Merion's Early Timeline

[DMoriarty]

"Tom,

Is it possible that Lloyd owned HDC from the beginning of HDC's corporate establishment?"



Sully:

In my opinion, no it is not; not at all. We know now exactly who the owners were and their percentages and we know who the board of directors were too. I think you asked me something about the HDC recapitalization in 1910. I'll get to that a bit later.

I agree with Tom.   And I know they know this information because I am the one who gave it to them.

[Mike_Cirba]

David,

Once again, you are the disengenuous one here.

The fact that Tillinghast obviously had in depth conversations directly with Mac right before construction began yet never said anything about a design role for Mac and instead cited Wilson, both when the course opened and again, quite unequivocally years later when Merion hosted its first US Open speaks volumes.

He saw the plans for the course in April 1911 just prior to construction and saw the course in Sept 1912 when it opened.

His personal conversations with Macdonald about Merion are solid proof that no one back then, including Mac, were claiming any design credit for anyone but Wilson and committee.

[DMoriarty]

Jim,

Here is the information, from a couple of old posts of mine, along with a bit of old discussion about how Wayne and Tom duped you and a number of other people into originally thinking that H.G. Lloyd and Merion were calling the shots all along;  they claimed an old deed showed that Merion purchased and controlled the land in 1909, when in fact it did no such thing.

I've colored the answer to your question in green without changing the content of either post, except to correct a typo: March 15, 1910 changed to March 15, 1911, in the last line of the first post.

Wayne and I did not lie about anything.

Of course you did.   You claimed that the deed conclusively established that that Merion purchase the property in June in 1909.    This was a lie.  There is no way that any reasonable person could honestly claim that the deed conclusively established that Merion purchased the property on this date. 
   
Not only that, but you concealed your lie by refusing to answer my questions about the transaction or to allow me to review the document.   SAME AS YOU ARE DOING NOW.   REFUSING TO ANSWER QUESTIONS ABOUT THE SOURCES AND CONCEALING THE SOURCES FROM REVIEW. 

If you want to pretend it was not a lie, that is up to you.  But lie or not, your statement had absolutely NO BASIS IN THE HISTORICAL RECORD, YOU KNEW IT, SO YOU HID THE HISTORICAL RECORD.

You claim that the deed conclusively proved that MERION PURCHASED the GOLF COURSE property in 1909. 

1.  MERION was not at all involved in the transaction.
2.  The transaction did not at all involve the GOLF COURSE PROPERTY.
3.  The deed does not even document a PURCHASE for value but a CONVEYANCE for nominal consideration of one dollar.

In other words, EVERY PART OF YOUR REPRESENTATION WAS ENTIRELY FALSE.

Your explanations, and post hoc rationalizations do not alter this or even address it.  YOU WOULDN'T EXPLAIN OR ADDRESS YOUR ASSUMPTIONS AT THE TIME YOU MADE THEM, SO YOU OUGHT NOT TO HIDE BEHIND YOUR EXPLANATIONS NOW. 

It doesn't matter who you guys guessed might have been involved, or what land you guys guessed might have been sold, or what you guys didn't even bother to check up on your guesses before your reached your conclusions, because:
       1.  YOUR ASSUMPTIONS WERE NOT BASED ON ANY REASONABLE INTERPRETATION OF THE DOCUMENT
       2.  YOU GUYS REFUSED TO EVEN TELL US THAT YOU WERE JUST GUESSING.
       3.  YOU GUYS REFUSED TO LET US REVIEW THE DOCUMENTS OR TO LET US REVIEW OR EVEN QUESTION THE DOCUMENTS.

As historic research goes, it does not get much more pathetic than this.   

. . . the Haverford Development Company (HDC) as the party of the third part, which we thought may've been Lloyd and his MCC investors beginning to buy into this land using HDC as their vehicle.

THIS is your justification for claiming that the deed conclusively proved Merion bought the property?   I stand corrected.  It does get more pathetic.

Still today we do not know who it was who first formed HDC or when.

This too is is absolutely pathetic.  You had no basis for concluding as you did without first figuring it out.   And there are many ways to figure it out, and all readily available to you.    Here, let me help you.  Again.

