Tilly's Curious Transformation

[TEPaul]

Bob:

Of course your question is a very good and logical one but I doubt the answer you will get---if you get one at all---will be even remotely satisfactory to any logical mind or interested discussant.

This is always more like some petty debating game with this man; for him to claim it is the truth he really seeks is nothing more than a transparent charade and joke.

I did just receive a very long and detailed explanation from Phil about the details of Tillinghast's mortgage and tax problems and even though I obviously have no way or interest in independently verifying any of it myself (I frankly feel no need at all to do that), I must say I am pretty blown away by the extreme depth of research Phil Young has done over the years via ever imaginable avenue into the life and times and family of one A. W. Tillinghast.

If Phil Young decided to be a top flight investigator/detective I have no doubt he would be a very good one! 

Frankly, this entire side-track into Tillinghast's finances seems to be just that----a sidetrack on MacWood's part to try to make some major point out of a semi-triviality that since Tilly was in some financial difficulty that THAT MUST MEAN he went through some architectural transformation and/or sold out his architectural principles.

The whole thing is just another of MacWood's attempts to make a mountain out of some minor molehill simply to defend and perpetuate some illogical notion, nothing more. And you are also right in your apparent implication that this man is no credit to the furtherance of historical understanding and historians!

[Tom MacWood]

TEP/Bob
Do you have Phil's book?

[Chris_Blakely]

Tom MacW -

I repeat the question.

What possible motive would someone have for dreaming up a story that shows them in an extremely embarrassing light?

Bob

YOu can't possibly tell me that you can't think of a reason!!!  I know I can.

[TEPaul]

"TEP/Bob
Do you have Phil's book?"


Yes, but for starters why don't you try answering Bob Crosby's very straightforward and very appropriate question instead of deflecting this discussion? That might actually intelligently further this thread and the truth of its subject

Bob Crosby has an uncanny way of both getting to the meat of an issue AND coigning very definitive terms. Among others his term for you and your modus operandi on here----eg "Gottcha tone and technique" is truly appropriate.

You have always come across and apparently tried to as something of the intellectual snob but the truth is you have prescious little factual information from the subject itself (Tilly's life or club records) to back it up with.

And THAT is obviously why pretty near everyone on here who actually tries to follow you now feels as Bob Crosby does when he said today----"You baffle me."

For anyone who is truly into these subjects and following them with a modicum of information basically knows now that you are at the end of your credibility run, Tom MacWood! The fact is you are really transparent! 

[TEPaul]

SO, why don't we get on track here by having you actually try to answer Bob Crosby's question on post #49 instead of avoiding it with another inconsequential and deflective question of your own such as post # 51?      

[Tom MacWood]

TEP
What does the book say about the loss of his personal property?

[TEPaul]

"TEP
What does the book say about the loss of his personal property?"


Tom:

Why do you ask? Is it because you think what the book says about the loss of his personal property is in some consequential way different from what Phil Young said on here was the reason for the loss of his personal property? If so, please explain exactly what you think the difference is?

Hopefully, my question and the subject of the question isn't something that makes "No sense to you." 

[Tom MacWood]

TEP
Because I seriously doubt you have ever read the book or own the book. That being said let me post the section in question:

[Tom MacWood]

TEP
What possible rational would there be to take his furniture and personal belongings in addition to foreclosing on his home, especially considering the circumstances at the time? The country was in a severe depression and extraordinary measures were put in place to prevent foreclosures, much less taking everything. At the time in NJ they gave the defaulting owner an additional two years to make good before the home would be sold. Did Tilly go into default in the Spring of 1936, when supposedly the house was sold, or did he go into default two years prior? That question is not addressed in Phil's story.

Bob
First of all the story Phil is telling us now differs from the story he told in his book, and the story he told in his IMO piece.

