[Mike Cirba]

Jim,

But didn't this become a moot point once Lloyd purchased ALL of the Johnson Farm, as well as the Dallas Estate (total 161 acres) in December, 1910?

Don't you think this was the plan for some time prior?   All it really meant was that they had to deal with Lloyd for any revisions from what was probably a working boundary (which is why Francis went right to his house after his brainstorm), but they certainly had plenty to play with once he made that purchase.

I'm sure Lloyd wanted to maximize the value of the property he bought, but I'm also sure he wanted a great golf course.   The Cuyler letter in fact, said something to the effect of;  "

It was found advisable that the Haverford Development Co. should take title in Mr. Lloyd's name, so that the lines be revised subsequently"

[TEPaul]

"I would suggest your strict reading of these guys not doing anything on the grounds prior to the formal establishment of the committee in January 1911 is the equivalent of David's strict formal readin of the reasons the club had to move from Haverford...when a little gray is probably correct on both counts."



Sully:

Now wait a minute. The ONLY reason I have ever said I don't think 'these guys' (to use your term assuming you mean the whole Wilson Committee) were doing anything of any significance at all on that ground, at least before Lloyd owned that ground in Dec. 1910 is because I have NEVER seen a single shred of evidence anywhere that they were!!


Since these people seemed to record so much of what else they did from June 1910 to say May 1911 how can it be explained that they NEVER recorded THAT and how could it be it was NEVER mentioned by anyone back then if they actually did it to any significant degree? With no evidence at all to suggest that, why should I think? Should I think it only because YOU can't imagine that they wouldn't have? I don't think so. THAT sure does not pass as any kind of contemporaneous factual evidence. I don't mean that disrespectfully of you, that's for sure, but you must adimit to the fact it just doesn't. 

I just don't believe in seriously speculating about somethng with absolutely zero factual evidence to support my speculation.

Honestly, Sully, just try to answer that before I go on to your next point like your remark about what Moriarty said about Tolhurst's mention of their reasons to move in 1909. He has never seen much of any MCC meeting minutes from any era, anyway, and most certainly not from 1909. Frankly, I'm not so sure I have either but as of today I hear they will ALL be shortly available.

AND, if those MCC meeting minutes from 1909 clearly say one of the MMGA reasons for moving from Haverford to Ardmore was because the Haverford course was too short and consequently obsolete would you THEN believe THAT was one of their reasons for moving to Ardmore?

And if you do believe that after hearing what the 1909 MCC meeting minutes said about that what would you THEN say to Moriarty?
 

[JESII]

Why did the proposed road need ot be on that map if they had no idea where the course was going to be?

[JESII]

Tom,

I just saw your post and can't quite make sense of what you're asking me so give me a minute...

[JESII]

Since these people seemed to record so much of what else they did from June 1910 to say May 1911 how can it be explained that they NEVER recorded THAT if they actually did it to any significant degree? With no evidence at all to suggest that why should I think it only because YOU can imagine that they wouldn't have? I don't think so. THAT sure does not pass as any kind of contemporaneous factual evidence.

Honestly, Sully, just try to answer that before I go on to your next point
 

I think is the heart of the question...and I've said before and I'll say again...I think it's staring us right in the face.

I think that 11/15/1910 plan is proof that they knew generally where the golf course was going to go before it was drawn.

And if it helps cool your jets, I think the very fact that CBM's July letter was so vague proves that the people that became the committee were the ones that developed the routing...most importantly the final 5 hole solution.

[JESII]

To be clear guys, I'm not making any of my statements as fact...just opinion...I think David presented his Essay as fact (I know, it's in the IMO section, but...) and I think you guys have vehemently opposed that with all sorts of "solutions" and presumed facts as well.

Tom - I can feel your blood start to boil and that's usually the precursor for a few pages of venom...let's try to discuss this stuff calmly.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Jim,

No doubt they knew generally where it was going to go.  They wanted to use the farm house as clubhouse, barn as maintenance, and be close to the tracks for access (where the expensive houses wanted to be further, and out of the Cobb Creek floodplain)  They also knew they wanted to hold to about 120 acres, starting with the bottom of the L and east of Ardmore, close to the tracks.

That doesn't necessarily mean that they had routed much of anything, does it?  I think they scheduled the meeting to introduce the members to the project and needed a map.  They didn't know where the boundary had to be, so they drew an approximate one.  As mentioned, it happened to have totaled more than the 120 acres agreed upon, which also suggests it was a graphic, and not a final exhibit.