Haverford Development Company was incorporated on June 14, 1909.  $100,000 par value.

Subscribers:
J. E. Tatnall (68 shares)
J. R. Connell (66 shares)
E. W. Nicholson (66 shares)

Board Members

J. Boyd
L. J. Kolb
J. R. Connell
E. W. Nicholson
A. M Butler
T. R. Patton

What else would you like to know about Haverford Development Company? 

On December 1, 1910  they were planning to  increase their capital stock from $100,000 to $300,000.   Surely even you can figure out why.

By March 15, 1911 they had increased their capital stock to about $243,000. 

Philadelphia and Ardmore Land Company incorporated in on or about February 18, 1907, 

Subscribers  were George and Joseph Connell and John Dick.  I believe George eventually became Mayor, and Joseph was the developer responsible for Oakmont and other Philadelphia suburbs. 

My point is that this research is not rocket science.   It takes less time than you spend typing one post.   Yet you guys just guess at things instead of looking them up.   Pathetic.

Funny how when TEPaul lectures us on all this stuff he forgets to mention who figured it all out for them. 

One more think, Jim,   I know Tom claims that TEPaul bought the land and controlled it from Dec. 19, 1910, but this too is misleading.   He was holding the land in his name for the Haverford Development Company, and there is no proof that he controlled the HDC.  (Even if he did, others had interests and he could not do whatever he wanted with this land. 

[TEPaul]

"And I know they know this information because I am the one who gave it to them."


David Moriarty:

Why in the world do you keep saying things like that? I don't know about Wayne but I know you never gave me a single thing to do with Merion, and I'm not going to give you a single thing to do with Merion either. This kind of thing is a two way street and you're about the furthest thing from that imaginable! I believe I have everything on my computer from Merion that's been copied and digitalized and not a bit of it came from you, that's for damn sure. So why do you keep saying crap like that? Does it make you feel better about yourself somehow? If that's the case then go for it, you clearly need it.

[DMoriarty]

Jim,

I hate to keep bringing these kinds of things up, as they  shouldn't be necessary, but TEPaul has this habit of forgetting all his own disproven theories and pretending like he figured this stuff out all by himself.

Still today we do not know who it was who first formed HDC or when.

This too is is absolutely pathetic.  You had no basis for concluding as you did without first figuring it out.   And there are many ways to figure it out, and all readily available to you.    Here, let me help you.  Again.

Haverford Development Company was incorporated on June 14, 1909.  $100,000 par value.

Subscribers:
J. E. Tatnall (68 shares)
J. R. Connell (66 shares)
E. W. Nicholson (66 shares)

Board Members

J. Boyd
L. J. Kolb
J. R. Connell
E. W. Nicholson
A. M Butler
T. R. Patton

What else would you like to know about Haverford Development Company? 

On December 1, 1910  they were planning to  increase their capital stock from $100,000 to $300,000.   Surely even you can figure out why.

By March 15, 1911 they had increased their capital stock to about $243,000. 

See what I mean?

[TEPaul]

Sully:

When we first got involved in this phase of Merion back then I did say I thought Lloyd was involved with HDC back in 1909. I said on here I was wrong about that, probably a couple of times but Moriarty never acknowledges that and now he's saying we lied about it. We didn't lie about anything, we simply made a mistake and then admitted it---again, a couple of times and that's a whole lot more than Moriarty has ever been capable of, that's for sure. Frankly I practically went blind trying to read that HDC June 1909 document.

I admit, I didn't know much at all about that phase of Merion back that early because we were always researching Flynn and he wasn't there back then. But I have it all now and I understand it all now and Moriarty never did have it and I don't think he ever will. Even if he did, what difference would it make? He would just ignore, dismiss or rationalize away anything anyone back then said that didn't support his preposterous essay. For his treatment on Alan Wilson's accounts Moriarty should be banned from ever having another essay put on here it's so disrespectful and arrogantly transparent in the way he accused Alan of virtually inaccurately eulogizing his brother in assigning him more credit than he deserved. For God's sake, every member of Wilson's committee who served with him told Alan that in the main Hugh was responsible for the East and West course and that pompous ass Moriarty has the nerve to question Alan Wilson's word and the word of everyone else on Wilson's committee??? Not in my book he doesn't and if he does and he did on here I think he should suffer every consequence leveled at him.

