here---eg if the metes and bounds of what Lloyd bought on Dec. 19, 1910 on the bottom of the "L" of Merion East are the same as the entirety of the Dallas Estate AND the Johnson farm property at the bottom of the "L" that MCCGA Corp bought on July, 21, 1911 and the metes and bounds on the eastern boundary of the old Johnson farm at the top of the "L" are the same as the land MCCGA received from Lloyd on July 21, 1911, then there is only one other place on Merion East that exchange and purchase could have happened during that timeframe of Dec. 19, 1910 and July 21, 1911 and that's the western boundary of Merion East at the top of the "L".

And at this point I hope we all realize what the western boundary of Merion East IS at the top of the "L"; it's Golf Fucking House ROAD!!!   

[Bryan Izatt]

Thanks for the thoughts on the green Area B on my map.  I agree that the western boundary should be closer to GHR.  I think I've discovered the error of my ways.  The metes that you and Tom provided were different in the headings.  I was never comfortable with the heading as it related to the boundary.  What I had forgotten is that the headings were magnetic compass readings from almost 100 years.  Magnetic north wanders about over the years.  Hence the difference between yours and Tom's metes.  Through a little research I've determined that magnetic north in PHA has moved about 5*04' west since 1910.  So, the heading of 23*58' from 1910 provided by Tom needs to be adjusted to S29*02E' for todays map.  That'll move the Haverford College boundary to the east from where I had it before.  Hence, also moving the western boundary of the Johnson farm further east to the area where you drew it. 

More precise drawings and acreages to follow as I have time.

I understand what you are saying but I think that surveyors routinely correct for this error, and I think they have for 100's of years, so I wouldn't be so quick to calculate new headings.  Even if you do correct for the headings,  I still think we may have the other problem I mentioned. 


I understand that surveyors would put the magnetic declinations on their work.  The question is, do the metes on the deed that you have and Tom has, indicate any correction or are they just headings?  I am persuaded that correcting for magnetic declination is appropriate in this case if for no other reason than it gets the line from your metes to actually track the property line up there.  The headings you and Tom provided don't.  I, of course, stand to be corrected.
.............................

 

[Bryan Izatt]

" As to 117 acres, that's what I'm trying to get to with my measurements.  Where the heck was a piece of property that fit that acreage.  After that then I might have some theories."


Bryan:

It was on the topographical contour survey maps they were using to route and design the golf course on 117 acres on. If the boundaries hadn't been on that, then why would they've had a problem in the first place on the last five holes and needed to ask permission from Lloyd for a land exchange for land ALREADY PURCHASED and an additional purchase of 3 acres for $7,500 from the board?

That is confirmed by the fact that we know MCC agreed to buy 117 acres from HDC in Nov, 1910 and when they actually did buy the land on July, 21, 1911 they bought 120.1 acres, and not 117 acres.

This would be on the topo map that no one today has ever seen?  What makes you think that a topo map would have GHR accurately on it if it wasn't built until the next year, or later? Or, do you know now when GHR was built. As for your questions, I don't know, that's what we're trying to figure out.  You "know" the answers.  Others of us doubt until we can logically see some facts to support your "answers".  You're reminding me of Sister Aloysius from the play/movie Doubt.  I can see you there in all righteousness saying: "I HAVE MY CERTAINTIES".

[DMoriarty]

I understand that surveyors would put the magnetic declinations on their work.  The question is, do the metes on the deed that you have and Tom has, indicate any correction or are they just headings?  I am persuaded that correcting for magnetic declination is appropriate in this case if for no other reason than it gets the line from your metes to actually track the property line up there.  The headings you and Tom provided don't.  I, of course, stand to be corrected.
.............................

Would they display a correction or would they have corrected them before providing the heading?  I'll look at the documents again.

Also, the coordinates I gave you were for the western border of the college property, not the western border of the Johnson farm property.   How are you determining the headings for the western edge of the johnson farm property? 

[Bryan Izatt]

OK, here's a correction on the location of the Haverford College - Merion boundary based on  Tom and David's metes and corrected for magnetic declination changes.  I think it fits better to the property lines up there.  Sadly, we have no corroborating evidence from the location of any monuments on the ground.

For the record, it's 140 yards from the new boundary location to the inside of GHR.  And it's just over 190 yards to the north boundary of HC property.

On the second picture I have put a red rectangle up at the north end of the property.  Tom has stated that that area of the Johnson farm was 12.77 acres.  We know that the N-S dimension is 983 ft, so the E-W dimension must be 566 feet.  That places the western boundary of the Johnson farm.  I've highlighted in green the area west of GHR that was not part of the golf land transfers.  Its' area is 25+/- acres.

The area of the green-orange-red Francis "triangle" is 4.8+/- acres  

In yellow I've outlined where the other part of the Johnson farm that was not used for golf was.  It's dimensions are based on the 1908 RR map.  No guarantees on that.  Too bad we don't have the metes, Tom. 

The area in orange is the Merion property, again based on the 1908 RR map.  Again, no guarantees, and no metes to verify it. 

