The reports mentioning Squire, et al laying out the course...if they don't come from Weeks, where exactly did they come from? I just don't recall.
Who said this information didn't come from Weeks? Weeks speculated that they "probably" used pegs to mark of the greens. It seems TEPaul just . . . ummm . . . let's say
extrapolated from there, claiming that according to S. Dacre Bush, they definitely staked out the course around March 1, 1894. As to why he so "
extrapolated" well you will have to ask him that.
So far as I know there are NO CONTEMPORANEOUS ACCOUNTS OF MEMBERS STAKING OUT THE COURSE AROUND MARCH 1, 1894. But if there are any I'd love to hear about them.
From your earlier post on Bush and the Green Committee minutes, . . .
Green Committee minutes? On what basis do you claim there were "Green Committee minutes." Weeks said the quote was an entry by Club Secretary Bush into the club record. He was obviously mistaken about whether Bush was Secretary, yet TEPaul claimed he had read the Club Secretary Bush's contemporaneous entries into the CLUB MINUTES. So far as I know, not even TEPaul ever claimed to have seen "Green Committee minutes" (although I wouldn't be surprised if he had a sudden recollection of it) and so far as I know, neither did Weeks. While TEPaul apparently doesn't understand this, we cannot just make things up or misrepresent the source material to suit our needs.
I would presume that there was no golf committee in 1894 because golf just started and then they felt they needed one for 1895 because it became popular. As such, I think its likely that they were appointed late 1894 or early 1895 and this "club record" was their first annual report of activity covering the previous year, which included building the course, etc.?
There was a report of a sub committee being formed to bring golf to Myopia, but Bush was not listed as on that sub committee. As I have said above a few times, the Bush quote may well have come from a later report, but a later report is obviously not a recording of events as they occur, and therefore should not necessarily be shrouded in the same assumption of reliability. That said,
if the Bush quote was a later report, I have no reason to doubt that it would have been generally accurate.
The 1894 Executive Committee Meeting reportedly took place in Boston in March, so if that was about when those meetings occurred, then the Bush "report" (if that is what it was) may have been from a meeting in March of 1895 (if for example, the sub committee on bringing golf to Myopia reported to him (he was a "Steward") and then he to the board.) Or it could have been his report from the 1895 Golf Committee which would likely have been at the meeting around March of 1896.
Or it may not have been a "report" but something like the piece written by Bush that MacWood mentioned earlier.
If so, he could certainly remember what happened the year before and was specifically recording it for history, so would make an effort to get it right, no?
I think I made the point above that he probably had some knowledge of what is in the quote, but we certainly cannot conclude it was firsthand knowledge. Aside from the tournament info, it seems only a general and terse summary of what happened.
And yet, for some, this cannot be considered an accurate report of events that we can rely on?
You can rely on it all you like. But to what end?
The Bush quote did not address who laid out the course!
I can't see it, frankly, but if others really think this, then it must be like libs and conservatives debating and certain belief sets are strongly tied together in the thought processes of both that the other just can't understand.
The funny thing is I think all on the club record side have acknowledged that the newspaper articles strongly suggest that Willie C did have something to do with it, and you and I have opined that they called him in as an expert in something after getting started. David has admitted that the Bush recollections are surely generally correct and yet a sometimes bitter debate continues.
The "bitter debate" does not at all hinge upon whether the Weeks' Bush quote is reliable. Reliable or not, the Bush quote is entirely consistent with the reports in the paper that Campbell laid out the course at Myopia.
It doesn't really matter if everything in the Bush quote is accurate or not, because
IT DOES NOT ADDRESS WHO CREATED THE GOLF COURSE. Even if everything in the the quote was 100% accurate - and it way well be -
IT STILL DOES NOT TELL US WHO CREATED THE GOLF COURSE. There was some debate about whether there was an entry into the "minutes" indicating that AMG staked out the course in early March, but it seems that TEPaul was . . . how shall I put it? . . .
confused about that.
So I am not sure what the debate is about now. I am still waiting for someone to explain how Mike Cirba's two articles and this Bush quote amount to anything indicating that AMG designed the course.
I have to believe it is personality and animosity based, but then, what do I know? As I said very early on in this reguritation of the thread, its more of the same old same old, one side believing we trust club records, the other side believing we should trust the old gossip columns/newspapers. Again, like the current political climate, it seems like the middle road guys have no chance to make headway in this argument.
You again misrepresent the issues involved.
What club records? All we have is the Bush quote, which does not address who laid out the course, regardless of whether it was a "record" or not.
So let's not pretend it is about trusting club records.
And as for the middle guys having "no chance," it is more like the middle guys have "no facts." You just cannot split the difference because you think that might be a desirable or convenient outcome, and I haven't seen anything suggesting that AMG staked out the course in early March. Except for TEPaul's and Weeks speculation, of course.
________________________________________
Mike Cirba, Jeff Brauer, whoever,
Again . . .
WHAT, SPECIFICALLY, IS THE BASIS FOR CONCLUDING THAT AM&G LAID OUT THE COURSE AROUND THE FIRST OF MARCH, 1894.