Merion's Early Timeline

[Phil_the_Author]

I have had my say on "Far and Sure" and you know what I believe. Surmise as you wish, I will say no more on the subject...

[Joe Bausch]

I have had my say on "Far and Sure" and you know what I believe. Surmise as you wish, I will say no more on the subject...

So, Phil, would it be fair that one of the two below are the only explanations possible since you believe Tilly could not have under any circumstances been Far and Sure:

1.  Far and Sure just by coincidence wrote a review very similar to AWTs?

or

2.  Far and Sure plagiarized from Tilly's article?

[Mike_Cirba]

Joe,

I think you need a third column for comparsion to the American Cricketer article by Tilly in January 1913.

Phil,

Completely Understood if you don't want to re-discuss.

[Eric Smith]

A lunch hour diversion.

Here's to 100...




Gauge your Merion thread acumen.  

Print this page and draw lines to match the pictures to the names.




THE PLAYERS



































THE NAMES


Mr. Moriarty



Mr. Macdonald



Mr. Cirba



Mr. Whigham



Mr. Bausch



Mr. Paul



Mr. Morrison



Mr. Charles Nelson Reilly



Mr. Brauer



Mr. Wilson



Mr. 'X'

[Mike_Cirba]

Eric,

I'm willing to give 50 bonus points to anyone who can provide pictorial evidence to prove the actual existence of Tom MacWood. 

[Eric Smith]

Eric,

I'm willing to give 50 bonus points to anyone who can provide pictorial evidence to prove the actual existence of Tom MacWood. 

Don't think I didn't try!!   
GCA? nada
Google Images?-- kept turning up photos of Crump

[Mike_Cirba]

Eric,

I believe you'll have an easier time finding actual photos of a Yetti.

[Mike_Cirba]

Joe,

Well, I think your two options to Phil are incorrect.

There is not a chance in a billion that it is coincidence.

However, might not one possibility be that Tilly gave it to a colleague at AG to use as he saw fit?

Or, that more than one person wrote under the pen name "Far and Sure"?

[Niall C]

The American Golfer article seems to me an embellishment of the first article and most probably by the same author (IMHO). Given the relative anonimity given by the "Far and Sure" moniker is it possible that Tilly, assuming he is Far and Sure, rehashed a previous article of his own (double fee for the same work) and felt comfortable telling a porky regarding when he played ?  The first article was in a local paper while the second was in a national publication, I can't imagine he was too bothered if some folk in Phillie noticed the similarity.

The second thing that stood out to me was the following passage;

"I had heard much of the plans and reports of the progressing work, but not until a month ago did I find the opportunity of seeing it. Two years ago Mr Charles MacDonald, who had been of great assistance in an advisory way, told me that Merion would have one of the best inland courses he had ever seen"

I'm sure its been analysed before on here but I read the above as saying that Mac advised on the plans/design. In other words someone else was doing the design. Seems obvious or am I missing something ?

Niall

[Tom MacWood]

I hope we aren't having a repeat of the Allen Wilson affair. When it was brought to everyone's attention that TEP had altered that document, he got upset, refused to explain why he did it, and he and David mysteriously disappeared from the site. Now we have a second example of TEP altering documents, no explanation, and he & David are no longer posting on this thread. When the going gets tough TEP is no where to be found.

As far as those minutes, I heard earlier this week that the Flynn book that Wayne Morrison has been working on is now going to press, so I'm hopeful you'll get a copy and we can finally put this matter to rest.  My understanding is that it will include verbatim accounts of those MCC minutes, which make very clear that no routing was approved (despite the many iterations of "plans" the committee devised) til late April, 1911, with Robert Lesley reporting for Hugh Wilson and Committee to the Board.   They will also make clear that Macdonald recommended which of the Committee's plans to use, and that's the plan that went to the board for final approval.  Somewhat magnamoniously, Macdonald says that if they use that particular plan, they will have the finest 7 finishing holes in the country.    They will also make clear that both the 3 acres that Macdonald recommended they buy back in July 1910, as well as the land along Golf House Road that was swapped in the Francis Land Swap Deal were both purchased after that approval date in late April 1911, prior to construction.   Once you see them, the timelines of everything should become much clearer.

