Willie Campbell & Myopia

[Tom MacWood]

Jeff:

That is an interesting point to raise and to try to look into. It very well may tell us something about the way the early professional immigrant golfers worked in that early era. It sure does seem that Campbell was a man who was moving around very quickly from place to place and service to service in his mere six years in this country. I suspect he may've provided some services to Myopia in 1896 or so such as playing lessons and perhaps playing tournament golf for Myopia in that year. I note that in the 1896 to 1897 timeframe or perhaps even the 1895 to 1897 timeframe Robert White was actually Myopia's permanent professional and greenskeeper, before John "Jack" Jones who was there for years thereafter took over for White. This is the same time Campbell is listed with Myopia. Did they have two head pros at the same time? I doubt that. White may've been on their payroll as their pro/greenkeeper then and Campbell just being listed as their tournament pro and perhaps a guy who gave lessons for an individual fee to Myopia's members and others at other clubs as well as traveling and doing other things such as fairly quickly laying out courses in a day or so for a fixed fee.

When I get back to Myopia I will see if their financial records from that time might reflect on that somehow. Of course, I can see MacWood and Moriarty histrionically caterwalling that this is just more speculation. Well, at this point, of course it is but it is going to turn into research at and with the subject---Myopia! Are they going to do this? Of course not. They will just rely on me and then criticize my efforts after I've done what they should have done if they really were dedicated researchers and historians on this particular subject!  

Phil
TEP said White was at Myopia in 1896? You have twisted and misrepresented what TEP wrote. You should go back and actually read what he wrote, it was a lot more than just White was at Myopia in 1896. And I don't believe you understand exactly what he was speculating. If anything the article you just posted (and subsequent reports of the actual event) supports the idea the two didn't work together at Myopia. According to your article White is with Myopia in June and Campbell is unattached, according to the reports of the event Campbell is with Myopia in July and White is a no show.

I find it humorous you are now giving yourself credit for telling us White was in Cinti in 1896. The article you posted said White was in Cinti, but for whatever reason you did not post that part of it.

[Niall C]

Niall,

I think our impressions of how things happened are pretty similar, although if I recall correctly I think the greens were sodded.   Even today though most of them are pretty much at natural grade.

I'm not sure they were waiting for Campbell per se, but I'm sure they were happy to have his input and expertise but I think that happened after the wheels were in motion, not before, and I think reports from May that the course was not yet laid out referred to the minimal construction activities that followed and not to the stakinf of the basic routing, which I think happened earlier as described.

There were apparently also a few basic cross hazards constructed as well, I believe.

Mike

Thanks for responding to my earlier post. I have no real knowledge of what happened at Myopia in the earlier days and nor do I really care beyond a general interest in how these early courses came about. The reason I asked those questions was it seemed to me that there might be an assumption on your part that because the course had been laid out by members prior to Campbells arrival then all he did was build the course according to that plan or something similar, would that be correct ?

I find that assumption interesting and perhaps contrary to experience back in Scotland. I appreciate that Scotland and Amercia are different but given that you had a lot of these Scottish pro's coming over to show how its done, its perhaps a fair assumption that they did things in a similar fashion. That (possibly) being the case, given that the members course was rudimentary and with minimal construction, Campbell would likely have felt no compunction in advising the members on how the course should be laid out (ie. designed) and the members, having hired an expert or professional (I think round then a lot of these phrases were interchangeable, same as laid out/designed etc) would likely have been happy with his imput. I say likely because all this is speculation on my part.

Would Campbells course have been much different from the members course ? Well perhaps not in terms of simplicity of construction but in terms of layout I imagine it would have followed the good design principles of the day, whatever they were. The final thing I would add is that this was some 15 to 20 years before MacKenzie started preaching about the finality of design, mainly I suspect because of the increased muck being shifted to make courses by then and consequently the increased costs. Back in the 1890's I suspect they looked at things differently and seemed to have had no compunction in making significant changes on an almost continious basis.

Phil,

Re the employment of professionals. Again, my impression from newspaper reports of the day is that it was not uncommon for more than one professional to be attached to big clubs and neither was it uncommon for pro's to migrate south during the winter season to take up an "engagement" at another club. Therefore not sure that finding out when White or Campbell was at Myopia tells you whether or not the other was there.

