[Mike_Cirba]

Tom,

Tillinghast also wrote multiple times in the local @hilly papers including in April 1911 that he had seen the plans.

[Tom MacWood]

Tom,

Tillinghast also wrote multiple times in the local @hilly papers including in April 1911 that he had seen the plans.

Two is multiple.

[TEPaul]

"TEP
What is the source for the January 11, 1911 date for the formation of the Wilson committee. In the past you've maintained the minutes don't mention when the committee was formed."


Tom:

As far as I can tell the source for the January 11, 1911 date of the formation of the Wilson Committee was you misquoting me again; something you seem to do on here regularly.

I never said the Wilson Committee was formed on January 11, 1911 or any other date. I don't know when it was formed or appointed and yes it is true that I have maintained the minutes don't mention when the Wilson committee was formed or even that it was formed simply because I have never seen it mentioned in any of the board meeting minutes I have ever seen.

The evolution through the second half of 1910 into 1911 of what that committee probably was and what it was apparently called (The Committee on New Golf Grounds (not the Construction Committee) which was never used or mentioned on or by the MCC board) is pretty interesting and I can try to explain that to you later (key word being "try" which perhaps should be parsed as to its incontestable meaning by legal eagles and grammarians Moriarty & Schmidt before we attempt to use it).  I did check with a long term Merion board member about how various types of committees there work including the standing or permanent committees and what might be termed "ad hoc" committees which tend to serve at Merion under the aegis of a permanent or standing committee, the chairmen of whom attend board meetings or are generally members of the board of governors while ad hoc committee chairman generally may not attend board meetings.

I'm quite sure this might be somewhat confusing to you since I am not aware that you've ever belonged to a golf club or served on a committee or board of one but this is the way clubs like Merion are often structured. My own is structured the same way perhaps because the men who founded it all came from MCC as a group.

[TEPaul]

"Sully, perhaps.  Heck, make that "likely" or "of course they would".  It doesn't change the fact that as a non-Member, it's logical and acceptable for Merion NOT to name him as one of the experts working on the course, whereas it defies logic to believe that the club chose not to name Wilson to his own fellow members."

Shivas:

When MCC informed its membership of various other events and who were doing them they did not necessarily mention their names either. That was true when the club informed the membership that certain "Guarantors" from MCC were essentially fronting the club the money for the move to Ardmore et al. That is a pretty significant analogy (because it also involves MCC) but being the incontestable grammarian that you are and given the fact that few around here are ever likely to admit they are wrong about ANYTHING they ever say, I'm quite sure you will just slough that one off too somehow!    

[JESII]

I don't believe Lloyd, or anyone else in the club hierarchy, stated Wilson was responsible in the main for the original design of the East course.

Really? Noone?

[Mike_Cirba]

Tom,

He also quoted info from the April 1911 Board report that was not in any other publication at the time.

He saw the plans.

[TEPaul]

"Two is multiple."


Tom:

Not exactly. In Philadelphia the term "two" isn't a "multiple" it's considered to be a form of the "singular" that is actually called "The Philadephia Siamese One" (it appears to have two parts but it is actually attached in the middle---or conversely it appears to be one but actually has two parts).

It's funny you should ask that because Merion's Wilson Committee member Dr Henry Toulmin was actually a great Philadelphia physician who studied at the famous "Gross Clinic" (extremely famous painting with Toulmin actually in it). During his internship at the Gross Clinic Toulmin tried to separate one of those "Twos" (a Philadelphia Siamese One) but unfortunately both halves died on him.

We think this might be the reason or influence behind why Merion East never really considered a separated fairway with say a bunker scheme dividing the two side by side left and right options like CBM's NGLA "Bottle" hole. I believe the thinking was that the Wilson Committee thought it might depress Dr Harry Toulmin too much because particularly when he got maudlin he used to say he feared both halves of a fairway like that might die.

We undertand guys from out of town like you and Moriarty look at Wilson and his committee as a bunch of good-for-nothing novices that were trying to prove to history that the hierachy of MCC were a bunch of dumb asses for picking them to design Merion East but actually Wilson and his entire committee were remarkably brilliant and thoughtful men who possessed an incredible lack of self consciousness in the way they conceived of golf course architecture.

I believe Toulmin got over his maudlin fear of separated fairways because Horatio sprung him for a good year with psychoanalyst Dr Adolf Katz but unfortunatly Merion East never did try to create a separated fairway hole like CBM's Bottle hole, and that possibility really died when it became pretty evident as time went on that CBM was having a pretty hard time getting out of the bottle anyway. Wait til you read that touching exchange in the agronomy letters between Piper and Alan Wilson after Piper proposed that CBM chair one of the USGA Green Committee meetings in New York.