I would not call the story as told extremely embarrassing. Tilly lost the home not because he was broke, but because he made a poor judgement. He was victim of confusion and financially strapped landlord. In fact to prove he had money, Phil tells us he was able to re-purchase his furniture and antiques right before they were sold off. What appears to be the real story is much more embarrassing IMO. So to answer to your question, perhaps the source of the story was embarrassed that Tilly was broke.

Another fact that adds to the story not making sense. In the book Phil claims Tilly was still coming and going from the home later in the year. In fact on Sept 17, 1936 Tilly wrote Jacobus that he had just closed the home for good.

What do you make of that?

[TEPaul]

"TEP
What possible rational would there be to take his furniture and personal belongings in addition to foreclosing on his home, especially considering the circumstances at the time? The country was in a severe depression and extraordinary measures were put in place to prevent foreclosures, much less taking everything. At the time in NJ they gave the defaulting owner an additional two years to make good before the home would be sold. Did Tilly go into default in the Spring of 1936, when supposedly the house was sold, or did he go into default two years prior? That question is not addressed in Phil's story."


Tom:

What possible rational would there be to take his furniture and personal belongings in addition to foreclosing on his home?

The rationale is the failure of a homeowner or property owner to pay debts such as mortgage payments and taxes owed. What eventually results from that is a lien, in this case a tax lien on real or personal property that can and does result in foreclosure and sale of the property to satisfy the government taxes owed. Anyone with some valid equitable interest in real or personal property can record that interest on the title of real property to protect their equitable right of redemption in that property. That's why homeowners record their equitable interest in real property as do mortgage lenders (mortgagees). Tax liens almost always trump other recorded encumbrances on property such as mortgages. The latter is why most all mortgage lenders escrow tax payments on property from a mortgagor (borrower).

The true story of what happened to Tillinghast's Harrington Park house in 1936 is not going to be correctly answered by your contention that those were tough times and Tillinghast's house could not possibly have been foreclosed on. I don't even know where Harrington Park is or even what kind of taxes Tillinghast owed (federal or local real estate taxes) but I can probably guarantee you that the entire proceedings of what happened back then in 1936 is all recorded on what is known as the Title and the title run on that property. To determine that all one needs to do is go to the Recorder of Deeds probably at the Harrington Park county seat, look up that particular property's history and it would all be right there-----all the former owners, all the former encumbrances, mortgages, liens, tax liens, foreclosure proceedings, auction and sale, the name of the new owner etc etc. This is what a Title Report is all about that most any buyer and their mortgage lenders require before the settlement on real property to be sure the particular property is not in some way encumbered by someone's right of equitable redemption. This is also why most all buyers and lenders require and buy title insurance (to protect themselves and their equitable interest against the rights of redemption of someone or something with an equitable claim on the real property in question).

I'm certainly not going to go do that but if one did, that is the best way to determine what precisely happened and when and how to Tillinghast's house and property in Harrington Park.

If someone bothered to do all that and it squared with Phil Young's and the Tillinghast family story of what happened to Tilly's Harrington Park property in 1936 and you still said it makes no sense to you and could not have happened, well then, Tom MacWood, I'm afraid I really wouldn't have much idea what to say to you or about you and your ability to analyze and discuss these kinds of things on this website, other than it's pretty much all fruitless and futile.

[TEPaul]

Tom:

Frankly, I have not followed that closely this entire diversion of yours and Phil's into the disposition of Tillinghast's Harrington Park proprety and his debts or tax problems. And so I wonder what really is the point or importance of it. Are you once again just trying to prove someone else wrong about some detail as it seems is your general interest on here with anybody and anything going back some years? I think Bob Crosby termed that very well when he called it your on-going "Gottcha attitude."

Or are you just trying to establish some cog that eventually leads to your contention that Tillinghast was broke at or around that time and consequently was driven into some "curious transformation" that led to the selling out his architectural principles by doing anything with architecture simply to make money and nothing more?