I've got some nice articles from Golf Illustrated (UK) from 1924/1925 by Harold Hilton and others on the retiral of Willie Fernie which reflects on his career and golf about 1890's and which mentions Campbell. If you or anyone else is interested give me a shout and I'll happily email them over to you.

Niall

[Tom MacWood]

This thread is indeed becoming comical.

Please show us anywhere that it says Campbell "designed" the course.

The press reports in mid-April indicate that three members were responsible for bringing golf to Myopia in the coming season.

A report in mid-May indicates the course has not yet been Llaid outL, yet you can see the entire course from a high vantage point. How could this be?   Simply because the staked out course has not yet been constructed, or laid out on the ground.

A report a month later calls the three men who Weeks tells us the contemporaneous records state planned the course are "experts" in the new game, so its not surprising they would have the confidence of the membership in their appointed task..

Pro Campbell is evidently brought over sometime to help get the course going, most likely building tees and greens and likely placing some cross bunker hazards.

This is not rocket science...sheesh..

Why in the heck would poor Mr. Weeks lie about any of this?  

Yet, two guys who have never been there or even tried to see the clubs records think nothing of dragging his name thru the mud without a clue of what he saw or read or relied on...

Pretty comical and pretty pathetic, I'd say.

Mike
I think it is safe to say every golf course Campbell laid out he designed...unless you are aware of one that someone else designed that he constructed. I asked that question before and from your non-answer I assume you are not aware of one. So hopefully we can avoid the game playing with the term laid out.

I'm not sure what this an indication of some frustration, but now you seem to be saying any moron could have laid out a golf course in 1894, so who cares who laid out the course. If that is the case why are you even involved with this discussion?

To my knowledge no one has called Weeks a liar. As I have said before, he had a lot more than golf to write about in this history, after all Myopia is a hunt club first and foremost. Plus the book came out in the mid-70s, prior to any great interest in golf architecture history, and prior to any good information on golf architecture history. I'm sure he did the best he could based on the information he had, that being said IMO it is mistake to put any great stock in the book, especially now after we have been able to uncover new information.

[Tom MacWood]

TEP
Where did you come up with the date of 1892 or 1893 for Appleton Farms?

[Phil_the_Author]

Tom Macwood,

It surprises me not that you distort what I wrote and that you once again show little to no capacity to understand what someone else has said.

You wrote, "Phil, TEP said White was at Myopia in 1896? You have twisted and misrepresented what TEP wrote. You should go back and actually read what he wrote, it was a lot more than just White was at Myopia in 1896..." No Tom, it is you who needs to go back and see exactly what Tom Paul wrote and what I did as well. Tom Paul stated, and I know this because YOU HAVE QUOTED THIS STATEMENT SEVERAL TIMES, even going to the extent to highlighting it in yellow, that he said, "note that in the 1896 to 1897 timeframe or perhaps even the 1895 to 1897 timeframe Robert White was actually Myopia's permanent professional... Now, what did I state? "So it appears that Tom Paul's "claimed recollection of the records" is correct as far as 1896 is concerned..." That statement proves that I completely understood that Tom Paul was speaking to a larger issue and greater time period. It also proves that, as I have pointed out that, AS FAR AS 1896 is concerned, that he was CORRECT. Just like David, you simply can't seem to admit that Tom was correct in even a small portion of a statement. That speaks volumes...

"And I don't believe you understand exactly what he was speculating." See above as I've just answered that.

"If anything the article you just posted (and subsequent reports of the actual event) supports the idea the two didn't work together at Myopia." Not at all. The article simply states that as of June 24th, 1896, that White was Myopia's professional and that Campbell was not. Or are you saying that Campbell needed to be the professional at Myopia in order to do any architectural work there? Of course that's not what you are doing."