I have seen similar scenarions 100 years later, which is why it leads me to believe that the routing was not attempted in any serious way.  Even if one member had doodled some stick drawings, at the very least, they weren't presented to any committee until it actually formed.

[TEPaul]

"Why did the proposed road need ot be on that map if they had no idea where the course was going to be?"


Sully:

What do you mean they had no idea where the course was going to be? Did you not read what I said above about the land that Horatio Gates Lloyd bought in Dec. 1910? It was the entire Johnson Farm (140 acres) PLUS the Dallas Estate (21). That totals 161 acres. Of course they knew what land the golf course was GOING to be on. And in that day and age that was plenty of land for a good golf course if one bothered to walk over it for about a half hour.

The thing I learned well from Bill Coore is a primary thing to worry about with land for golf in the routing process is if it has any or too many areas that you might get one hole into but you can't get another one out of. He called it getting stuck in corners or little boxes and triangles or whatever.

And I think this is precisely what happened with that triangle. It was there before the property was routed but it was just a bit too narrow to get the 15th green into where they wanted the green for a hole of its length but too narrow to also get the 16th tee into to get the 16th quarry hole out of where they wanted its tee for a hole of its length.

Frankly, this scenario never occured to anyone I know of until about a year and a half ago when I was driving down from the very top of Golf House Road at College Ave and right between the Hall and Van Arkle houses and when I swung right rather sharply around the bottom of the Hall's property it all of a sudden hit me-----Oh My GOD, this is nothing like the configuration of the proposed road on the top of that triangle on that November 1910 land plan!

[JESII]

OK Jeff - your opinion on this type of stuff is much more valuable than mine.

I have to ask a few questions in that vein though:

If they had nothing more than a single members doodlings, why did they stick to that initial boundary so closely? No more than 15 or 20 yards give and take as it went down the road...if the "approximate road" meant nothing, why did they abide by it?

More specific to Francis - when he said his only contribution was to suggest trading the land along Golf House Rd "where the fine homes are" for the area where the 15th tee and 16th tee are...why it have really been just 15 yard slices both giving AND TAKING from the land east of that proposed road?

[Mike Cirba]

Jim,

If you look at that Land Plan you see they intended clearly to show ingress and egress to the proposed golf course property as well as the proposed real estate development,

This included all motorways and rail lines.  Let's remember the timeframe as a course further out from the Main Line needed to show accessibility.

Let me ask you a followup;

If the amount of the Francis Swap was so precise, at 130x190 that Francis recalled it exactly 40 years later, then why wouldn't they have just had Pugh and Hubbard draw their scale map "to scale"?

Why instead create a triangle that's about 100 yards wide by 265 yards long?   Why not just represent it accurately in the first place, especially since it was the most important midnight ride since Paul Revere?     

[JESII]

"Why did the proposed road need ot be on that map if they had no idea where the course was going to be?"


Sully:

What do you mean they had no idea where the course was going to be? Did you not read what I said above about the land that Horatio Gates Lloyd bought in Dec. 1910? It was the entire Johnson Farm (140 acres) PLUS the Dallas Estate (21). That totals 161 acres. Of course they knew what land the golf course was GOING to be on. And in that day and age that was plenty of land for a good golf course if one bothered to walk over it for about a half hour.

The thing I learned well from Bill Coore is a primary thing to worry about with land for golf in the routing process is if it has any or too many areas that you might get one hole into but you can't get another one out of. He called it getting stuck in corners or little boxes and triangles or whatever.

And I think this is precisely what happened with that triangle. It was there before the property was routed but it was just a bit too narrow to get the 15th green into where they wanted a hole of its length but too narrow to also get the 16th tee into to get the 16th quarry hole out of where they wanted its tee for a hole of its length.

Tom,

This is a big part of my point.

They didn't need to draw the line for the road. They chose to. Why would they choose to buy a corner to paint themselves into?

[JESII]

Jim,

If you look at that Land Plan you see they intended clearly to show ingress and egress to the proposed golf course property as well as the proposed real estate development,

This included all motorways and rail lines.  Let's remember the timeframe as a course further out from the Main Line needed to show accessibility.

Let me ask you a followup;

If the amount of the Francis Swap was so precise, at 130x190 that Francis recalled it exactly 40 years later, then why wouldn't they have just had Pugh and Hubbard draw their scale map "to scale"?

Why instead create a triangle that's about 100 yards wide by 265 yards long?   Why not just represent it accurately in the first place, especially since it was the most important midnight ride since Paul Revere?     