The thing that actually gives me the most comfort in all this is there is no question in my mind if Charles Blair Macdonald could see the things Moriarty has been writing on here and defending past the point of being defensible he would tell Moriarty himself he's totally full of shit. The guy knows about as much about those people, what they did and what went on out there in a project like that or even any other project at any time as a tadpol does. And why would he know as he's had about zero experience himself!

[DMoriarty]

Jim,

I'm trying not to pay much attention to TEPaul's posts, so if he ever bothers to post anything relevant or anything that can be factually verified, will you do me a favor and let me know?

Thanks?

[TEPaul]

Moriarty:

Post #1133???

Why don't you grow up? You are no different than some petulant child!!

"I found it FIRST Mommy, I FOUND IT FIRST MOMMY!! I should get the CREDIT MOMMY!!!"


Jeessus Christ what a total waste of time you've become on here. It's pathetic; even I'm starting to feel bad for you and believe me that definitely takes a whole lot!  

[DMoriarty]

Jim, 

Isn't it funny how Tom can insist over and over how they at Merion have always known everything and how he and Wayne figured all this out and never learned a thing from me, yet when proven wrong they accuse me of being overly concerned about credit?   Ironic since the only reason we are in this battle is that they are to proud to listen to anyone else or to admit that someone else could figure something out that they proved incapable of figuring.

I do find these discussions of credit utterly tasteless.   I wouldn't give a damn about credit but some pompous windbag insists on trying to take credit for my work while at the same time smearing me and my essay without basis.   Given these circumstances I feel compelled to set the record straight.  So when TEPaul makes an asinine claim like he does above when he said he never got any help from me, I'll correct him.  Doesn't take long to do, that's for sure.

[TEPaul]

I went down to the Cascades on Saturday and I was gone for about 30 hours so I missed the following until now:


"A more recent example?  For almost a year he has insisted that Mr. and Mrs. Lloyd owned and CONTROLLED the Johnson farm.  Again a misrepresentation of the facts that he still makes daily.  ACCORDING TO CUYLER, HDC CONTROLLED THE PROPERTY; they took title in Lloyd's name."


David Moriarty:

I sold real estate for twenty years in the state of Pennsylvania, and you're actually trying to tell me I don't understand a deed in the state of Pennsylvania?? How preposterous are your posts on here going to get anyway?? Horatio Gates Lloyd took both the entire Johnson Farm and the Dallas estate into his own name BY DEED for seven months and in this state that does not mean he did not have control of that property for seven months; it means he did have control over it. He didn't take the deed as an agent for HDC, he took it solely in his own name with his wife (et ux). If you don't believe me call up a Pennsylvania real estate lawyer or better yet the Pennsylvania board of Realtors and ask them what it means regarding control. He obviously did not plan on owning Merion East, only as Cuylers articulated----eg being in the position to move boundaries lines at will; by the way a very good indication that a finalized plan of the course had not been done at that time (Dec. 10, 1910) and a very good example of why the Francis idea had not yet happened otherwise IT would have ALREADY been incorporated INTO the topo contour maps of the Wilson Committtee's and there would have never been any need for the MCC board to address it as they did on April 19, 1911.

Why did HDC give him control of that land for seven months? Can't even you figure out why that is really OBVIOUS?!?   

[DMoriarty]

Is the reputation of a golf course really more important those who were supposedly responsible for its creation. 

The reason I ask is that one after another, the great men of Merion are being thrown under the bus by those here who claim they are defending Merion.  From these recent threads alone, the communications of Francis, Lloyd, Merion's Board of Governor's, Robert Lesley, and Hugh Wilson himself have all been discarded or ignored.  Most recently it is T. Dewitt Cuyler.   