"According to your article White is with Myopia in June and Campbell is unattached, according to the reports of the event Campbell is with Myopia in July and White is a no show." No Tom, you are wrong there. First of all there has been no "July article" presented as evidence, ONLY DAVID'S QUOTING of a SUPPOSED ARTICLE. I put it that way because both you and David have treated many on this site the same, demanding that they post what they are citing from or remembering BEFORE you will accept it as proof. I simply asked the same thing of David and get responded with "I DON'T GIVE A DAMN WHAT YOU WANT." Come now, I think asking for the article isn't that big a deal here, or maybe he's just "bluffing?" No, David wouldn't do that and I also don't believe he is misquoting it; however, simply for fair play's sake, he needs to post the article. In any event, all the article states, and this is taking David's quoting of it as truth, is that White POSSIBLY didn't FINISH THE TOURNAMENT! We have no way to state anything else as he may have been eliminated earlier or decided that he played so badly that it wasn't worth going on, or any number of other things including that he played the entire tournament but that the paper simply chose to only give a partial listing of those who did. So, your reading in to it that White was a "No Show" is far too loose of an interpretation of a document that hasn't even been presented. Maybe he didn't show, but no one can make that conclusion based upon what has been presented.

"I find it humorous you are now giving yourself credit for telling us White was in Cinti in 1896."Once again you are making what I stated to be far more than what I said. I NEVER CLAIMED that I was the one who informed any and all that White was in Cincinnati in 1896. I stated that "By the way, you did ask Tom Macwood if White was in Ohio and not at Myopia in 1896. I can’t help that he didn’t answer it for you. Then again you did end that post by asking “Tom, Mike, ANYONE?” I believe I fall into the latter category." Why didn't YOU answer your buddy's question when you had ample opportunity to do so? Actually, I am quite surprised that you didn't refer to an earlier posting on this thread where you referred to another thread that discussed White's involvement at Myopia and where he would be in 1896, but you must have forgotten, just as David either missed, forgot or chose to ignore it.

"The article you posted said White was in Cinti, but for whatever reason you did not post that part of it." Once again, in your final statement here, you show your arrogance. You know you already asked me about this and I answered it, not once, but TWICE, yet you make the statement again as if it has some sort of diabolical meaning toward my motive in what I posted when it clearly didn't and doesn't. Here's what you posted in #623 "Phil, How come you did not include the info on White going to Cincinnati in 1896?" Evidently my answer in post #624, although quite clear, was unsatisfactory for you because in your post #626 you stated, "Phil, in my post just prior to yours I highlighted TEP's statement below and said it was speculation presented as fact, and presumably that is why you posted your quote: 'I note that in the 1896 to 1897 timeframe or perhaps even the 1895 to 1897 timeframe Robert White was actually Myopia's permanent professional...' Obviously the fact White was in Cincinnati in 1896 had everything to do with TEP's statement. White being at Myopia in 1894 has nothing to do with who designed Myopia either so I was curious why chose not to include it. Just wondering." I responded in Post #627 in depth to which you responded in #628 "Phil, Its no big deal I was just curious..." But now you're making it a big deal? Disingenuous to the last.

All of this because neither you nor David can admit, graciously or grudgingly, that Tom Paul was CORRECT as far as Robert White having been the professional at Myopia in 1896.

[Tom MacWood]

Phil
Was White at Myopia in 1897?

It is no big deal I just found it humorous you were taking credit for something you failed to do.

[Mike Cirba]

Before this thread totally degenerates into flames as it seems rapidly and increasingly intent on doing, I would like to post one fact and ask one question.

First, there was some speculation earlier asserting that these men of Myopia would never be up at a "summer" colony in the spring, so how would/could they have staked out nine holes after the snow melted?   Well, in going back to the April 15th1894 article I posted, with some AMAZING COINCIDENCE I saw that the blurb above the one that tells of the appointment of the subcommittee for golf at Myopia shows us that the other of the three men credited with the original nine holes was indeed also in Hamilton at that same exact time as the others!;


Mr and Mrs A. P. Gardner have returned
from their visit in Washington to
Mrs Gardner's parents, Hon Henry Cabot
and Mm Lodge, and are now at their country seat, in Hamilton.

Messrs J. Watson Merrill, R. M. Appleton and W. A. Burnham of the Myopia
Hunt club's committee on field sports, have been appointed as a sub committee to take
measures for the introduction this season
of the game of golf at the Kennels.

So, we now know that in the beginning of April, 1894, it appears that all of the protagonist members credited in Week's account, and according to Tom Paul, from the administrative records, and all point to not only all three men being there, (along with Mr. Burnham), but also point out that two of them are in a subcommittee assigned to TAKE MEASURES for the introduction of the game of golf at Myopia.