Remember - I don't think the hole was "designed up" prior to 11/15/1910, just that they knew they were going up there...I would imagine he (Francis) had a strong mind for numbers, hence the finished product could easily have been what he recalled best...40 years later.

[Mike Cirba]

Jim,

I'm not at a computer now but will repost later to show that the differences between the drawing and finished course were much bigger than 15-20 yards.

The whole left side of 15 would be missing as well as the entire 14th green!

Even the base of the triangle is off by a good 30 yards, or drawn to 76 pct. Of what they needed.

[JESII]

Mike,

In either event...fine. My point is that your theory needs the road to be drawn pretty much at random but then for some reason was used as the hard border until the idea popped into Francis' mind, at which point he had to ask permission to move the undrawn line...I can't see the logic behind drawing the line at random and then using it as the hard line...

[TEPaul]

"Tom,
This is a big part of my point.
They didn't need to draw the line for the road. They chose to. Why would they choose to buy a corner to paint themselves into?"


Sully:


They had to draw the line for the road and they chose to because they had an agreement with HDC that they would buy 117 acreas. That "agreement" was struck between MCC and HDC in Nov. 1910. But in November of 1910 the boundary lines of the ENTIRE property they would eventually buy FOR THEIR GOLF COURSE were not all set in that agreement in November 1910.

Do you know why?

NONE of the boundary lines of the overall property (Johnson Farm and Dallas Estate) were flexible or negotiable for the golf course with the EXCEPTION OF ONE!

Do you know why and do you know what it was?


Secondly, are you under the impression the Wilson committee was trying to do numerous routings using that Nov. 1910 land plan? For the life of me I cannot figure out why so many or even anyone was always trying to measure the configuration of that proposed road on the Nov 1910 land plan unless they were trying to figure out if it actually enclosed percisely an exact 117 acres of land or the exact 117 acres that conformed to some routing done before that land plan was done.

But there is no question in my mind that the contour survey maps the Wilson Committee was using to route the course in 1911 did enclose precisely 117 acres of land, and up in that corner the dimensions of that triangle on those contour survey maps were just too narrow to get the 15th green and the 16th tee where they wanted them.

[TEPaul]

Mike Cirba:

Unless you are absolutely certain that all the dimensions of that entire "proposed" Golf House Road were completely identical on that Nov. 1910 Land Plan to all the dimensions of that "proposed" road on the contour survey maps the Wilson Committee was using to route and design that golf course in 1911 I just wouldn't bother trying to measure anything on that November 1910 Land Plan anymore!!

And you have no idea what the complete dimensions of that "proposed" road was on those contour survey maps the Wilson Committee was using to route and design that golf course in 1911 because you have never seen one. Either have I. Either has anyone I know.  

But if we ever do find one this Francis land swap puzzle will definitely be solved once and for all at least as far as WHEN it could not have happened BEFORE, and particularly if one of those contour survey maps has a surveyor's date on it!!

If one of those contour survey maps that we know the Wilson Committee was using has a date on it like mid-Dec 1910 or Jan. 1911 AND it has dimensions on it in that triangle that we can legitimately measure AND they are too narrow to get the dimensions of the area of the existing 15th green and 16th tee into, THEN I'm afraid one of Moriarty's primary premises on which he based his primary conclusion in this essay, "The Missing Faces of Merion," is going to pretty much go right down the drain and take petty much any last vestiges of validity of the essay with it!

[Mike Cirba]

Jim,

I think the aesthetic consideration was to have a gently curving road as the boundary instead of the golf holes just happening by chance to have a gently curving quality to them, which is another reason I think they would have been artistically opposed to the hard-line, straight-cut decapitation of the Johnson farm.

Imagine if Golf House Road was just built as a dead straight line through the property!

The road that got built has more bulges and rolls than they may have determined ideal, but they made it work because they had to increase width in the top areas, likely to fit the alternate fairway around the quarry.

[TEPaul]

Guys:

As I was just saying to Mike on the phone I think we have all been concentrating on the wrong dimension of that 130 yard by 190 yard triangle that Francis mentioned in his story. Most of us have been trying to analyze and measure whether the triangle got wider at the base (the 130 yard dimension or is it 100 yards on that Nov. 1910 land plan? ) as a result of Francis's fix. We have a very reliable pre-existing fixed point (the southwest corner of the Haverford College land) on the east side of the base of that triangle but not a fixed point to measure back in 1910 or early 1911 on the west side (that became Golf House Road or was a point on the line of the proposed road on either the Nov 1910 land plan or the 1911 survey contour maps---which may not have been the same ).