[Tom MacWood]

I don't believe Lloyd, or anyone else in the club hierarchy, stated Wilson was responsible in the main for the original design of the East course.

Really? Noone?

Please enlighten us.

[Mike_Cirba]

Oh my God...I need to read something rational just so my brain doesn't explode like Shivas's must have.   

Oh...the humanity...the humanity....Lewis Carroll on his worst mushroom-induced trip never spiraled so out of control as this latest twist down the sinkhole darkly... 

I have no idea what else to say here.  We have truly hit a new standard. 


April 1911




May 1911




May 1911




Jan 1913




June 1934




Tom MacWood....didn't you say some time back that you believed "Far and Sure" was Tillinghast?   Should I include him too?

[TEPaul]

"Really? Noone?"


Sully:

Actually, according to Alan Wilson every member of Wilson's Committee (Francis, Lloyd, Toulmin and Griscom) told him that "Hugh Wilson was in the main responsible for the architecture of the East and West courses." But like everything else from Merion itself these two rabid revisionists just slough off and try to rationalize away anything and everything the men that were there then with Wilson said about him. Well, let me amend that----perhaps MacWood isn't trying to rationalize away what Alan Wilson said all the member of Hugh's committee said about him and the fact that Hugh was in the main responsibile for the architecture of the East and West courses. Perhaps MacWood has never been aware of what Alan Wilson's letter to Philler did say in that vein. It appears he has a lot of catching up to do on this subject despite being involved in it for the last six and a half years.

According to Moriarty and his essay Alan Wilson was either mistaken about that or just engaging in some kind of eulogistic hyperbole because his brother Hugh died the year before.

Frankly, as I've said before I believe that this entire Merion/Macdonald subject started over six and a half years ago because MacWood found an article or two that mentioned Macdonald/Whigam had helped and advised Merion in 1910 and 1911. Apparently he thought he had found something that Merion may never have known (afraid not! ) and he put a thread on here about it entitled "Re; Macdonald and Merion" which is about on page 150 now.

[Tom MacWood]

TEP
Allan Wilson said a lot of things, unfortunately not all of what he said turned out to be accurate, and he was not amongst the Club's hierarchy in 1911 aka Lloyd & Co.

[Tom MacWood]

April 1911




May 1911




May 1911



Tom MacWood....didn't you say some time back that you believed "Far and Sure" was Tillinghast?   Should I include him too?

Mike
If I'm not mistaken Tilly spoke to CBM while covering an event at Garden City. At the time Merion was being built Tilly was working on Shawnee, which may explain why he was at GCGC and why he did not actively report the progress at Merion. Isn't NYc is closer to Shawnee than Philadelphia? The interesting thing about his comments regarding the plans, he does not say when he saw the plans or where he saw the plans.

I do not believe Tilly was Far & Sure.
 

[Phil_the_Author]

Tom,

Please consider carefully what you wrote:

"Phil, I count two articles in American Golfer between 1910 and 1912. The first is December 1910 when he announces the project, and says M&W had recently visited the site (June is recent?). The second and last article was May 1911 when he said the planning stage was nearing completion, and noted M&W had visited and were assisting the committee. The course opened September 1912. That is not a lot of coverage and tells me he was not observing the progress closely..."

By that definition and logic, H.H. Barker, C.B. Macdonald & Whigham had NOTHING whatsoever to do with Merion because they wrote NOTHING, not a SINGLE WORD about the course, the construction or the design of Merion during that time period!

Again, writing about the course and "OBSERVING THE PROGRESS CLOSELY" are two entirely different things! For you to make that conclusion based upon the line of reasoning you used is ludicrous. Again, Tilly wrote for more publications than the American Golfer during that time period as has already been mentioned. Secondly he was good friends with anumber of the Merion members and associated with tem REGULARLY. Do you believe that they DIDN'T talk about the progress of the project because Tilly hadn't written anything about it that day? Thirdly, His father was well aware and keeping up-to-date on everything Philadelphia golf related and providing details to Tilly for his columns when needed and finally, Tilly was GREATLY INTERESTED because Merion was to be the FIRST GREAT COURSE in the area, something he had written about and spoken about for years.

This is a case where you have CLEARLY made a determinatioon and are attempting to fit the facts to meet and prove it. You are wrong on this one...