So, what measures do we think they took?   What would be the logical first steps?    One might think locating holes for a course would be the first priority, right?    

If we believe the contrarians here, they did absolutely NOTHING in this regard.   In fact, over a month later on May 19th we're told nothing at all was done, supposedly.  

Except for the fact that we know by mid-May two things were indeed done.   We know that from a high vantage point one would be able to watch play across the entire course, correct?    We also know that sheep were purchased that would be fielded on the location of the golf holes.

So, how is that possible if the location of the golf holes was not yet determined?   It would neither be possible to know one could watch play across the entire golf course unless their location would be known any more than one would know where to graze the sheep.  

So, what were the "measures" that Appleton, Gardner, and Merrill and Burnham were doing to bring golf to Myopia for the new season, scheduled to open in June.   Clearly by June of that year the local paper called them golf "experts".

We now know they were there at Hamilton...we now know they had responsibility and authority to make things happen to bring the game to the club...and we know Weeks tells us and Tom Paul's account of the administrative records confirms that they staked out the first nine holes.

Niall Carlton may be correct that Willie Campbell in helping build the course may have made changes...they may even have been significant, and I'm not denying his importance in early Boston golf.

But we also know that whatever he did it was not deemed to be of great enough significance to include it in the official Myopia administrative records, and we also know that to deny any role in the building of the original golf course to Appleton, Merrill, and Gardner in the face of a rapidly increasing amount of circumstantial evidence that gives them motive, means, and opportunity is simply yet another case of bad revisionist history.

[Phil_the_Author]

Tom,

You have such a hard time admitting when you are wrong... I did not take credit for that and no matter how many times you now purposefully misrepresent what i state it will not make it any more true.

Tom, was White the professional at Myopia in 1896? Its no big deal, I just find it pitiable that you and David simply can't admit that Tom Paul was right when he stated that he was...

Enjoy the rest of the day and however you choose to take the discussion...

Mike, don't worry, for my part, since the self-proclaimed "seekers of truth" seem to have forgotten that it some times forces one to admit when they are wrong, I am done with this. As Johnny Storm would say, "Flame out!"

[Mike Cirba]

So hopefully we can avoid the game playing with the term laid out.



Tom,

Funny...I don't recall you having any problem with the following definition posited by David a few years back, or accusing him of "playing with the term" when it suited your theories?    I believe you in fact concurred heartily, if memory serves.  

David argued so convincingly, in fact, that I can see personally how they could be two separate efforts, and I think it makes perfect sense in this case where the members staked out a course after the snow melted in the spring and then had Campbell in with his experience to help them build it on the ground.   Don't you?

It certainly seems to fit all the theories together very nicely and comprehensively and all of the evidence to date offered supports an "inclusive" reality, especially the newest stuff I just found and produced here.
  

"To the contrary, X was discussing the construction of the course, and was being quite literal. He was charged with laying out the course on the ground. According to Oxford English Dictionary, to “lay out” means to “construct or arrange (buildings or gardens) according to a plan.” This was precisely how X used the phrase. “Our problem was to lay out the course, build, and seed eighteen greens and fifteen fairways.’ The committee had to arrange and build the holes on the ground according to plan.." - David Moriarty

[TEPaul]

I got the dates on the Appleton Farm while in Massachussetts. It comes from chronicles of/and some letters and diaries including the Appletons and a few other families of some of their friends (a number of the same names from Myopia Hunt Club and other Boston clubs and summer communities). Those families had been into a number of sports including foxhunting, polo, tennis, golf, sailing, yachting etc for generations. It's remarkably to me how many of those families are still there in the same places and clubs. Boston and some of its surrounding summer communities such as the North Shore seems to be far more generationally enduring than the same basic societies around New York or Philadelphia from back in those days and before. I'm not sure why that is.  

[Mike Cirba]

In case anyone thinks I'm making this stuff up, here's the April 15th 1894 news article that in a few short blurbs amazingly manages to talk about;

1) A.P. Gardner's location at the time in Hamilton
2) The Creation of the Golf Committee at Myopia that included Appleton and Merrill
3) Willie Campbell's assignment for the golf year to Essex CC

Coincidence?   Please recall that as of this publication date, Willie Campbell was in the United States for a total of two weeks time, and being housed south of Boston at Brookline.   I'm not sure of any suburban rail line going to the North Shore at the time, but it is 33 miles on horse and carriage between TCC and Myopia.

