[DMoriarty]

But isn't history frequently decided after the affected "public" makes their own determination?  And, there's nothing wrong with contrasting views of any given historical fact.  We see it all the time - for example, was Gettysburg lost because of lack of Confederate communication or was it the superior strategy of the Union forces?   I think it depends on the reader.

Dan,

You are entitled to your opinion and certainly people may interpret the same facts differently, but with all due respect to John's recent thread, this was not meant to be an opinion poll.  As I said in the opening post, It is meant to be a discussion addressing a simple and narrow question:  " What is the factual basis for believing that MCC's Board chose [Wilson] to design Merion East?"

So your opinion is inaposite here, unless you are williing to back it up with facts. 

Plus, Dan, in my experience with these Merion threads your opinion seems pretty much set regardless of the facts, and your contribution is pretty much a periodic popping in to state the same opinion over and over again, without ever offering factual support.  Do I have that about right?

[Dan Herrmann]

David, Yep, you have it right.

I base my opinion on what I've seen presented, both here and elsewhere.

But I was answering the question in the thread title, "Was Hugh Wilson Chosen to Design Merion East?".   I admit that I didn't notice a request for factual backup.  I do see that now, so I'll respectfully bow out.

[JESII]

What is the factual basis for believing that MCC's Board chose him to design Merion East?

David,

There have been several contemporary quotes indicating Wilson was the lead guy on the project. Did it start that way in June 1910? I don't think they tagged anyone as lead architect. They sought out and accepted assistance from CBM and probably Barker, but Alan Wilson didn't exactly mince words when he said it was a home made job, or some such line with no professional architect being used.

I don't think anyone can say unequivocally that HW was appointed to design Merion, but the fact that noone was should be indicative of a different time...

[John Mayhugh]

John + David,

Please put it back in your respective pants.

Thanks.

What do you mean by this tacky, classless remark?  I've said nothing negative about you at all. 

Still waiting for your explanation, Mr. Cirba.

[DMoriarty]

What is the factual basis for believing that MCC's Board chose him to design Merion East?

David,

There have been several contemporary quotes indicating Wilson was the lead guy on the project. Did it start that way in June 1910? I don't think they tagged anyone as lead architect. They sought out and accepted assistance from CBM and probably Barker, but Alan Wilson didn't exactly mince words when he said it was a home made job, or some such line with no professional architect being used.

I don't think anyone can say unequivocally that HW was appointed to design Merion, but the fact that noone was should be indicative of a different time...

Jim,   I am not sure to what quotes you refer.  I am drawing a blank on that one.   Can you point me in the right direction?

Alan Wilson wasn't referring to Macdonald and Whigham when he noted that they did not use a professional architect.  And his reference to Wilson being "the person in the main" was made in direct comparison to the other members of the committee, not to M&W.  

But that aside, by the time Alan Wilson wrote his, Hugh Wilson had been the person in the main without a doubt.  After all, before Wilson's death, Merion had completed Major changes under his direction, and at the time of his death I think they were as in the process of a major bunker project. Again, given the timing of the letter and Flynn's continuing involvement with the course it seems more likely to me that  Alan Wilson was protecting his brother's reputation from encroachment by Flynn, not by CBM.  

[JESII]

David,

Let's take these guys at their words.

What was the phrase Alan Wilson used about the course being a home made one, or something like that...

[DMoriarty]

David,

Let's take these guys at their words.

What was the phrase Alan Wilson used about the course being a home made one, or something like that...

I'll try, but I'd be a lot more comfortable doing so if we could also take our source at his word.   Here's hoping TEPaul and Wayne did not doctor the Alan Wilson statement more than we already know.

Here is the first paragraph of the report:

There were unusual and interesting features connected with the beginnings of these two courses which should not be forgotten. First of all, they were both “Homemade”. When it was known that we must give up the old course, a “Special Committee on New Golf Grounds”—composed of the late Frederick L. Baily. S.T. Bodine, E.C. Felton, H.G. Lloyd, and Robert Lesley, Chairman, chose the site; and a “Special Committee” designed and built the two courses without the help of a golf architect. Those two good and kindly sportsmen, Charles B. MacDonald and H.J. Whigam, the men who conceived the idea of and designed the National Links at Southampton, both ex-amateur champions and the latter a Scot who had learned his golf at Prestwick— twice came to Haverford, first to go over the ground and later to consider and advise about our plans. They also had our Committee as their guests at the National and their advice and suggestions as to the lay-out of the East Course were of the greatest help and value.  Except for this, the entire responsibility for the design and construction of the two courses rests upon the special Construction Committee, composed of R.S. Francis, R.E. Griscom, H.G. Lloyd. Dr. Harry Toulmin, and the late Hugh I. Wilson, Chairman.