[Tom MacWood]

"TEP
What possible rational would there be to take his furniture and personal belongings in addition to foreclosing on his home, especially considering the circumstances at the time? The country was in a severe depression and extraordinary measures were put in place to prevent foreclosures, much less taking everything. At the time in NJ they gave the defaulting owner an additional two years to make good before the home would be sold. Did Tilly go into default in the Spring of 1936, when supposedly the house was sold, or did he go into default two years prior? That question is not addressed in Phil's story."


Tom:

What possible rational would there be to take his furniture and personal belongings in addition to foreclosing on his home?

The rationale is the failure of a homeowner or property owner to pay debts such as mortgage payments and taxes owed. What eventually results from that is a lien, in this case a tax lien on real or personal property that can and does result in foreclosure and sale of the property to satisfy the government taxes owed. Anyone with some valid equitable interest in real or personal property can record that interest on the title of real property to protect their equitable right of redemption in that property. That's why homeowners record their equitable interest in real property as do mortgage lenders (mortgagees). Tax liens almost always trump other recorded encumbrances on property such as mortgages. The latter is why most all mortgage lenders escrow tax payments on property from a mortgagor (borrower).

Why would they put a lien on his furniture and other personal property above and beyond his home? Are you under the impression the sale of the house would not cover the dilenquent property taxes? Have you bumped your head?

The true story of what happened to Tillinghast's Harrington Park house in 1936 is not going to be correctly answered by your contention that those were tough times and Tillinghast's house could not possibly have been foreclosed on. I don't even know where Harrington Park is or even what kind of taxes Tillinghast owed (federal or local real estate taxes) but I can probably guarantee you that the entire proceedings of what happened back then in 1936 is all recorded on what is known as the Title and the title run on that property. To determine that all one needs to do is go to the Recorder of Deeds probably at the Harrington Park county seat, look up that particular property's history and it would all be right there-----all the former owners, all the former encumbrances, mortgages, liens, tax liens, foreclosure proceedings, auction and sale, the name of the new owner etc etc. This is what a Title Report is all about that most any buyer and their mortgage lenders require before the settlement on real property to be sure the particular property is not in some way encumbered by someone's right of equitable redemption. This is also why most all buyers and lenders require and buy title insurance (to protect themselves and their equitable interest against the rights of redemption of someone or something with an equitable claim on the real property in question).

At least you appear to be acknowledging Phil's story does not add up.

I'm certainly not going to go do that but if one did, that is the best way to determine what precisely happened and when and how to Tillinghast's house and property in Harrington Park.

If someone bothered to do all that and it squared with Phil Young's and the Tillinghast family story of what happened to Tilly's Harrington Park property in 1936 and you still said it makes no sense to you and could not have happened, well then, Tom MacWood, I'm afraid I really wouldn't have much idea what to say to you or about you and your ability to analyze and discuss these kinds of things on this website, other than it's pretty much all fruitless and futile.

Why would Tilly be closing down his home in September 1936 (mentioned in his letter to Jacobus) if the house and personal property were being sold off in the spring of 1936 (as Phil claimed)? Why would Tilly be lying?

[TEPaul]

"Why would they put a lien on his furniture and other personal property above and beyond his home? Are you under the impression the sale of the house would not cover the dilenquent property taxes? Have you bumped your head?"


Tom:

To answer that question, one should probably determine and consider the exact nature and amount of the tax liens placed on Tillinghast's real and personal property, would you NOT think? 

Do you know that? Have you considered that or have you just been sort of bumping along on your head?

BTW, pretty danged amazing coloration on that question of yours. Is your hair on fire or something?

[Kalen Braley]

You know,

I've been watching these threads while sitting on the sidelines, and thats all fine and good because I know little about Tillinghast and appreciate Phillip's effort and enjoy these threads.

What I don't get though is why these kinds of threads can't just be about the man and his work?  Why do some feel compelled to drag all this other stuff into the discussion?  Everyone's got thier skeletons and thier struggles in thier personal life so why do these discussions always seem to turn this way?