Selling real estate in Philadelphia must be even better than staying at the Holiday Inn, because TEPaul thinks he is qualified to unequivocally throw out Cuyler's statement about a 1910-11 transaction that may have involved not only real property law, but also agency law, issues of fiduciary duty, corporate law, conflict of interest, shareholder rights, and partnership law, to name just some of the potential areas at issue. 

For the past year, while TEPaul and Wayne were hiding the Cuyler letter, they portrayed Cuyler as a lawyer extraordinaire and one of the most powerful men in the RR industry.    But without realizing its significance, TEPaul let a fragment of this letter out and that fragment established that, while Lloyd may have taken the deed to the HDC land in his name, the reality of the situation was that HDC took title in Lloyd's name.  In other words, Lloyd was acting on behalf of HDC.  Rather than face this fact head on, TEPaul simply threw Cuyler under the bus.  Never mind that Cuyler was apparently an experienced attorney who  set up the deal, and that was obviously familiar with the transaction, the facts, and the various legal obligitions of the various parties, he doesn't know what he is talking about, at least when compared to Tom Paul.  After all, TomPaul sold real estate!   

So much for the legal advice of the esteemed T. Dewitt Cuyler, Esq.

[Bryan Izatt]

Following is a summary of the property time line:

When	What	Source
Before July 1910	…….  made possible by the action of certain members of the Club, who, with others, not members of the Club, have acquired a tract of 338 acres, under the name of Haverford Development Co. This property adjoins the grounds of Haverford College, between College Avenue and Ardmore Avenue, directly on the Philadelphia and Western Railway, with a station at either end of the property - a plan of the property is enclosed.	President Allen Evan's November 1910 letter to the membership
Before June 29, 1910	Macdonald and Whigham visit Merion and discuss the various merits of the land Merion propose to buy	Macdonald’s letter to Lloyd
July 1, 1910	Mr. Connell and his associates fully realize the benefit to the remainder of the property if a first class Golf Course could be established on the ground, and for that reason offer one hundred (100) acres, or whatever would be required to lay out the course, at $825.00 an acre It is probable that nearly one hundred and twenty (120) acres would be required for our purposes	Robert Lesley, chairman of the “Search Committee” report to "Special" board meeting of MCC
Nov. 1910	…. a basic understanding (agreement in principle with HDC) that MCC would buy a certain amount of land for a certain amount of money out of a larger HDC tract from the HDC.	two letters between Nickelson of the HDC and president Evans of MCC
3rd week of Dec. 1910	Cuylers gets the MCC Golf Association Company set up with officers, with a certain amount of stock and registered.	NA
November 15th, 1910	The Club has secured 117 acres at $726.50 an acre, or $85,000. (later amended to: “MCC had AGREED to buy (not yet bought)”.)	President Allen Evan's November 1910 letter to the membership
December 16, 1910	161 acres was transferred from HDC to a man by the name of Rothwell (probably a title and trust company employee) for $1.00.	Reflected in a deed dated Dec. 16, 1910.
December 19, 1910	Three days later Rothwell transfered the property to Lloyd and his wife.      ……..  transfer of the 117 acres into the names Horatio G. Lloyd et ux for MCC that would become the majority of the world famous Merion East golf course;	Reflected in a deed dated Dec. 19, 1910
TBD	The land now covered by fine homes along Golf House Road was exchanged for land about 130 yards wide by 190 yards long---the present location of the 15th green and the 16th tee.	Francis reminisces in 1950 US Open Program
Before April 19, 1911	"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......" "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 19, 1911
April 19,1911	Whereas the Golf Committee presented a plan showing the proposed layout of the new golf ground which necessitated the exchange of a portion of the land already purchased for other land adjoining...Resolved that the board approve the exchange.………….. and the purchase of 3 acres additional for $7,500 ( we have always referred to as the P&W railroad property  ……..  but the club wouldn't actually buy that land from the P&W Railroad ……. until over a half century later)	Thompson's board resolution
July 19, 1911	Lloyd transferred 120.1 acres of his 161 acre Dec. 21, 1910 deed back to Rothwell who transferred it to the MCC Golf Association Company the same day, each time for $1.00	July 21, 1911 deed

Now, back to the measuring.  I called the Delaware County Recorder of Deeds today.  First the good news - they're quite happy to sell me the deeds for the princely sum of $1.00 per page.  Now the bad news - you have to know the book and page number of the deed you want if you want them to pull it, copy it and mail it.  If you don't, you have to go in and search it out.  They won't do the search for you.   So, I'm at an impasse on that path.  I don't suppose there's anybody in the Phillie area that'd like to hike out to Media, PA and get the book and page numbers for me?  I'll happily pay for the copying and mailing.