As it turns out, partially due to the work you've put forward and the corresponding research in reaction to it, Macdonald's role as a superb advisor to the Merion Committee was confirmed and probably even accentuated, but what we now also know in much greater detail than ever before is that Hugh Wilson kicked some serious ass, and fully deserves to be known as he always has been as the architect of Merion.  

All,

Last night I outlined what I thought the "state of the course" was when Findlay wrote his article, and I think there is enough evidence from Tillnghast and Findlay to support that understanding.   "Far and Sure", whoever he was, supports that as well in his writing.

But last night at about 4am I woke up and something pretty  fundamental occurred to me that I don't think I realized prior;

I think we've made a collective mistake in believing that if there was an Alps hole, or a Redan, or any of the template holes built in the first iteration of Merion East, that it was clear direct evidence of the routing and planning of one Charles B. Macdonald.   That isn't so, and now when looks at the timelines, and the supporting evidence, the whole thing comes pretty sharply into view.

Let's consider the timeline;

June 1910 - The landowner Mr. Connell brings HH Barker to the large plot of land he wants to sell to Merion (Lloyd acting as the angel), and Barker sketches a routing that gets sent in what is essentially a prospectus package packet to Merion.

Later June 1910 - At the invite of Griscom, C.B. Macdonald and H.J. Whigham visit the proposed site for what seems to have been a single day with the intent of determining if the acreage proposed, the site specifics, and the inland soil would be appropriate to build a first class course.    In July, their very general recommendations are sent via letter to Merion, recommending a 6,000 yard non-specific course, the purchase of 3 additional acres along the creek and mostly concerned with agronomics.

July - November 1910 - Not much written record, but one can reasonably assume that properations to purchase the land and to setup committees to deal with purchasing and possible construction is being done.  

December 1910 - Mr. Lloyd purchases the 117 acres for Merion's use as a new golf club.

January - early March 1911 - Hugh Wilson and the newly formed Construction Committee work on putting together various plans of how to use the new land.   They report later to the Merion board;

""Your committee desires to report that after laying out many different courses on the new land, they went down to the National Course.....", which we now know happened around the end of the first week in March.

March 1911 - Wilson and Committee visit Macdonald at NGLA.   The Merion minutes, and later Wilson writing in 1916, make clear that the first day was spent going over Macdonald's sketches of the ideal holes abroad and the second day spent going over the course at NGLA.

to be continued

Tom,

I agree and I prefer not to type out the timeline again but I do think it's important for making my next point that people understand when Macdonald was originally at Merion in June 1910 and what he did, when the Committee went to visit him at NGLA in March 1911 (and what was discussed), and when Macdonald returned for a day in early April 1911 and what he did at that time.

I say that because it occurred to me overnight that I think many folks here have interpreted the fact that there are/were a few template type holes at Merion as some proof that C.B. Macdonald had to be directly involved with the design.  

Coupled with the fact that David's essay discovered that Wilson didn't go abroad until the spring of 1912, how possibly could Hugh WIlson and committee have already routed and seeded those template holes before he even went to see the originals unless CB Macdonald had done it for them?

It's a fair question, and on the face of it seems to make a lot of sense.

However, when one considers the fact that most of the holes as originally grassed in Sept 1911 were pretty much "blank pages", using only what natural features where available, and with very little in the way of bunkers, "mental hazards", or other man-made touches that would ultimately create the various strategies  of each hole.   Relatedly, if you think about the definitions of the Ideal Holes as identified by Macdonald, the vast majority are largely defined by their pre-prescribed bunkering patterns that serve to create the strategic choices and demands of each hole type.

Alex Findlay's June 1912 article gives us clear insight into the state of the course nine months after seeding when he states that it's too early to even comment on "the possibilities of the new course" and then mentions that it won't be until the late fall 1912 that Fred Pickering "will give it the finishing touches".  

But, we also do know that the first iteration of Merion did have a few attempts at Template style holes in the style of CB Macdonald, including the redan 3rd, the Alps 10th, and the Eden green at the 15th.