He wrote that they did it without the help of an architect, but then immediately went into how much those two amateur sportsmen helped.  If he meant to include Macdonald and Whigham as "architects" who did not help, then the report makes no sense.    I don't think he thought of them as architects who earned their living designing courses.  They were amateur sportsmen.

So my reading is that Wilson meant that except for the help provided by M&W they did it themselves without the help of a [professional] architect.   How else could one read it without rendering it nonsensical? 

[Mike Sweeney]

He wrote that they did it without the help of an architect, but then immediately went into how much those two amateur sportsmen helped.  If he meant to include Macdonald and Whigham as "architects" who did not help, then the report makes no sense.    I don't think he thought of them as architects who earned their living designing courses.  They were amateur sportsmen.

So my reading is that Wilson meant that except for the help provided by M&W they did it themselves without the help of a [professional] architect.   How else could one read it without rendering it nonsensical? 

David,

Okay, I agree with this, so can you take us to the next step of your thinking?

[Niall C]

 
It is a rather simple and narrow question.   What is the factual basis for believing that MCC's Board chose him to design Merion East?

Assuming we are trying to get to the answer of who designed Merion, then this is the wrong question IMO as, in the absence of proof otherwise, there is enough there by way of club records and contemporary accounts to credit Wilson. The question therefore should be what factual basis do we have for believing that MCC's Board chose anyone else to design the course ?

Niall

 

[Tom MacWood]

 
It is a rather simple and narrow question.   What is the factual basis for believing that MCC's Board chose him to design Merion East?

Assuming we are trying to get to the answer of who designed Merion, then this is the wrong question IMO as, in the absence of proof otherwise, there is enough there by way of club records and contemporary accounts to credit Wilson. The question therefore should be what factual basis do we have for believing that MCC's Board chose anyone else to design the course ?

Niall

 

Niall
What club records? The MCC minutes do not mention Wilson or his committee.

What reason or reasons would they have had for choosing Wilson? What were his qualifications?

[Mike_Cirba]

There is no way the minutes of an organization would include the members of a temorary sub-committee like Wilson's that reported to a permanent standing committee "ike Lesleys Golf Committtee.   

Merion was a multi-sport club with a focus on cricket in 1910.

Honestly, sometimes either the stunning naiverte and/or purposeful twisting and omission of facts here is just incomprehensible. 

Now, if someone had found the meeting minutes of Lesley's Golf Committee and there was no mention of Wilson then I would agree, but we also know, as does the author of this thread, that would never be the case.

[Tom MacWood]

Mike
You are obviously more familiar with the inner workings of a Cricket Club, but the fact remains (for whatever reason) there is no mention of Wilson or his committee.

My message to Niall still stands.

[Tom MacWood]

Mike
Was Wilson on the green committee at the old course? When was he selected chairman of the green committee of the new course?

[Mike Sweeney]

What reason or reasons would they have had for choosing Wilson? What were his qualifications?

I think you and David are trying to apply 2009 standards to the early 20th century world. If this was 1925, I could see your point. Reality is there really are no professional architects in 1911? Macdonald never accepted a fee at any of his projects. Even today, there are no real standards today to call yourself a golf architect. If I could afford it, I could appoint myself as architect of a new to be built course.

In 1911, if I had fairly unlimited time and money, access to some of the greatest golf architecture minds of the day in M&W, access to industrialist throughout Philadelphia that are building bridges, infrastructure and factories, and I had a supportive membership, I absolutely believe I could build a great golf course. We have such a person on this Board today in Archie Struthers. Is Twisted Dune world class? No, but he did not have the access, money and support that Hugh Wilson did at the time? No.

Charles Banks states in the Yale Alumni Weekly on April 19, 1929, "Mr.Macdonald was familiar with the plans from the outset, but Mr. Raynor was the real genius of this masterpiece (Yale), who made the layout, designed the greens, and gave the work of construction his supervision from start to finish."

Raynor is dead at the time of the letter and I am guessing that Charlie was still getting request for work that could have gone to Banks.  Thus, Banks had every incentive to give more/full credit to Charlie but he did not. There are other passages from "Golf at Yale" that I can send to you (IM me) if you want support that Charlie was very familiar with the site. Who gets credit for the the Yale routing? Unclear to me, but it sounds like a collaboration. Today, most people at Yale agree with the following attribution:

Seth Raynor - Architect

CB Macdonald - Consultant

Still, Charlie writes about Yale along with National, Lido and Mid-Ocean in his book and to my knowledge never writes about Merion a world famous course at a very early age due to its Jones connection. Why did Macdonald not mention Merion, to my knowledge ever?

I believe that Merion has always (and probably more so now!) known and acknowledged Macdonald's involvement at Merion. I did not know about it and have attributed it to David's essay but that is due to my (probably lack of) knowledge about the details of the club's history.

So my question to you and David is, what do you want Merion to do, and please be specific?