Based on the information available, so far, I've plotted out the boundaries and calculated the areas of the plots of land we're interested in.  The obvious caveat is that, without the metes and bonds from 1910 and 1911 (Tom), the plot is approximate.  The various areas are labeled on the plot:

Area RE - Johnson Farm retained by HDC for Real Estate - approx. 22 acres

Area JW - Johnson Farm west of Golf House Road           - approx. 18 acres

Area M - Merion Golf course about 1913                         - approx. 123 acres

Total of above                                                              - approx 163 acres

Area F - Francis land swap, included in Total                   - approx 4.8 acres

Area RR - Railroad Land, not included in Total                 - approx. 3 acres


The total area is close to the purported 161 acre purchase in December 1910 and the Merion area is close to the 120.1 acres purportedly transferred to MCC in July 1911.  The delta of about 1% most likely results because of small variations the location of the boundaries. Area F at 4.8 acres - the Francis land swap - is most definitely not 3 acres (the boundaries of that area are pretty accurate), so it seems unlikely that Area F accounts for the 3.1 acres added to the golf course area between December 1910 and July 1911.  Too bad about those closeted metes, Tom.

[TEPaul]

Bryan;

I'm impressed. I do have a few minor questions but nevertheless go back and read my posts #652 and #656.

Look how close we are!!

You said above:

"Based on the information available, so far, I've plotted out the boundaries and calculated the areas of the plots of land we're interested in.  The obvious caveat is that, without the metes and bonds from 1910 and 1911 (Tom), the plot is approximate."


It may still be approximate but I can tell you that you have now gotten the important and relevent acreage tracts (plots) and the total very close to what the actual metes and bounds determine them to be!

Tell me what you think you've learned or are learning from all this information taken together and I'll tell you what I think I've learned by that excercise contained in #652 and #656 that pretty much matches your post and drawing above. I think there may be a later post by me on this that explains a few other things about all this (the excercise contained in posts #652 and #656) even better. I'll see if I can find it.

[TEPaul]

Bryan:

Post #670 is another good one to review about the above.

[TEPaul]

Bryan:

Your timeline above is very good but on your first inclusion "Before July, 1910" you're implying that an arrangement with certain members of the club with the 338 acre HDC tract took place before July, 1910 and you are using as your source president Evan's circular to the membership of Nov. 1910. In that circular Evans does not say there was an arrangement with certain members of the club with HDC on the 338 acres before July, 1910. From other records from the club it does say that this arrangement was agreed to in a number of negotiations and conferences between Lloyd and Connell that appear to have culminated in late Oct or early Nov. 1910. At that point, Lloyd put the situation in front of the board, they considered it, approved it and then notified the membership of it. Simultaneously Lloyd sent out his own circular to the membership about the real estate opportunity.

[TEPaul]

Bryan:

By 1913 Merion could have added a few little pieces on the southwest boundary of the property but I'm not sure they had done that yet. I'll check the Merion deed and survey run to see. It would probably be better not to use 1913 but rather the total acreage when the deed was transfered from Lloyd to MCCGA in July 1911 and that deed shows a total acreage of 120.1, not 123.

[Patrick_Mucci]

TEPaul,


I don't understand you.

You ask Bryan Izatt to tell you things, yet you refuse to supply Bryan with what he's asked of you, the Metes and Bounds

WHY ?

Why would you ask for something from somebody when you're not willing to provide them what they've asked of you ?

It's disengenuous, not in keeping with scholarly pursuits and intellectual dishonesty..

Why are you hording and hiding this information and then expecting Bryan to reveal everything he knows ?

It's not fair to Bryan who's put a lot of work into this.