How could those have been conceived or created by Wilson if he hadn't gone abroad yet?

Well, they likely came from Wilson and Committee's trip to NGLA in March 1911, after which the Merion minutes reflect;

"On our return, we re-arranged the course and laid out five different plans."

Approximately a month later, on April 6, 1911, M&W came and spent a day onsite with the Committee and selected one plan in particular that they claimed would lead be equal to the seven best finishing holes on any inland course in the world.

Good question indeed. I do have the report and it does not say it was written by Wilson and it is not signed by Wilson. It merely says:

            Golf Committee through Mr Lesley, report (sic) as follows on the new Golf Grounds.
            Your committee desires to report that after laying out many different courses on the ground they went down to the National.....

This is all contained within the April 19, 1911 MCC board meeting minutes.


Since the wording of the report said 'your committee' and then said 'they' I just assumed that since Lesley was not part of Wilson's committee that the report was written by Wilson's committee who were the only ones with first hand knowledge of what they'd been doing through the winter and spring of 1911 and at NGLA (again Lesley was not part of Wilson's committee and apparently did not go with them to NGLA in early April 1911) and since Wilson was the chairman of the Wilson committee and chairman generally write reports for the committees they chair, I have assumed that Wilson probably wrote the report that was delivered to the board by Lesley, the chairman of the Golf Committee that the Wilson committee apparently worked and operated under. But I don't know that for sure and I admit that another member of the Wilson committee may've actually written the Wilson Committee report although I can't exactly imagine why another would have rather than Wilson himself.

If you haven't figured this out for yourself at this point, Hugh Wilson was clearly a very efficient and organized man in these kinds of things and his app. 1000 agronomy letters makes that very loud and clear!

Have you ever even belonged to a golf club, David Moriarty, and do you even have a modicum of personal experience in things like this with these kinds of private clubs, how they work, how their committees work and function and report and so forth and so on?

No, I didn't think so!  

HOWEVER, when the Wilson Committee report to the MCC Board of Directors meeting on April 19, 1911 used the term “we laid out numerous different courses on the new ground” in the winter of 1911 BEFORE visiting NGLA and Macdonald that could mean they staked out holes on the property AND/OR they submitted those staked out “courses” on the ground to a paper topographical contour survey “plan” of the property (courses drawn on those paper plans). I know they had topographical contour survey maps of the property that was now in the possession of Lloyd because Wilson mentioned the plan and enclosed it to Russell Oakley in Washington D.C. in his first correspondence on Feb. 1, 1911.

In that case we KNOW that when they used the term “laid out” to describe what they HAD BEEN DOING in the PREVIOUS months in that report (winter months of 1911 and before visiting NGLA) there is no way at all they could’ve meant they were BUILDING or actually CONSTRUCTING a golf course on the ground because WE KNOW from the Merion TIMELINE that was an event (the actual BUILDING of a course) that would NOT TAKE PLACE for a number of months HENCE!

In that Wilson Committee report to the MCC Board Meeting on April 19, 1911, it also said they “rearranged the course and laid out five different plans” FOLLOWING their visit to NGLA in the second week of March, 1911. One can certainly logically assume that by “laid out” at that point they meant submitting a routings and perhaps designs to their paper topographical contour survey plans which Macdonald and Whigam would review on April 6, 1911, help them select one to be submitted to the MCC Board of Directors meeting on April 19, 1911, and which “plan” was reported to have been ATTACHED to the Wilson Report and which was reported to have been approved and which would be built in the coming months.

No problem, it may be taking a risk with my understanding with Wayne and MCC but I'm willing to take that risk on that at this point if it will AT LEAST help to put a stop to the constant ongoing argument and bickering and mindbendly boring and irrelevent PARSING of words and their meaning on here as to WHAT drawings and sketches the Wilson Committee were referring to during their two day visit to NGLA:

Your committee desires to report that after laying out many different golf course 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......