HOWEVER, even if that November 1910 land plan is not in exact scale we sure do know where they measured the right side (the east side ) of that triangle from. There is one highly reliable and PRE-EXISTING fixed POINT on top of the triangle (on that Nov 1910 land plan) to another highly reliable pre-existing fixed point on the bottom of the triangle (on that Nov. 1910 land plan).

And what was the length of the east side of that triangle in green on the east line on the land plan between those highly reliable PRE-EXISTING fixed points? It was approximately 300-310 yards! I know because I paced it off myself twice between those fixed points and I encourage anyone else to do the same if they're interested.

But what was the the length of that line when Golf House Road was built (and dedicated to the township---ie Merion or HDC ceased to own it) from College Ave to the very northeast corner of Merion East (back then just back left behind the 16th tee)? It was app. 110-120 yards

And what was the length of that line from the northwest corner of Merion's property then to that fixed point at the southeast corner of Haverford College's land (that forms the aforementioned east side of the bottom of the triangle on that Nov 1910 land plan?

It's 190 yards!! The very length of the east side dimension of that triangle that Francis mentioned in his 1950 story (and pretty much the same length of that tiangle dimension today)!

This means that triangle on the Nov 1910 land plan was not created by Francis's idea and fix for the 15th green and 16th tee. The fix merely involved the reconfiguration of Golf House Road, and that is what Francis went to get permission from Lloyd for in the middle of the night, almost certainly  around the end of March or beginning of April 1911, given other contemporaneous MCC administrtative records that suport that fact.

[Dan Herrmann]

Plus, does anyone think the Land Company wouldn't adjust the road if the club "suggested" it?  The company was in the business of selling estate homes on what would be Philly's greatest golf course (turned out to be on of the world's best, obviously).  Of course they would work with the Club!

And today, we have Golf House Road, a bucolic roadway with classicl estate homes (mansions) on one side and a case study in a beautiful golf course on the other.  Where else can you view one of the world's great courses so easily?

Use Google Street View on the following URL to see what I'm talking about:

http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&rlz=1C1GGLS_enUS350US350&q=golf+house+road,+ardmore+pa&um=1&ie=UTF-8&hq=&hnear=Golf+House+Rd,+Ardmore,+PA+19003&gl=us&ei=idFpTM2aGcH38Aav57WyBA&sa=X&oi=geocode_result&ct=title&resnum=1&ved=0CBsQ8gEwAA

[TEPaul]

This is the rationale and conclusion of the essay, "The Missing Faces of Merion" when the author tries to take the occurence of Francis' fix back up to six months in time and before Nov. 10, 1910 and before Francis was on the Committee and before Horatio Gates Lloyd even owned the land. That essay has that Nov. 15, 1910 land plan that shows the entire triangle in green and the author says the entire triangle was created by Francis' fix before Nov. 10 1910. Apparently the author forgot to measure the length of the east side dimension of that triangle on the Nov. 15, 1910 land plan for confirmation for his essay. Or did it not even occur to him to measure it even against the length of it Francis discribed (190 yards)? Or did he mismeasure it? If so what's the big deal about a mistake of 310 yards versus an actual 190 yards? That's only a 120 yard mistake----big deal that's only a full wedge.  But what's the big deal about a full wedge between friends, enemies and rivals?  




"According to Tolhurst, Francis wrote:
The land was shaped like a capital “L” and it was not very difficult to get the first 13 holes into the upright portion – with the help of a little ground on the north side of Ardmore avenue – but the last five holes were another question…. The idea was this: We had some property west of the present course which did not fit in with any golf layout. Perhaps we could swap it for some good use?

Francis immediately ran the idea by H.G. Lloyd, proposing that Merion exchange land west of the routing for the land now used for the fifteenth green and sixteenth tee. Lloyd agreed, and “a few days later the quarryman had his drills up where the 16th green now is and blasted off the top of the hill so that the green could be built as it is today.”

Given Francis’ description of the timing of the quarryman’s blasting, and given that he eventually served on the Construction Committee, it has long been assumed that the “swap” occurred while Construction Committee was in the process of building the course. But the supposed land exchange must have occurred much earlier, before Merion secured the land, which was before Merion appointed Wilson and his Construction Committee.