[Mike_Cirba]

Careful readers will also note that as of May 1911, there were only "proposed holes", and no "golf course" on the ground as has been misinterpreted from the Piper & Oakley letters.

Again, no mention of Barker.

 

[TEPaul]

"TEP
Allan Wilson said a lot of things, unfortunately not all of what he said turned out to be accurate, and he was not amongst the Club's hierarchy in 1911 aka Lloyd & Co."


Tom:

Another typical generalization on your part that you apparently hope has some meaning. Why don't you list those "a lot of things, unfortunately not all of what he said turned out to be accurate?"

Actually Alan Wilson was amongst the club's hierarchy, at least with golf. Alan was one of the founders and board members of what in 1909 became known as the "Merion Cricket Club Golf Association." And so was Hugh Wilson.

The more we all get into all this the more apparent it becomes how little you actually know about Merion, its people and its history, Tom.

Personally, I think that is your real failing in trying to analyze all this and why I have always said that if you or anyone else really wants to know a club's history you really do need to go there FIRST and completely familiarize yourself with all of it----as Wayne and I have been doing for about the last ten years.

[Tom MacWood]

Tom,

Please consider carefully what you wrote:

"Phil, I count two articles in American Golfer between 1910 and 1912. The first is December 1910 when he announces the project, and says M&W had recently visited the site (June is recent?). The second and last article was May 1911 when he said the planning stage was nearing completion, and noted M&W had visited and were assisting the committee. The course opened September 1912. That is not a lot of coverage and tells me he was not observing the progress closely..."

By that definition and logic, H.H. Barker, C.B. Macdonald & Whigham had NOTHING whatsoever to do with Merion because they wrote NOTHING, not a SINGLE WORD about the course, the construction or the design of Merion during that time period!

Again, writing about the course and "OBSERVING THE PROGRESS CLOSELY" are two entirely different things! For you to make that conclusion based upon the line of reasoning you used is ludicrous. Again, Tilly wrote for more publications than the American Golfer during that time period as has already been mentioned. Secondly he was good friends with anumber of the Merion members and associated with tem REGULARLY. Do you believe that they DIDN'T talk about the progress of the project because Tilly hadn't written anything about it that day? Thirdly, His father was well aware and keeping up-to-date on everything Philadelphia golf related and providing details to Tilly for his columns when needed and finally, Tilly was GREATLY INTERESTED because Merion was to be the FIRST GREAT COURSE in the area, something he had written about and spoken about for years.

This is a case where you have CLEARLY made a determinatioon and are attempting to fit the facts to meet and prove it. You are wrong on this one...

Phil
Considering the fact that Tilly had golf columns in the Philadelphia Ledger and American Golfer and wrote next to nothing about the progress at Merion, how can you say he followed the progress closely? If he actually followed the progress closely wouldn't he have written more about it?

[TEPaul]

Shivas:

With all due respect, are you actually serious about what you've said today about Merion and the fact you think what you said is incontestable?  

Please tell me you're joking or at least trying to be ironical somehow. Do people pay lawyers actual money to say some of the stuff you and Moriarty have said on some of these threads?  

[Mike_Cirba]

Tom MacWood,

If Tillinghast saw the plans for Merion at Garden City, or even if the saw them hanging on Macdonald's wall, all the better!  

He still saw the plans prior to construction, he spoke directly to CB Macdonald about them, he had many good friends among the Merion membership, the best being Howard Perrin, and he also knew what all the terminologies meant from laid out to architecture.    Hell, one of his quotes I've only seen one other place and that is in the April 19, 1911 Merion Minutes!!   

And with all of that, when Merion opened he did not credit CB Macdonald with the course in his length review for American Cricketer, and instead said Hugh Wilson deserved the congratulations of all golfers!

Then, in case there was any remaining doubt, and because it was so sad that so few knew the truth, he wrote the conclusive proof in 1934, as seen above.

Never did he mention anything about Barker, and Alan Wilson also made very clear that Merion did NOT use a golf course architect.

This Barker thing of your's is thinner than an Ethiopian model.    We can go over it again, but almost none of those courses were opened in June 1910, or if they were remodels only few had their work done by Barker by that time.

By the way, are you seriously trying to convince us that A. W. Tillinghast didn't really know who designed Merion?!?!?  

[Phil_the_Author]

Tom,

Your reasoning is simply misplaced at the very least on this. But let us say, for argument's sake, that Tilly didn't follow the "PRGORESS Closely" as you put it. SO WHAT? Does that NEGATE a single word of what he wrote? Of course not.