That's all that's mentioned about plans and data (the words sketches and drawings are not used) and I think it's pretty clear that probably means Macdonald's plans and such from abroad even though one could conclude the first part could mean his plans of NGLA itself also, BUT it could not possibly mean Merion's plans or drawings. I hope you all notice the word "his" (so I didn't highlight or capitalize it ) and I hope no one on here will try to contend Merion's plans were HIS (Macdonald's, even though at this point I wouldn't put anything past the essayist)! 

[Tom MacWood]

Mike
Is there some reason you can not answer this simple question?

It appears you were quoting the report before TEP, where did you get those direct quotes from the April 1911 report?

[Mike_Cirba]

Tom,

I'm not sure if it was this thread or another prior but everything I quoted here from the minutes had already been posted prior by Tom.

By the way, if you're confused about the paraphrsing Tom used that nixed the pronouns on a post or two, my understanding is the way I have it in the material in quotes is correct.   Hope that helps.

[Mike_Cirba]

Niall,

In your reading of the AG article above, how would you interpret what "Far and Sure" said was "conceived by" Hugh Wilson and committee;  the holes or the problems of the holes?

I'm not sure they are not synonymous but I'm interested in your take and anyone else's.

[Tom MacWood]

Tom,

I'm not sure if it was this thread or another prior but everything I quoted here from the minutes had already been posted prior by Tom.

By the way, if you're confused about the paraphrsing Tom used that nixed the pronouns on a post or two, my understanding is the way I have it in the material in quotes is correct.   Hope that helps.

Mike
When did Tom first post the excerpt?

I searched (and I searched pretty thoroughly) and yours was the first I found, shortly after you told the group Wayne would have those minutes in his new book.

I'm only confused why TEP continues to get a pass for altering documents. Jeff B asked a while back what a historian would think of this debate, I can tell you what he or she would think if they learned someone deliberately altered documents to support their case, and it would not be good.

[Mike_Cirba]

Tom,

I was very careful not to quote anything here from the MCC minutes that wasn't posted prior by Tom because I assumed I did not have permission to do so and maintain that understanding.

As I mentioned many times previously, Wayne has no interest in contributing primary source info to this website and given the history between you guys, do you find that surprising?

Also, lest anyone gets the wrong impression related to Tom Paul or David Moriarty,s dropping out of this thread, I believe it was mutually requested to lower the temperature in the room and hopefully allow this thread to die a natural death.

In the absence of any additional evidence or any new theories to vet, aren't we simply rewording the same old disagreements?

 

[Rich Goodale]

Tom M

100 year old documents cannot be "altered" by anyone on this site, even by one as multi-skilled as TE Paul.  Maybe misquoted, but that will resolve itself, if true.  "Altred?"  No chance.  They are what they are and will eventually be revealed for what they really are, which may well be inconclusive.  I've been through enough source documents to know that the only thing which is clear is that the "truth" is nothing but clear. You should find a thread with more meat on it to gnaw over if you are really looking for a meal.  IMHO, of course.

Cheers

Rich

[Mike_Cirba]

Tom,

Pronoun persnicketing aside, you're a smart guy.  Are you really honestly saying you can't tell who that portion of the minutes is referring to that after laying out many golf courses went down to NGLA and on their return created five different plans?

How many Merion committees do you think went down to NGLA?

[Tom MacWood]

Tom M

100 year old documents cannot be "altered" by anyone on this site, even by one as multi-skilled as TE Paul.  Maybe misquoted, but that will resolve itself, if true.  "Altred?"  No chance.  They are what they are and will eventually be revealed for what they really are, which may well be inconclusive.  I've been through enough source documents to know that the only thing which is clear is that the "truth" is nothing but clear. You should find a thread with more meat on it to gnaw over if you are really looking for a meal.  IMHO, of course.

Cheers

Rich

Rich
They were altered. A misquote is an inoccent mistake, these were obviously not innocent mistakes. These were deliberate acts to help support his case, and he hasn't denied it either.

Although I thought your article on OTM in Golf Arch magazine was misleading and historically inaccurate, no one could accuse you of deliberately falsifying documents.