As quoted by Tolhurst, Francis wrote that Merion gave up “land west of the present course which did not fit in with any golf layout;” land which was later “covered by fine homes along Golf House Road.” In exchange, Merion received a small section of “land about 130 yards wide by 190 yards long – the present location of the 15th green and the 16th tee.” No doubt Francis was describing the land between the present practice area and Golf House Road, a small triangle of land that perfectly matches Francis’ description. More importantly, the land was acquired while Merion was putting the finishing touches on the routing plan for the course. So the date of the supposed “swap” will allow us to determine when the final touches were being put on the initial routing plan.

Surprisingly, as one can see in the land plan above, Merion acquired this small projection of land as part of the 117-acre parcel designated “Merion Golf Course” in the Plan. Merion optioned and purchased the land for the 15th green and 16th tee as part of their option and purchase of the bulk of the golf course property. Property records confirm this. The supposed land swap must have occurred prior to mid-November 1910, when Merion obtained an option from Haverford Development Company. This was six weeks before the purchase was finalized and the Construction Committee appointed. The “swap” was not a swap at all but actually a small but significant reshaping of the large parcel Merion intended to purchase from Haverford Development Company. Before the purchase, the parties must have agreed to shave off a portion on the right side of the parcel and added the projection of land for the 15th green and 16th tee.

Francis and Lloyd had been fine-tuning the layout plan before Merion secured the land. Francis described his epiphany as having occurred while he was looking over a “map of the property.” He also noted that the land Merion gave up “did not fit at all in any golf layout.” So by this time the planning process was well underway, and the “swap” allowed them to better fit the last five holes into the plan for the routing. “It was not very difficult to get the first 13 holes into the upright portion – with the help of a little ground on the north side of Ardmore avenue – but the last five holes were another question.” The Francis land “swap” allowed them to complete the routing plan. All before November 10, 1910."

[Mike Cirba]

Tom,

I think this is very important observation.

It's one thing to claim that the "Approximate Road" location is the reason that the width at the base of the triangle on that November 1910 map only measures perhaps 100 yards wide when Francis claims his swap was for 130 (and today's course reflects that 130), but it's quite another to be off by 40% when the length that triangle is drawn on the map is 310 yards and the present course reflects Francis' other 190 yard dimension!  

I don't believe there is any way on earth if Francis (and Merion) swapped land they already owned through Lloyd (that particular purchase didn't happen until December 19th, 1910 anyway, another reason thinking the Land Swap happened prior to then makes no sense)  for a 130x190 parcel somewhere else, that they would hire a professional surveyor to work up a detailed scale map for a member solicitation where that important bit of property that allowed them to complete their golf course routing now somehow mysteriously measured 100x310.   That dimension only accounts for 76% of the width, yet overstates the length by almost 40%!

I think earlier I wrote that that area in question was 265, but that was my mistake...you're correct that it measures slightly over 300 yards.

It might be helpful to look at some property maps again...

This first one from 1908 shows the original pre-purchase dimensions of the Johnson Farm.   As you can see, there is a nice, healthy rectangle of land above the southern border of Haverford College that the club would seemingly want to utilize for golf, especially given proximity to the quarry.



Here again is the way that northern section of the property was represented on the Nov 1910 Land Plan.  It makes it appear that the golf course property runs all the way to the top end of the original Johnson Farm land, when in fact the Francis Swap took it only to the northern end of the adjacent Haverford College property.



Here we see  the land area marked “JW”, which represents the Johnson Farm land that was NOT used for golf, which not only includes unused land to the west of the present course, but also land north above where the triangle actually ended, for another 120 yards as Tom mentioned.   The thin purple line represents the original line drawn on the November 1910 Land Plan which as seen does a woeful job representing neither the existing boundary lines of the course, nor the triangle area of the purported Francis Swap.

[TEPaul]

Mike:

I believe #520 is an excellent depiction and description of the boundary evolution in question of that property from 1908 to certainly the Francis land-swap fix in 1911 which is what we've been primarily concerned with on this website in an attempt to compare the Francis story and what really did happen with that Francis fix and when with the explanation of it and when it happened as found in the IMO essay "The Missing Faces of Merion."

The most important point to consider, I believe, is we have now identified two highly reliable and measurable points that are still identifiable that endured throughout this entire timespan in question and even to today even though there was a SUBSEQUENT minor boundary line adjustment between MCC and Haverford College but that was done AFTER the golf course and holes #15 and #16 were built and in play (I have that minor boundary adjustment, its metes and bounds and the particulars of the agreement between the two parties and the consequent deed to MCC).