[Mike Cirba]

It also appears that "Squire" Gardner spent much of his year around Hamilton, as his in-laws lived there, and he had a cottage in neighboring Wenham.   In fact, in 1894 they were still there in October of that year where his daughter was delivered.

[Tom MacWood]

Phil
I think you are right White was at Myopia for part of 1896, but did he play in the 1896 Open? I don't think so. Was Campbell unattached when the championship was played? No, he was attached to Myopia. As I said a page or two back late in 1895 it was announced TCC was not rehiring Campbell, early in 1896 he was hanging around Philadelphia and then showed up at Myopia in the summer. White did play in the 1897 and 1898 Opens attached to Cinti.

Phil
Since you're having difficulty answering my simple question I will go ahead and drop it. I've never had a problem admitting when I'm wrong or someone else is right. The quote above is from last night, not that long ago.

TEP wrote: "I note that in the 1896 to 1897 timeframe or perhaps even the 1895 to 1897 timeframe Robert White was actually Myopia's permanent professional and greenskeeper, before John "Jack" Jones who was there for years thereafter took over for White. This is the same time Campbell is listed with Myopia. Did they have two head pros at the same time? I doubt that. White may've been on their payroll as their pro/greenkeeper then and Campbell just being listed as their tournament pro..."

As far as TEP is concerned I will give him credit for guessing correctly that White was (apparently) at Myopia in 1896, and give him credit for being wrong that White was there in 1897. I'll give him credit for 1895 too, although that is not documented. And for not knowing he was at Myopia in 1894 that should be noted too don't you think? And for speculating that Campbell was the tournament pro and White was the permanent pro/greenkeeper I will continue to say the facts do not back him up on that either. But for your sake let me say once again his statement was not completely inaccurate, he got one fact right, White was at Myopia in 1896.

[Tom MacWood]

In case anyone thinks I'm making this stuff up, here's the April 15th 1894 news article that in a few short blurbs amazingly manages to talk about;

1) A.P. Gardner's location at the time in Hamilton
2) The Creation of the Golf Committee at Myopia that included Appleton and Merrill
3) Willie Campbell's assignment for the golf year to Essex CC

Coincidence?   Please recall that as of this publication date, Willie Campbell was in the United States for a total of two weeks time, and being housed south of Boston at Brookline.   I'm not sure of any suburban rail line going to the North Shore at the time, but it is 33 miles on horse and carriage between TCC and Myopia.

Carriage? Why would he take a carriage when he could take a train?

[Mike Cirba]

Tom,

That's why I asked the question...wasn't sure about a suburban rail corridir at that time tween Hamilton and Brookline.

That you'd avoid the more relevant info I provided isn't surprising.

[TEPaul]

Mike Cirba:

I don't know if you're aware of it or thought of it but some of the names in those old newspaper articles are interesting for other reasons. A bit OT to this thread but the Lodges were quite the generational political force in Mass and US Government. The name you see there, Henry Cabot Lodge, I believe was a Senator from Mass, and the father of Senator Henry Cabot Lodge, long-term US Senator from Massachussets who was eventually unseated by a young political rising star from Boston named John Fitzgerald Kennedy!!  

The Appleton family is certainly fascinationg too for longevity of their farm in Ipswich (Appleton Farm) that may've been in a single family longer than any other farm in American history. Some of the names connected to that family are pretty interesting too. It looks like one of the Appleton gals married Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, and another married Sen. Levertt Saltonstall, another august long term US Senator from Massachussetts. And that brings things home to roost with me and pretty much full cycle with those people. I lived in Washington DC for close to ten years in the 1970s with the ex-wife of a US Senator from California who was Senator Edward Kennedy's best friend and we lived in the house in Washington that they had bought from Massachussets Senator Leverett Saltonstall.

What goes around comes around and back around again, I guess. You go to a club like Myopia today and it's just amazing that just about all those old names are still there.

[TEPaul]

All the rail lines from Boston to those surrounding summer communities were there in those days. When you drive through any of those old Boston summer communiites today you cannot help but notice how often you cross those old train tracks.