Have YOU READ everything that Tilly wrote during that time period? I can say that I haven't and I'd be stunned if you even thought that you could approach the number of magazine and newspaper articles that he wrote that I have in my collection. That is why I know for a fact that he wrote abnout Merion more often than you know and that I also don't have the time to look them up and quote from them. If that is not good enough for you, oh well, I'm sorry, but you do have to trust some people in what they say. On this subject i do know what I am talking about.

Actually though, I believe that what you miss out on isn't what he didn't write about, but WHY he wrote about what he DID and WHEN he did it! That, too, explains much.

For example, and I'm sure this will come as quite a surprise to the Philly guys, but were you aware that he wrote a series of newspaper articles for the San Antonio Light in Texas in 1913 about the PHILADELPHIA ATHLETICS baseball team? Not a single word about golf in any of those articles. Does that mean he wasn't interested in golf? Of course not! He was in San Antonio for the entire month of October 1913 designing three different golf courses and wrote about the Athletics because of the World Series! Heck, he didn't even write about the design work he was doing; he didn't have to as other writers for the paper did.

Your reasoning is flawed on this one...

[Tom MacWood]

"TEP
Allan Wilson said a lot of things, unfortunately not all of what he said turned out to be accurate, and he was not amongst the Club's hierarchy in 1911 aka Lloyd & Co."


Tom:

Another typical generalization on your part that you apparently hope has some meaning. Why don't you list those "a lot of things, unfortunately not all of what he said turned out to be accurate?"

Actually Alan Wilson was amongst the club's hierarchy, at least with golf. Alan was one of the founders and board members of what in 1909 became known as the "Merion Cricket Club Golf Association." And so was Hugh Wilson.

The more we all get into all this the more apparent it becomes how little you actually know about Merion, its people and its history, Tom.

Personally, I think that is your real failing in trying to analyze all this and why I have always said that if you or anyone else really wants to know a club's history you really do need to go there FIRST and completely familiarize yourself with all of it----as Wayne and I have been doing for about the last ten years.

TEP
It appears Allan Wilson's letter is the source of the story that Wilson first went to the UK & Scotland in 1910 to study the famous links before returning and designing the golf course.

He also said the committee designed the golf course without the help of a golf architect. CB Macdonald called himself as golf architect.

Those are two big mistakes, but in fairness he was not directly involved so its hard to hold it against him.

And what he actually said about his brother being the designer in the main:

"...they [the members of the committee] have each told me that he is the person in the main responsible for the architecture of this and the West course."

He was responsible in the main for the architecture of the courses in 1926.

[Mike_Cirba]

Tom MacWood,

That's crap and you know it.

Philler asked Wilson to write a rememberance of the origins of the golf courses.

He wasn't talking about the course in 1926; he was talking about the course that opened in 1912.


Dear Mr. Philler:-

      You asked me to write you up something about the beginnings of the East and West courses for use in the Club history, and I warned you that I did this sort of thing very badly. You insisted, however, so I have done the best I could and enclose the article herewith. If it is not what you want, please do not hesitate to destroy it and to ask someone else to write you something which will better suit your purpose.
      I am very glad you are writing the club history. It ought to be done because unless put on paper these things which are interesting in themselves are apt to be forgotten,-- and I do not know of anyone who would do the work so well as you.

                  With regards, I am,
                     Sincerely,
                        Alan D. Wilson



By the way, are you seriously trying to convince us that A. W. Tillinghast didn't really know who designed Merion?!?!?   

[Tom MacWood]

Tom MacWood,

If Tillinghast saw the plans for Merion at Garden City, or even if the saw them hanging on Macdonald's wall, all the better!  

He still saw the plans prior to construction, he spoke directly to CB Macdonald about them, he had many good friends among the Merion membership, the best being Howard Perrin, and he also knew what all the terminologies meant from laid out to architecture.    Hell, one of his quotes I've only seen one other place and that is in the April 19, 1911 Merion Minutes!!  

And with all of that, when Merion opened he did not credit CB Macdonald with the course in his length review for American Cricketer, and instead said Hugh Wilson deserved the congratulations of all golfers!

Then, in case there was any remaining doubt, and because it was so sad that so few knew the truth, he wrote the conclusive proof in 1934, as seen above.

Never did he mention anything about Barker, and Alan Wilson also made very clear that Merion did NOT use a golf course architect.

This Barker thing of your's is thinner than an Ethiopian model.    We can go over it again, but almost none of those courses were opened in June 1910, or if they were remodels only few had their work done by Barker by that time.

By the way, are you seriously trying to convince us that A. W. Tillinghast didn't really know who designed Merion?!?!?  