[Tom MacWood]

Tom,

I was very careful not to quote anything here from the MCC minutes that wasn't posted prior by Tom because I assumed I did not have permission to do so and maintain that understanding.

As I mentioned many times previously, Wayne has no interest in contributing primary source info to this website and given the history between you guys, do you find that surprising?

Also, lest anyone gets the wrong impression related to Tom Paul or David Moriarty,s dropping out of this thread, I believe it was mutually requested to lower the temperature in the room and hopefully allow this thread to die a natural death.

In the absence of any additional evidence or any new theories to vet, aren't we simply rewording the same old disagreements?

 

Mike
I'm sure you were careful, but I cannot find any TEP quote of the excerpt before yours on 4/15.

Here is a link to the thread, can you find it?

http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,39341.0/

[Rich Goodale]

Tom

You do need to calm down and think about what the word "altering" means in relation to documents.  I do not think that even you or Dave would accuse Tom of actually altering any of Merion's documents if you really understood the meaning of the word and/or knew Tom.

As to my OTM (and other) articles that you have sometimes kindly cited in some of your research, please let me know where you think I was "misleading and historically inaccurate."  One only learns if one is made aware of specifics rather than broad generalities.

Thanks in advance.

Rich

[Jeff_Brauer]

Tom Mac,

I could be wrong, but vaguely recall TePaul pulling off some of his posts, angry at how they were being assaulted, or perhaps at the request of Wayne or MCC in how much info he was putting out there. I can't say for sure, but perhaps that is why you can't find the minutes that he posted originally.  Just a possibility.

Like Rich says, I think in some ways you and DM ought to calm down (as TePaul needed to a while back)  While I am not a lawyer I wonder if some of the accusations (in reality going both ways here) could be construed as slander.  Even if borderlline, we know TePaul has both the temperment and money to find out!

[TEPaul]

Although I don’t want to post on this thread or subject anymore, the following remarks of Tom MacWood just have to be addressed before I depart from this subject on this website. The other day I sent an email to the administrator of this website about this thread and this subject of Merion and then we discussed it on the phone. We both agree it reflects badly on the main participants and that it is also reflecting badly on this website and it’s even beginning to do what might be termed “collateral damage” at some clubs and certainly including Merion. The 2009 Walker Cup is coming up at Merion in less than two months. A lot of us will be there and very much including the administrator of this site. Because of this subject on here it seems like some negative things may be happening and certainly none of us want that. Bradley Anderson, arguably the most realistic and coolest head on this thread mentioned this on this thread some weeks ago and some sort of took him to task for even suggesting what he did. People on here who did that should reconsider and take him seriously because what he was suggesting and indicating is what happens in the real world. Perhaps some on here don’t care about that because they don’t live in the real world of an actual relationship with some of these clubs but others of us do including the administrator of this website. I suggested the main protagonists of this thread and subject just be asked to stop posting on this subject on here. I agreed to do that and apparently Moriarty has too. I would ask and suggest that MacWood and Cirba do as well. Now, with this issue of me altering documents on here; I have never done anything like that and never will. My approach and philosophy on these things is that I will offer my opinions on what I know and what I have. If someone disagrees with my opinions then that’s their good right. If someone wants to see the actual documents then they can try to establish a working relationship with this club as I have over the last thirty years. If I’ve made some mistakes in some posts on this thread then that is what they are---mistakes, even though I still don’t know what mistakes some think I’ve made. Sometimes we probably get some words or spelling wrong in what we write on here. A good example of that is that Tom MacWood despite being corrected about half a dozen times still can’t seem to figure out how to spell the name correctly of one of Merion’s major participants and historical recorders, Hugh Wilson’s brother Alan. MacWood spells it Allan or Allen or seemingly any other possible way than the correct way. For the last time HIS NAME is ALAN D. Wilson!!! This “we” and “they” debate is complete nonsense. The fact is that Wilson report refers to the committee in that report with BOTH “we” and “they”. If that doesn’t make grammatical sense to someone like Tom MacWood then that’s his problem because that is the way that report was written over 98 years ago. In his last remarks in posts in the last day or so he does not say he thinks I altered documents and even deliberately, he states that I have done that---eg altered them and altered them deliberately and he even assigns a motive for doing that to me, and he even claimed in writing that somehow everyone on here can see that or should know that. In his last remark below he says I haven’t even denied doing that. Well, as far as I know no one has ever asked me to consider confirming or denying it but since this issue has come up this way from MacWood I categorically DENY ever altering any documents at any time to do with Merion or anything else on this website, deliberately or otherwise. If I have made some mistakes in wording or spelling, as most everyone on here does and has at one time or another, by all means point them out and I'll consider correcting them if appropriate.