So, I suppose some on here may then logically ask why those people back then did not just live out there permanently inside of almost always living in Boston in the winter. That question would be logically answered if any on here just took a look at what most of the houses back then of those summer communities looked like.

I guarantee you noone would want to heat those behemoths in the Massachussets winters, certainly not back then! They just closed them done at the end of the season and moved back into what was always referred to back then as "town." Back in those days New York City was referred to by those people the same way and so was Philadelphia.

[Phil_the_Author]

Tom Macwood,

I've never had a problem answering that question. As far as I know, White was not the professional at Myopia in 1897. In fact it appears that he was in Cincinnati for PART of 1896 as well, but that is just conjecture still.

I am glad to see that you admit that Tom Paul was correct about the 1896 date. As far as, "And for not knowing he was at Myopia in 1894 that should be noted too don't you think?" I see nothing of any noteworthiness in his not knowing that. I understand that you view it critically and as some sort of proof that he doesn't know the history of Myopia as well as he claims, but then again he did know about White in 1895-96 when others disagreed with that showing he does know a bit more than they thought.

What I think is of noteworthiness is something I mentioned in an earlier post, that is, the question of WHEN White began designing or performing any formal architectural work. You know more about White's history than most on here, and so I am surprised that you apparently haven't thought much about why he wasn't considered to lay out and/or work the course. This was the common practice and expectations of the Scottish pros who came to America at that time. I'm not looking at derailing this thread, but it certainly is an area of architectural history with White that is surprising, that is, why did it take him so long to begin doing that type of work. Everything about his history appears a bit different. From professional to greenkeeper to architect to mixing in being one of the founders of Macgregor sporting goods. There doesn't seem any consistency to what he was doing whereas so many other Scottish pros who came here had very opposite careers.

Anyway, I think that White's early career deserves some looking into and a thread all its own. Unfortunately I am simply too busy at the moment to pursue it...

[Travis Dewire]

TEP,

Love the post about the brahmins!!!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Cabot_Lodge,_Jr.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lodge_family - more information on the Lodge politicians
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cabot_family - the Cabot's
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_Brahmins - and no talk of these families would be complete without the master list!!!!!


And, about the Appleton Farm, here is a quick list of the oldest family business still in the family, in America. A few farms from MA on the list. OT but I schooled with the next in line to take over Zildjian Cymbals. I believe her mother is CEO now, so it will be interesting to see how the gender change will affect them long term. Mother was first woman president in the company's long, long history

http://news.everest.edu/post/2009/08/america-s-oldest-family-run-businesses

[TEPaul]

Travis:

There's some fairly interesting stuff online and in two repositories of his papers on Edward Weeks too, the man who wrote the Myopia centennial history book (1875-1975). The man was the editor of Atlantic Monthly magazine for almost thirty years and with that and the fact he belonged to Myopia for years and knew those people going fairly far back I would say he would have a whole lot better shot at getting the facts of Myopia's history right than a couple of Internet dudes today who've never even been there and have only seen a couple of old newspaper articles like MacWood and Moriarty.  

Weeks died in something like 1989 at 91.

I also have one last chapter in my experiences with the Appleton family to tell and I believe it's what I think it is and pretty amazing really. I sort of hesitate to tell it but what the hell a lot of water has gone under the bridge now and I just might.

[DMoriarty]

David,

Thank you for the very gracious reply!

Tom Paul, as you can see, I've produced contemporaneous, factual, evidentiary proof that YOU were Correct when you stated that Robert White was definitely the professional at Myopia during the year 1896. It was most encouraging to see that David has seen the light when it comes to the new era of congeniality and showing respect on the Discussion Board and admitted that he was mistaken in his perception that YOU were wrong in this! 

Phillip,

I think you confuse brevity and honesty with rudeness.   If you want more congeniality and respect from me perhaps you drop the self-righteousness and . . .
1.  Stop making unreasonable and rude demands what what I need to do for you and what you want from me.
2.  Stop misrepresenting my past dealings with TEPaul and Mike, especially as a justification for your rude demands.
3.  Stop the condescending lectures intimating that I have misused the source material or drawn unsupported conclusions when I have not.