[TEPaul]

Pat:


Clearly you have very little to no idea what is really going on here so it would probably serve this thread well if you would just refrain from those constant comments.

Bryan isn't giving me anything and I'm only asking him how he thinks he is arriving at the process and results he is because it appears to be very similar to what I arrived at, and somewhat the way I arrived at it, that is reflected in posts #652, #656 and #670 (there may be others).

If you are really interested in this thread and subject you should start by very carefully reviewing those posts above from a number of days ago to see if you can understand them and what they are doing and apparently proving. If you have questions about them feel free to ask me. The most interesting number seems to be the 18! Bryan was about double that some days ago but for most interesting reasons he has been working his way down towards it and just look at where he is now with the JW area!! THAT particular area, in my opinion, is the most important area of all because it not only appears to be the only boundary area this fix could have happened (given all the other factual occurences) but it is also the only boundary area between those two deeds that actually changed (and the reason for that is it was clearly designed to be flexible or elastic via the position Lloyd put himself in by taking that Dec. 19, 1910 deed into his own name). All the rest of the boundary lines on those two deeds remained the same from the beginning point on College Avenue to the corner point of the Eaton property and the middle of Ardmore Avenue. You can also take out area RE because no golf holes were ever considered in that section, and that allows you to run Merion's present (and in July 21, 1911) property line right to the intersection of Ardmore and Golf House Road. From then on back to the beginning point on College is the only dimensional area this fix (land swap) could have taken place, and it happens to be the entire delineation of Golf House Road! So we've isolated it and now all we need to do is measure its enclosure using the metes and bounds of two separate deeds! If we had a copy of one of those working topo contour maps the Wilson Committee was using in 1911 we could also measure off of that assuming it was in scale which it very likely was given the 117 acre understanding between HDC and MCC of Lloyd's 161 acre deed going in on Dec, 19, 1910 and the deed going out from him to MCCGA on July 21, 1911 that shows 120.1 acres for MCC.

Most all the information in his timeline came from me anyway and I'm simply helping him refine it at the moment.

I believe that two people coming at the same subject and problem from perhaps somewhat different perspectives but yet seemingly arriving ultimately at the same results and conclusions somewhat independent of one another is actually going to tell us all and show us all a remarkable story of how to go about analyzing a most interesting situation with clearly one piece of the puzzle missing which it probably always will be missing from our consideration and empirical analysis (the Wilson topo contour maps they obviously used to route and design that course in 1911 as well as how that proposed road ON THOSE TOPO CONTOUR MAPS was clearly limiting them and making it difficult to fit those last five hole in, as Francis said in his story).

It's a form of logic using all the events and material in a timeline to come to what the X factor is, where it is, what it probably measured before the fix and after the fix as well as logically at least the timeframe of when that fix happened.

It would probably be very benefical for all following this thread if both you and Moriarty would allow me and Bryan Izatt to do this on our own without having irrelevent and unproductive comments from either of you which only wastes time and derails the process.

[Mike_Cirba]

Bryan,

I just want to thank you for your tremendous work on this.   

I'm not close to Media, but if you still need them by this weekend I'll see what I can do about getting you what you are requesting.

However, on your own you seem to be doing just fine at the moment.

[TEPaul]

Mike Cirba:

Are you beginning to understand what is going on here? It seems like Bryan and I are reaching almost identical results somewhat independent of one another and we are doing it not even using the metes and bounds on the entireties of those two important deeds that bookend this important timeline.

The reason for this is the unique event circumstances contained in this project's timeline that happen to be reflected in those two book-end deeds.

It looks like Bryan and I already have come to the same measurment results in those important areas that make up the totals. I will virtually guarantee you that either a professional surveyor or Bryan once the metes and bounds are totally measured will match the results Bryan and I arrived at.

Given some of the unique circumstances of this whole thing it appears there is virtually no way they can't all match and that would be pretty amazing considering we actually did it without measuring all of it.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Pat:


Clearly you have very little to no idea what is really going on here so it would probably serve this thread well if you would just refrain from those constant comments.

I don't think I'm as dense as you think I am.