I think I might suggest to the historians of Merion that they submit your last depiction on your post or perhaps a copy of your entire Post #520 to the Merion Archives. While you may not be the engineer and surveyor that Richard Francis was you and your boundary lines certainly are more colorful than him and his.  

I believe that now anyone who takes the time to become cognizant of these evolutionary boundary line details and their supporting MCC records should be able to see what happened out there with the Francis fix (land swap) as well as app. when it happened and certainly WHEN it could not have happened BEFORE (which the "Missing Faces of Meion" essay attempted establish and presumably prove).

Again, I think the star of this entire year and a half long analysis has become that 190 yard boundary line length mentioned in Francis' story versus the 310 yard length shown in that Nov 1910 plan (one of the triangle dimension lines that the "Missing Faces of Merion" essay claims the Francis fix created as the essay claims the Francis fix created that entire triangle on the Nov 1910 Land Plan). Francis was an engineer and a surveyor and no competent engineer/surveyor is going to miss or get away with a 40% dimensional mistake of that importance for long!
 

[JESII]

Tom and Mike,

In my thesis, the routing was complete, but the designing up was not even contemplated by the time that map was drawn so there would be no way, or reason, for the triangle to accurately represent the finished product. It's presence alone is what convinces me of the timing of the deal.

I have two questions along these lines I'd be interested in hearing ideas on:

1) If the road was designed with no consideration for a golf course (other than to potentially enclose 117 acres) why did they then view it as such an obstacle in the routing process? They certainly must have seen it as a hard line in the routing if it had them stuck on the last five for so long, right? Afterall, the land they/Lloyd owned went well west of that road and could certainly be used for golf...


2) If Hugh Wilson was the Chairman of the committee to build the course when the Swap took place, why would Lloyd get the right to approve it? His ownership of the land may have been in his name, but purely as a facilitator for the club. Prior to the formal establishment of the committee, when I suspect they were all dealing with and discussing the different facets of the whole effort, Lloyd was THE KEY GUY because of his involvement with HDC and the company that owned the Johnson Farm (I forget the name).

[Mike Cirba]

Tom,

I think it certainly gives new perspective on the MCC Minutes which state, “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..."

Thinking more about this statement, as well as Francis' 1950 account where he takes his now infamous midnight bicycle ride to H.G. Lloyd's house, it becomes clear that there is very little chance that the Francis Swap happened prior to November 1915 for other reasons that the dimensions of that triangle.

Just as tellingly, Francis tells us in his account that once he arrived at Lloyd's house, he shared his idea;

"The idea was this:  We had some property west of the present course that did not fit in at all with any golf layout.   Perhaps we could swap it for some that we could use?"

You may have the exact date, but if memory serves, I believe the securing of 117 of the 338 acres of HDC land for Merion, done with the promise of a $30,000 down payment on a total of $85,000 purchase price (..."a number of members who may be termed "Guaranators" have agreed to advance $30,000", was written in the November 15th circular letter) was done around November 10th, 1910, when the Merion president Allen Evans agreed to Connell's offer.

The Circular Letter goes on to say that the best way to accomplish this was to create a separate corporation, the "Merion Cricket Club Golf Association", which would agree in principle to sometime buy outright the 117 acres in question.

In December of that year, the MCCGA was formally chartered, but Cuyler recommended that Lloyd take title to the property into his own name at that time, as "It was found advisable that the Haverford Development Co. should take title in Mr. Lloyd's name, so that the lines be revised subsequently".

On December 19th, 1910, H.G. Lloyd did just that, and took title for some 117 acres of HDC Land into his fold.   At the time, he was also made official head...President, I believe the title was...of the MCCGA.

In either case, it was at this point that in all reality Merion actually had official control of the land in question, although it wasn't until July of the next year that the final purchase of the land, leased back to the club deal was completed.

This would explain however, why sometime AFTER December of 1910, Richard Francis would have bicycled his way to the only place where he could get the green light for his idea...to H.G. Lloyd's house, because prior to then, the statement "We had some property", would not have been the case.

[TEPaul]

Mike Cirba:

I'd like to make a suggestion. I think your Post #520 is very good, very explanatory and particularly with those diagrams and mostly the last one. I would suggest that you do not post more diagrams of the same kind on this thread because I feel that just serves to confuse people and it is hard to find what one is looking for in the future as was the case with those old really long threads on this subject in the past. Let's just go with the one on your #520 and if you want to post more let's start another thread for it.

Thanks

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()