Cirba and MacWood I suggest you two at least stop posting not only on this thread but on this subject as well as I have and apparently Moriarty has. It really is doing some collateral damage as Bradley Anderson suggested it would and the sooner you realize that the better it will be for all of us and for this website. I guarantee you will have no disagreement from this website’s administrator if you do precisely that and like RIGHT NOW!

And now, having agreed with the administrator not to post anymore on this subject I surely hope this one will be the last on this unfortunately issue on here!







“I hope we aren't having a repeat of the Allen Wilson affair. When it was brought to everyone's attention that TEP had altered that document, he got upset, refused to explain why he did it, and he and David mysteriously disappeared from the site. Now we have a second example of TEP altering documents, no explanation, and he & David are no longer posting on this thread. When the going gets tough TEP is no where to be found.”

“I'm only confused why TEP continues to get a pass for altering documents. Jeff B asked a while back what a historian would think of this debate, I can tell you what he or she would think if they learned someone deliberately altered documents to support their case, and it would not be good.”

“Rich
They were altered. A misquote is an inoccent mistake, these were obviously not innocent mistakes. These were deliberate acts to help support his case, and he hasn't denied it either.”

[mike_malone]

http://www.philly.com/inquirer/home_top_left_story/20090723_History_in_the_archives_of_Merion_Golf_Club.html


  Not to stir things up, but this may shed light on the current Merion version of the early history.

[Tom MacWood]

Tom

You do need to calm down and think about what the word "altering" means in relation to documents.  I do not think that even you or Dave would accuse Tom of actually altering any of Merion's documents if you really understood the meaning of the word and/or knew Tom.

As to my OTM (and other) articles that you have sometimes kindly cited in some of your research, please let me know where you think I was "misleading and historically inaccurate."  One only learns if one is made aware of specifics rather than broad generalities.

Thanks in advance.

Rich

Rich
I'm perfectly calm. Everyone knows what altered means in this case. The transcibed versions were altered to support their case. I suppose they thought they could get away with it since they were hording the original documents. Not only does not reflect well on them, it doesn't reflect well on Merion, or anyone who defends such behavior.

Regarding my essay I thought about using this quote of yours from your OTM article to illustrate how people exaggerate OTM's resume, but I decided against it.

"Most of us know most of these already, but just listing the names of some of the most revered trips off the tongue so smoothly that I can't resist writing them together: Dornoch, Machrihanish, Elie, County Down, New Course, Portrush, Wallasey, Lahinch, Muirfield, Rosapenna, and Nairn."

The acknowledgment was for your Arch Simpson article, which was very good..

[Tom MacWood]

Tom Mac,

I could be wrong, but vaguely recall TePaul pulling off some of his posts, angry at how they were being assaulted, or perhaps at the request of Wayne or MCC in how much info he was putting out there. I can't say for sure, but perhaps that is why you can't find the minutes that he posted originally.  Just a possibility.

Like Rich says, I think in some ways you and DM ought to calm down (as TePaul needed to a while back)  While I am not a lawyer I wonder if some of the accusations (in reality going both ways here) could be construed as slander.  Even if borderlline, we know TePaul has both the temperment and money to find out!

You may know something I don't know, but I don't believe you can delete posts. You can edit them, but I don't think you can get rid of them. If they are edited you would see they are edited and that is not what appears to have happened here. In fact there are several posts of his with the quote for all to see.

I'm quite calm. The fact that I'm not going to let his actions pass without an explanation, even though many others turn a blind eye, has nothing to do with the state of my emotions.