Bryan isn't giving me anything and I'm only asking him how he thinks he is arriving at the process and results he is because it appears to be very similar to what I arrived at, and somewhat the way I arrived at it, that is reflected in posts #652, #656 and #670 (there may be others).

Then WHY won't you provide him with the Metes and Bounds that he's politely requested on numerous occassions ?

If you are really interested in this thread and subject you should start by very carefully reviewing those posts above from a number of days ago to see if you can understand them and what they are doing and apparently proving.

TE, they're asking for the FACTS, the METES and BOUNDS.
IF the FACTS undermine your position so be it.
IF the FACTS support your position so be it.
Just provide the FACTS that Bryan has repeatedly requested..... please.

If you have questions about them feel free to ask me.

I've asked you to provide the Metes and Bounds and I've asked you why you won't provide the metes and bounds.
Yet, you've answered neither.

The most interesting number seems to be the 18! Bryan was about double that some days ago but for most interesting reasons he has been working his way down towards it and just look at where he is now with the JW area!! THAT particular area, in my opinion, is the most important area of all because it not only appears to be the only boundary area this fix could have happened (given all the other factual occurences) but it is also the only boundary area between those two deeds that actually changed (and the reason for that is it was clearly designed to be flexible or elastic via the position Lloyd put himself in by taking that Dec. 19, 1910 deed into his own name). All the rest of the boundary lines on those two deeds remained the same from the beginning point on College Avenue to the corner point of the Eaton property and the middle of Ardmore Avenue. You can also take out area RE because no golf holes were ever considered in that section, and that allows you to run Merion's present (and in July 21, 1911) property line right to the intersection of Ardmore and Golf House Road. From then on back to the beginning point on College is the only dimensional area this fix (land swap) could have taken place, and it happens to be the entire delineation of Golf House Road! So we've isolated it and now all we need to do is measure its enclosure using the metes and bounds of two separate deeds! If we had a copy of one of those working topo contour maps the Wilson Committee was using in 1911 we could also measure off of that assuming it was in scale which it very likely was given the 117 acre understanding between HDC and MCC of Lloyd's 161 acre deed going in on Dec, 19, 1910 and the deed going out from him to MCCGA on July 21, 1911 that shows 120.1 acres for MCC.

That's great, but it doesn't explain why you WON'T provide Bryan with the metes and bounds.
Why won't you provide them ?

Most all the information in his timeline came from me anyway and I'm simply helping him refine it at the moment.

His timeline discards the ambiant noise and provides what I've been asking for for some time.
Now, help him further by providing the metes and bounds.
And, if you won't, tell us why you won't.
What are you afraid of ? Or, what are you hiding ?

I believe that two people coming at the same subject and problem from perhaps somewhat different perspectives but yet seemingly arriving ultimately at the same results and conclusions somewhat independent of one another is actually going to tell us all and show us all a remarkable story of how to go about analyzing a most interesting situation with clearly one piece of the puzzle missing which it probably always will be missing from our consideration and empirical analysis (the Wilson topo contour maps they obviously used to route and design that course in 1911 as well as how that proposed road ON THOSE TOPO CONTOUR MAPS was clearly limiting them and making it difficult to fit those last five hole in, as Francis said in his story).

That may be, but, you're still refusing to supply Bryan with the information he's requested.
You're willing to receive information from others but apparently unwilling to share the information solely in your possession.
THAT'S NOT RIGHT.

It's a form of logic using all the events and material in a timeline to come to what the X factor is, where it is, what it probably measured before the fix and after the fix as well as logically at least the timeframe of when that fix happened.

It would probably be very benefical for all following this thread if both you and Moriarty would allow me and Bryan Izatt to do this on our own without having irrelevent and unproductive comments from either of you which only wastes time and derails the process.

"ALLOW me and Bryan to do this on our own"
Are you kidding ?
You won't allow Bryan to pursue his quest because you're keeping the Metes and Bounds from him.

Don't you see the hypocrisy ?
Don't you see the absurdity of your position ?

You and perhaps Wayne want to orchestrate this to your conclusions, otherwise, you'd share the information requested with Bryan
You want to pursue a process under ONLY YOUR TERMS.