[TEPaul]

"On the second picture I have put a red rectangle up at the north end of the property.  Tom has stated that that area of the Johnson farm was 12.77 acres.  We know that the N-S dimension is 983 ft, so the E-W dimension must be 566 feet.  That places the western boundary of the Johnson farm.  I've highlighted in green the area west of GHR that was not part of the golf land transfers.  Its' area is 25+/- acres."


Bryan:

Unfortunately, on the Dec. 19, 1910 deed the first number on the linear dimension at the top of the "L" along College Ave. that brings the metes and bounds back to the starting point of the 140.137 acre Johnson Farm property is one of about half a dozen words that is badly blurred on the deed. I can't tell if it's a four or a five. It actually scales to a 5 on the 1908 PRR plat map but I've seen how inaccurate they can be which isn't surprising as their dimensions are never used for the same purpose as survey maps for property metes and bounds and deeds and titles.

So if it was a 4 now that block up there is about 10.5 acres and not 12.77. I can actually check that number by going back to the Recorder of Deeds and getting the copy of the deed transfered to Rothwell three days before he transfered it to Lloyd et ux. Hopefully on that one that number won't be blurred.

So now you are down from 35 acres to around 25 acres, right Bryan? Call me Sister Aloyious or whatever you want to call me but I will virtually guarantee you by the time all of this is said and done we will be right around that 18 number I've been mentioning. And I didn't even measure a thing. All I did is notice that all the boundaries were the same on those two deeds to a certain defined point to another certain defined point, and then I just took out the acreage that was never used for golf from the old Johnson farm and I got a remainder (138). And when I subtracted the total land MCC bought on July 21, 1911 (120.1) I got a remainder of 18 between two defined points. When you add it all up again it matches the total on the July 21, 1911 deed. I'm sure you can do the same thing on the Dec. 19, 1910 deed against the dimensions of the yet to be built Golf House Road on the Wilson Committee's topo contour maps and the remainder will be 21. That's the difference between the land exchange for land ALREADY PURCHASED AND the additional 3 acres purchased for $7,500 that is reflected in the Thompson Resolution, AND which is in fact the Francis land swap.

The point is on the land adjustments that took place between defined points on those two deeds between two defined times no land got lost between HDC and MCC that's for sure. It never does and that's why my excersice works. And it also explains how the Francis land swap works and when it happened WITHIN a defined timeframe (Dec, 1910 to July 1911).

[Mike_Cirba]

Tom,

Are you thinking the land west of the golf course not used for any purposed included that rectangle over across from the #2 green, as well as that narrow strip along Ardmore Avenue running from that rectange eastward?

[TEPaul]

"Tom,
Are you thinking the land west of the golf course not used for any purposed included that rectangle over across from the #2 green, as well as that narrow strip along Ardmore Avenue running from that rectange eastward?"


It certainly could have because Lloyd owned that too between Dec. 19, 1910 and July 21, 1911. He bought 161 acres (44 more than MCC originally thought they needed (117)).

The real estate prospectus that Lloyd informed the membership of by letter on Nov, 1910 mentioned that HDC had 338 total acres and that MCC had AGREED to buy (not yet bought) 117 of that 338. He mentioned the remaining 221 was going to be a real estate development for sale at $2,500 an acre which of course he recommended MCC members buy into and as later sales stats show many of them did including Hugh I. Wilson.

But when he transfered the land for the course back to MCCGA on July 21, 1911 MCCGA bought 120 acres and the remaining HDC land for residential devoplment was then 218 acres. That left Lloyd with a remainder from his Dec. 19, 1911 purchase of not 44 acres but 41. As the Thompson Resolution shows MCC agreed to buy those three additional acres from the HDC residential component for the going acre residential rate (3 acres X $2,500 per acre=$7,500).

[TEPaul]

Michael Cirba:

Here is another very interesting item.

Obviously as a result of Francis' idea everyone involved understood that MCC would have to do a land exchange for land ALREADY PURCHASED (by Lloyd not MCC) AND buy three additional acres of HDC residential land for $7,500 to solve the problem Francis mentioned of fitting in the last five holes.

That was the Francis land swap idea and solution to the problem with fitting in the last five holes Francis mentioned in his story. If that Thompson Resolution was addressing any other land exchange anywhere else on the course's boundaries then it would have to have been addressed by the board AND recorded by the club with an actual land transfer deed and title with someone else outside the MCC (117 acres) and outside the remaining HDC land (again interestingly the only place the MCC 117 acres and the remaining HDC 221 acres touched one another without at least an existing road between them is completely defined). There is no such land transfer deed or title or mention by the board in this important timeframe (Dec. 19, 1911 to July 21, 1911). Believe me nobody adds or subtracts land in Pennsylvania from their property to some other landowner without having it formally transfered and recorded in the County Recorder of Deeds.