Mike
Clearly Tilly did not follow the progress on the ground closely. He wrote next to nothing about it. His best source of information appears to be CBM. He does not mention anyone on the committee by name.

In 1930 Wilson was largely responsible for the design. I'll give him that.

[Tom MacWood]

Tom MacWood,

That's crap and you know it.

Philler asked Wilson to write a rememberance of the origins of the golf courses.

He wasn't talking about the course in 1926; he was talking about the course that opened in 1912.


Dear Mr. Philler:-

      You asked me to write you up something about the beginnings of the East and West courses for use in the Club history, and I warned you that I did this sort of thing very badly. You insisted, however, so I have done the best I could and enclose the article herewith. If it is not what you want, please do not hesitate to destroy it and to ask someone else to write you something which will better suit your purpose.
      I am very glad you are writing the club history. It ought to be done because unless put on paper these things which are interesting in themselves are apt to be forgotten,-- and I do not know of anyone who would do the work so well as you.

                  With regards, I am,
                     Sincerely,
                        Alan D. Wilson



By the way, are you seriously trying to convince us that A. W. Tillinghast didn't really know who designed Merion?!?!?   

He quotes CH Alison's impressions as well. Was Alison also referring to 1912? If so, he would have needed a time machine.

[TEPaul]

"TEP
It appears Allan Wilson's letter is the source of the story that Wilson first went to the UK & Scotland in 1910 to study the famous links before returning and designing the golf course."


Tom:

Personally, I would say that would be an excellent bet. As you appear to I have long felt that was what created the misinterpretation years later that Wilson went abroad in 1910. Where the latter part of that story of seven months came from I have no idea because Alan Wilson didn't say that and he sure would have known how long Hugh went abroad because the two of them were in business together and worked together almost every day. When Hugh went abroad in 1912 it could not have been more than about six weeks at most and that really is provable.

But that has very little to do with the fact that Alan Wilson also said that every member of Wilson's committee told him that in the main it was Hugh Wilson who was responsible for the architecture of Merion East and West. It would be pretty hard or bizarre for Alan to just make up that every member of Wilson's committee told him that in the main Hugh was responsible for the architecture of the East and West courses and that they were "homemade" and without an architect, since every member of Wilson's committee was alive and well in 1926 to read that. If they hadn't said that don't you think some of all of them would've asked Alan why he said they all said that?

I sure do!

I have said all these years that I believe other than that remark of Alan's that the course was found in 1910 and as a first step the club sent Hugh abroad that the Alan Wilson letter to Philler is the single best source of information about what happened back then and who was responsible for what contributions were made including Macdonald and Whigam. I still very much believe that and maintain that and I believe Merion does too and should.

[Tom MacWood]

"TEP
It appears Allan Wilson's letter is the source of the story that Wilson first went to the UK & Scotland in 1910 to study the famous links before returning and designing the golf course."


Tom:

Personally, I would say that would be an excellent bet. As you appear to I have long felt that was what created the misinterpretation years later that Wilson went abroad in 1910. Where the latter part of that story of seven months came from I have no idea because Alan Wilson didn't say that and he sure would have known how long Hugh went abroad because the two of them were in business together and worked together almost every day. When Hugh went abroad in 1912 it could not have been more than about six weeks at most and that really is provable.

But that has very little to do with the fact that Alan Wilson also said that every member of Wilson's committee told him that in the main it was Hugh Wilson who was responsible for the architecture of Merion East and West. It would be pretty hard or bizarre for Alan to just make up that every member of Wilson's committee told him that in the main Hugh was responsible for the architecture of the East and West courses and that they were "homemade" and without an architect, since every member of Wilson's committee was alive and well in 1926 to read that. If they hadn't said that don't you think some of all of them would've asked Alan why he said they all said that?

I sure do!

I have said all these years that I believe other than that remark of Alan's that the course was found in 1910 and as a first step the club sent Hugh abroad that the Alan Wilson letter to Philler is the single best source of information about what happened back then and who was responsible for what contributions were made including Macdonald and Whigam. I still very much believe that and maintain that and I believe Merion does too and should.

Based on some of his errors, Allan Wilson obviously did not have first hand knowledge of who did what and when, which is why he went back to the living members to ask them their recollections, including who was reponsible for the architecture. Its impossible to know for sure if they were saying he was responsbile for the architecturer in 1912 or 1926, but based on everything we know about the events of 1910-11, and his activities afterward when the course was overhauled, I believe 1926 is the most logical answer.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()