I'm not championing David's cause, I'm championing his efforts, and there's an enormous distinction that neither you nor Wayne understand.

Do yourself, and everyone else a favor.  Supply Bryan with the Metes and Bounds and save Mike Cirba a trip to Media, PA.

Thanks.

[TEPaul]

Mike Cirba:

Are you beginning to understand what is going on here? It seems like Bryan and I are reaching almost identical results somewhat independent of one another and we are doing it not even using the metes and bounds on the entireties of those two important deeds that bookend this important timeline.

The reason for this is the unique event circumstances contained in this project's timeline that happen to be reflected in those two book-end deeds.

It looks like Bryan and I already have come to the same measurment results in those important areas that make up the totals. I will virtually guarantee you that either a professional surveyor or Bryan once the metes and bounds are totally measured will match the results Bryan and I arrived at without even using the exact metes and bounds on those two book-end deeds.

Given some of the unique circumstances of this whole thing it appears there is virtually no way they can't all match and that would be pretty amazing considering we actually did it without even measuring all of it with actual metes and bounds.   

The last part of this should show that if this fix actually took place before these two book-end deeds (a most important TIMELINE) there would have been no reason at all to actually make the boundary adjustments they did within this Dec, 1910 to July 1911 timeframe that are reflected in the boundary DIFFERENCES between these two bookend deeds. Had it happened before that timeframe the acreage area increments would have been reflected in those working topo contour maps that Wilson and his committee began to use just following Lloyd's Dec. 19, 1910 deed.

Had it not happened that way the Francis idea with Lloyd would have happened something like this:

Francis:
"Horatio, I thought we fixed that problem with the last five holes last summer or fall at some point."

Lloyd:
"Oh, sorry, Richard, I guess I forgot to tell the surveyor or whatever who made our working topo survey maps to reflect that fix with the redelineation of Golf House Road on the contour survey maps but don't worry about it, as you know I'm in a postion by my Dec. 19, 1910 deed for 161 acres to just change the necessary boundary line at will again, so consider it done, AGAIN! You say you need a swap for land ALREADY PURCHASED for land adjoining AND an additional three acres along the proposed road? The swap will be a net out, right, but of course the additional three acres will cost us about $7,500, but no problem, I'll tell Evans or Lesley or Thompson or whomever and the board should approve it when they meet next. I know it's after midnight, Dickie boy, but would you like a strong drink anyway before you get back on your bike? If not do you mind if I go to bed; it's pretty late and one of us should get up early and get that quarry man to drill the top off the quarry."

[TEPaul]

"I've asked you to provide the Metes and Bounds and I've asked you why you won't provide the metes and bounds.
Yet, you've answered neither."


Because Pat, the way this is getting resolved, and it seems to be close to being resolved already with Bryan and me without metes and bounds is a whole lot more interesting for all of us than just measuring metes and bounds at this point. What we will learn here doing it this way---eg the story this will tell us all doing it this way is how the unique circumstances of what happened at Merion in this entire timeline are going to show us how neither me or Bryan or even a professional surveyor is needed to measure metes and bounds to come to the exact acreage results.

The actual measurements using all the exact metes and bounds can be done later by Bryan or anyone else who can do what he does AND a professional surveyor using the exact metes and bounds and I guarantee you they will ALL show the same results that I came do some days ago and Bryan came to last night. I believe there is virtually no way they can't come to those same results given some pretty interesting events within the timeline we are using for this!

It is pretty cool how this is playing out between us; you'll see eventually I guess, that is if you really aren't as dense as I think you are. 

For starters you might begin by trying to understand what happened in that excercise depicted in posts #652, #656 and #670. From there you might try to understand how Bryan arrived at the results he produced on here last night!   

[TEPaul]

Bryan:

When you get back on this thread, IM me. Thanks

[DMoriarty]

Great job Bryan,  especially with your time line.

But what a joke TEPaul has become!  He refused to provide you with basic information from a publicly recorded document and now he is trying to take credit for your work.    Pathetic.   


By the way, I'd recommend you resist TEPaul's request to take the conversation private.  It is just his way of trying to further glom on to your hard work.  I have been there.