And this can be completely confirmed by the fact that the metes and bounds of the property on the Dec. 19, 1911 deed are identical to the metes and bounds on the July 21, 1911 deed from a certain beginning point to another definite point. The remainder of the land from that second point back to the beginning point was changed. Do you think I really need to explain where that second point to the end was?   


So, after this fix and agreed upon solution with Lloyd (Francis's idea, late night bike ride and agreement from Lloyd) clearly everyone working on the Wilson Committee, at least, would have to have been well aware that the problem on the last five holes had been solved because they'd agreed to a swap AND PURCHASE of three additional acres from 117 to 120 which Lloyd would transfer to MCCGA on July, 21, 1911 AFTER Board approval on April 19, 1911 (The Thompson Resolution).

Isn't it interesting that when Hugh I. Wilson first wrote Russell Oakley on Feb. 1, 1911 he mentioned in his letter that MCC had purchased 117 acres and NOT 120 acres? 

I think this clearly indicates that by Feb. 1, 1911 Richard Francis had not yet had his idea for the land swap or else surely the chairman of the committee would have known that they were now designing on 120 acres and not 117; and he never would have told Oakley that they were still designing on 117 acres! (I have little to no doubt that the essayist will probably try to rationalize this item away TOO by claiming that Hugh I. Wilson was such a novice that he was not even aware of this Francis land swap until someone actually told him about it and that he should put it in his April report to the board to be given by Lesley on April 19, 1911 so the board could actually consider it and approve it!  ).

It looks like the timeframe for when the Francis' land swap idea and agreement could have happened has just narrowed somemore!

[Bryan Izatt]

Tom,

Too bad that you can't read that number off the deed.  Is it just the first number that's blurred?  Is the 66 clear?  Have you tried mapping the metes out around the property, that should tell you what the last number is, unless other metes are obscured too. 

Have you measured the area of what I call the fat L, the rectangular area I have in yellow on my map, west of Merion and north of Ardmore.  It should be an easy calculation since the boundaries are straight.

How does the deed describe the metes for the Cobb's Creek boundary - are there headings and distances for the meanderings of the creek?  Or, does it just say, follow the creek? 

Lastly, do you know if Cobb's Creek was rerouted when the current 11 green and 12 tee were built.  I'm curious about the boundary down there.

[TEPaul]

Tom,
Too bad that you can't read that number off the deed.  Is it just the first number that's blurred?  Is the 66 clear?  Have you tried mapping the metes out around the property, that should tell you what the last number is, unless other metes are obscured too."


No, but as I told you, at some point I could go back to Media and try to find the Rothwell deed three days earlier that was identical to Lloyd's deed since Rothwell's deed to Lloyd was what we call a "paper transfer". Hopefully on the earlier one that long hand number is not blurred. The sixty six is not blurred.   

[JESII]

Tom,

Are you saying the Francis Swap included the 3 acre purchase?

Can you identify the land exchanged as well as the land purchsed through this deal and the Thompson Resolution?

Thanks.

[TEPaul]

"It should be an easy calculation since the boundaries are straight."


Bryan:

Straight on what? On the PRR plat maps? It's taken us weeks to ALL finally figure out that Nov. 15, 1910 PROPOSED land plan is virtually useless to do any exact measurements off of and I've already tried to explain to you that even if those PRR Plat Maps may be a bit more reliable they are definitely not of the reliability for exact measurment purposes of property deed/title metes and bounds that come off of profesional surveys of JUST the property in question.

This is one of the reasons this whole thread has taken so long----eg too many people just keep trying to determine definite measurements off information that is simply not reliable for that purpose.

This is why we should (and probably will) take ALL this information to a surveyor and get them to do the exact measurments. That is what they are in that business for after-all-----to do exact property measurements.

[DMoriarty]

This whole thing is a joke.

TEPaul tells us the acreage of the rectangle, so Bryan spends his time extrapolating, coming up with an accurate depection that is obviously wrong, and of course the information TEPaul gave us was wrong, based on a number he couldn't even read.   Did he mention that when he told us the acreage?  Of course not.  

But really, why would we expect the information to have been correct?   Why would it be? None of what he tells us checks out.  

-  Just like his continued claim that Lloyd controlled all this property.   Merion's own lawyer told us the HDC took title in LLoyd's name.    So Lloyd was NOT in control of this property.  
-  Just like his claim that the meeting minutes establish the date of the Francis land swap, when in fact they establish that the swap to which they referred could NOT have been the swap that Francis described.
-  Just like when he insists that the 1910 land plan was exact, when it is clearly marked as an approximation.  
-  Just like for the past year when he has been claiming that he can Factually refute the my land swap theory, yet he has NOTHING.

It is an absolute joke for us to rely on TEPaul for any sound or accurate information.  He and Wayne or either unwilling or incapable of providing us with accurate information from the records.    Yet they insist on hording the informaition and trying to control the conversation.    

How stupid is this that Bryan is capable of providing us with an overlay of what happened, yet TEPaul is too insecure to even provide him with the directions from a publicly recorded Deed?     Why are we wasting our time humoring this rude, pompous individual?