I missed the section where we moved to First Principle Only. . .
Jim,
Bryan stated a while back (and a number of times I think) that his time line was trying to work with
first principles, which I take to mean axioms or facts which required no deduction or additional proof; In other words, the basic, undisputed building blocks of arguments to come. A good example of a first principle would be that, according to the x deed, Lloyd took title to y property on z date.
I thought the purpose of his time line was to list out all the reasonably undipsutable facts, or first principles, off of which all these other arguments are being developed. Maybe I am wrong about this, but that was my understanding of his time line. (Aside: While generally a good idea, there are some big problems with Bryan's fact based time line approach in this instance, but that is outside the scope of your question.)
. . . but David tell me are you saying Wilson's committee required CBM's approval in April 1911 before taking the plan to their board? In other words, if CBM were overseas for the month, do you think they would have waited until he returned before proceeding?
First, to clarify, I was explaining to Bryan
what sanction I thought M&W had from Merion that gave M&W the authority to sanction to the plan before it went to the board. My answer was NOT meant to be a first principle or statement of fact, but was my understanding based on the facts we know from the Board Meetings. My understanding may change if we ever get to see the parts of the record that are currently being hidden from us.
Second, to try and address your questions:
1. I don't think Wilson's Committee took the plan to the MCC board. I think Lesley's Committee did. TEPaul assumes that Lesley was speaking on behalf of Wilson's Committee, but I have seen no facts supporting TEPaul's assumption.
2. Judging from what we have been told that Lesley told the Board, I think that it was very important to Lesley and the MCC's Board of Governor's that M&W had been involved in the planning process (at NGLA) and that M&W had already sanctioned the plan being presented, and that they stated that it would produce a first class course with some of the best inland holes in the country.
3. Judging from what we have been told that Lesley told the Board, I do not think that Lesley or the Board were much if at all concerned with what Wilson and his Committee thought of the layout plan, or with what, if anything they had contributed to it.
4. I do not think it was a coincidence that a plan was not presented to MCC's Board until shortly
after M&W returned to Merion, went over the land (again) and over the various versions, and sanctioned the final routing plan.
5. As for whether Merion would have waited for M&W to approve of the plan, who says they did not wait as it is? In other words, I think they waited to proceed until M&W could teach Wilson and his Committee how to lay out the course in early to mid March, and then they waited until M&W could come back down about three weeks later to go over the land (again) and over the various layout options, and to finally determine the routing plan.
6. What would they have done if they could not get CBM? I don't know, but my guess is that they would have gotten someone else, but they probably would not have been that happy about it, as they clearly wanted nothing but the best.
7. I think the choice of the word "approved" is significant because it provided insight as to how important Lesley and the Committee thought M&W's opinion was.
Hope this helps.