And you misstated my position once again.  I never concluded that TEPaul was wrong about 1896, I explained what did not make sense about the various stories, and asked a number of questions which have yet to be answered by anyone.    Do you not recall me asking Tom MacWood to confirm that White was in Cincinnati in 1896?  Interesting that you would overlook this yet again.  Besides, TEPaul claimed that the Myopia records indicate that White was the professional at Myopia in 1896-1897 and maybe 1895.  You certainly have not proven that correct.   And to my mind if that information come from club documents recording contemporaneous events, then it all ought to be correct.  As for 1896, you overstate and oversimplify your case, as I explained above.   

Again Phillip your reliance on this single article as "factual" astounds me, especially when it is not really clear when or why that list of professionals was compiled.   I take it then that you have as little doubt about the three separate articles stating that Campbell laid out Myopia?   Or do you only take single articels as "factual" when you like the information? 

_________________________________

Mike

Cirba, I noted pages ago that Gardner returned to Myopia in April.   

But how you put the others there too is beyond me.   You do realize that their winter meeting occurred in Boston, don't you? 

[Mike Cirba]

David,

What "measures" do you think Appleton, Merrill, and Gardner took to bring golf to Myopia after being charged with that task sometime prior to April 15th, 1894?

Do you believe they sat around Boston for the next two months hoping perhaps a golf course would magically appear on their club's land by the start of the mid-June season?  Or perhaps that the sheep might design some holes for them?  Why do you think the newspaper called them golf "experts" before the course at Myopia even opened?

[Tom MacWood]

Mike
Are you really that delusional?

[Mike Cirba]

Tom,

Excellent post!

[DMoriarty]

David,

What "measures" do you think Appleton, Merrill, and Gardner took to bring golf to Myopia after being charged with that task sometime prior to April 15th, 1894?

Who?   The article did not say anything about Gardner having been appointed.   The article said Appleton, Merrill, and Burnham.    So why would you include Gardner?   Come to think of it, if Gardner would be designing the course with Appleton and Merrill within the next few weeks, why wasn't Gardner reported to have been on this committee?

As for what Appleton, Merrill, and Burnham, they (or someone else at Myopia) must have arranged for "Prof." Willie Campbell to lay out a golf course on Myopia's property.  

This would have been an obvious and easy thing to do, given that:
1.  These three were golfing at the Country Club that spring, where Campbell was the well-regarded professional;
2.  Their friends at the Country Club had already arranged for Campbell to be over at Essex County for the summer; and
3.  Campbell was not only an real expert golfer -one of the best of the world he was an expert at designing and laying out golf courses.  He had reportedly done so abroad, had reportedly already done work on the Country Club's course, and would be doing similar work for Essex County.  

Do you believe they sat around Boston for the next two months hoping perhaps a golf course would magically appear on their club's land by the start of the mid-June season?  Or perhaps that the sheep might design some holes for them?

Neither. As I said, I think they that they arranged for Campbell to plan and lay out a golf course, and according to at least three reports, the course had not been laid out by the middle of May.  

Why do you think the newspaper called them golf "experts" before the course at Myopia even opened?

It didn't call "them" anything.  The article referred to Appleton and Gardner as "expert players" along with W.B. Thomas, and T. Watson Merrill (not J.W. Merrill.)   Again, it is not even the same grouping.  

Looking at these old papers, these four were apparently called "expert golfers" basically because they played golf (at the Country Club) and were among the better of a bunch of beginners there.   But this was not saying much.   (Keep in mind, Mike, that this is a Gossip column and the columnist very likely has no idea what she is talking about.)

For example, Leeds was reportedly a beginner as well, yet at Myopia's opening day, Leeds was scratch,  giving Appleton 6 strokes, J.W. Merrill 10 strokes, and Burnham 24 strokes (Gardner got 18.)   And Leeds who was often referrred to as the "crack golfer" won the tournament with a 112!  The others didn't make the top four net, but Appleton reportedly shot a 63 on the second nine.  

Just fine for a bunch of beginners, but Willie Campbell was one of the best players in the World, 30 or 40 stokes better than they were.  And he had substantial design experience.
___________________________________________________

You should take a step back, Mike, and think about how ridiculous your leaps of logic have become.  It is embarrassing.