[Mike_Cirba]

The other thing everyone is forgetting, or purposefully neglecting, is that Merion had the most experienced golf course shaper and agronomist in the United States at the time in Fred Pickering.

[Tom MacWood]

Mike
Off the top of my head these were some of the professional architects in 1910:
HH Barker
Alex Findlay
JD Dunn
Seymour Dunn
Devereux Emmet
Donald Ross
Tom Bendelow
Herbert Strong
George Low
Alex Smith
Isaac Mackie
William Watson
George O'Neil


I disagree about using a modern standard, I think we are more in tune with what was happening in 1910 than many who disagree with us.

[Mike Sweeney]

Off the top of my head these were some of the professional architects in 1910:
HH Barker
Alex Findlay
JD Dunn
Seymour Dunn
Devereux Emmet
Donald Ross
Tom Bendelow
Herbert Strong
George Low
Alex Smith
Isaac Mackie
William Watson
George O'Neil

And once you hire them, you lose Charlie as a consultant, because as it states in Golf at Yale, "he (Macdonald) staunchly believed in an amateur ethic and refused to accept any fees for his work." Who would you rather have in 1911? Not even you are going to pick Herbert Strong over Charlie at that time.

Maybe it is something about Philly but given the resources, I think I could smoke all those guys you listed with Charlie at my side!

[Tom MacWood]

Why would you lose CBM as a consultant?

[Phil_the_Author]

Tom,

You left out Tilly. In 1910 he was hard at work on Shawnee for which he was being paid.

[Tom MacWood]

Mike
CBM wrote in Scotlands Gift that he refused to accept a fee, but that he had no problem with others accepting a fee, and gave Emmet as an example. Raynor must have made a small fortune in golf architecture. I know CBM worked with Forgan, Emmet and Raynor all in 1909 or after, and all paid professionals.

[Mike Sweeney]

Why would you lose CBM as a consultant?

Just my opinion as a reader of history including George's book.

If you can, can you address my question of what do you and David want Merion to do? Thanks

[Tom MacWood]

Mike
I'm not holding my breath, but I (and I can only speak for myslef) would like Merion to join in the search for the truth. A good start would be providing a copy of the April 1911 minutes. In the past we have been told they don't have clearance from MCC, but obviously that hasn't prevented the November 1910 minutes from being copied and posted on GCA.

[Sean_A]

There is no way the minutes of an organization would include the members of a temorary sub-committee like Wilson's that reported to a permanent standing committee "ike Lesleys Golf Committtee.   

Merion was a multi-sport club with a focus on cricket in 1910.

Honestly, sometimes either the stunning naiverte and/or purposeful twisting and omission of facts here is just incomprehensible. 

Now, if someone had found the meeting minutes of Lesley's Golf Committee and there was no mention of Wilson then I would agree, but we also know, as does the author of this thread, that would never be the case.

Mike

I spend a lot of time going through minutes of all sorts.  If there is one thing that I am sure of it is that one can never predict what will or will not be minuted.  It all comes down to the diligence or lack thereof of the person taking the notes and how little or much he (most likely in consultation with whatever group) potentially wants to be made public. Minutes are a great "so called" first hand source, but they are often not terribly precise - much of the time purposefully so.  What is really telling is the agenda and minutes of a meeting.  Unfortunately, agendas are quite rare to come across.

Ciao 

[Mike_Cirba]

Mike
I'm not holding my breath, but I (and I can only speak for myslef) would like Merion to join in the search for the truth. A good start would be providing a copy of the April 1911 minutes. In the past we have been told they don't have clearance from MCC, but obviously that hasn't prevented the November 1910 minutes from being copied and posted on GCA.

Tom,

The November 15, 1910 Merion correspondences were already in the public domain through the Sayres Scrapbook, which they were affixed to.

I wouldn't hold my breath, either.  

Perhaps if this had been done a different way originally, but with one Merion member here having been thrown off GCA and a good friend of many of the members being castigated and called a liar routinely even though he's also stepped away and retired from GCA in utter frustration from this discussion, I'm not expecting to see much more in our lifetimes.

Perhaps we should just buy Wayne and Tom's book?   Lord knows now they might have time to actually finish it!   

[Mike_Cirba]

Mike

I spend a lot of time going through minutes of all sorts.  If there is one thing that I am sure of it is that one can never predict what will or will not be minuted.  It all comes down to the diligence or lack thereof of the person taking the notes and how little or much he (most likely in consultation with whatever group) potentially wants to be made public. Minutes are a great "so called" first hand source, but they are often not terribly precise - much of the time purposefully so.  What is really telling is the agenda and minutes of a meeting.  Unfortunately, agendas are quite rare to come across.

Ciao  

Sean,

While that's true, unless there was some related board action or proposal needing board approval, the announcement of the makeup of the members of a temporary sub-committee reporting to a permanent standing committee would hardly be routine or expected as is implied by the very question and nature of this thread.  

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()