For once can we just keep that other stuff out?

Thanks,

Kalen

[TEPaul]

"What I don't get though is why these kinds of threads can't just be about the man and his work?  Why do some feel compelled to drag all this other stuff into the discussion?  Everyone's got thier skeletons and thier struggles in thier personal life so why do these discussions always seem to turn this way?"


Kalen:

I agree with you---I don't see why these threads get into such detailed debates about all this seemingly extraneous stuff such as the details of the lose of Tillinghast real estate in NJ, tax liens, mortgage law and whether Phil Young is being consistent or the extended Tillinghast family told the truth. Not to even mention what point any of this has regarding what the man did in architecture. For answers to all that you should probably just ask the one who keeps starting these threads and asking all the questions about that. Good luck, though, getting a straight answer.

Personally, I think he raises all these issues because he is trying to make the case that due to these kinds of things Tillinghast sort of sold out on his architectural principles. You can find another thread about this very thing on the back pages that was started a couple of years ago-----eg with a title something like "Did Tillinghast sell out his architectural principles (with that PGA Tour)?"

There's that as well as this guy seems to have tried to make a career on here of pointing out how clubs, club histories, architectural historians, biographers etc, etc have made mistakes with their records and what they've written and reported. The major problem I have with this kind of thing is he only seems to be interested in using extraneous sources such as newspaper accounts and he seems either completely unwilling or unable to actually go right to the source of the subjects as the rest of us do and always have. This seems to foster a rather large degree of argumentation, adverserialness and intransigence when others begin to question is sort of one dimensional opinion and point of view.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Kalen,

No, every thread from here on out is about who can piss the furthest!

[TEPaul]

"For once can we just keep that other stuff out?"


Kalen:

Do you have what you think might be a decent proposal of how to do that?

[Tom MacWood]

"Why would they put a lien on his furniture and other personal property above and beyond his home? Are you under the impression the sale of the house would not cover the dilenquent property taxes? Have you bumped your head?"


Tom:

To answer that question, one should probably determine and consider the exact nature and amount of the tax liens placed on Tillinghast's real and personal property, would you NOT think?  

Do you know that? Have you considered that or have you just been sort of bumping along on your head?

BTW, pretty danged amazing coloration on that question of yours. Is your hair on fire or something?

TEP
Last time I checked property taxes were a small percentage (usually calculated in 1/1000ths) of the value of the home. In your world the sale Tillys' home would not have covered his dilenquent amount? I take it math is not your strong suit.

[TEPaul]

"TEP
Last time I checked property taxes were a small percentage (usually calculated in 1/1000ths) of the value of the home. In your world the sale Tillys' home would not have covered his dilenquent amount? I take it math is not your strong suit."


Tom:

Well, last time we paid the real estate taxes on this 60 acre farm in Pennsylvania they were a little less than $20,000 per year and this farm has every single Clean and Green and conservation act and tax reduction measure available on it that reduces the effective tax rate to about 20% or less of what it would be otherwise. So if this municipal entity went with your thinking and checking this farm would be worth about $50 million dollars of assessed value which is not necessarily the same thing as market value.  It's valuable but not that valuable.   Plus, I have no doubt at all that the real estate taxes where Tillinghast lived in New Jersey were and are percentage of tax owed to assessed value (the millage rate) much higher than the semi-rural township where I live in Pennsylvania.

And not to even mention, I'm not even sure what governement entities slapped tax liens on Tillinghast's real and personal property. Do you know? What if it was not just the municipal entity that Tillinghast's REAL ESTATE property was in? What if a tax lien on his real and personal property was the Federal Goverment (which does not tax real estate property in one's lifetime)?

So I have no idea what the amount of Tillinghast's back taxes owed were or what percentage of the tax lien foreclosure/auction sale paid off----all I'm saying is with his REAL estate property in Harrington Park, NJ there is one place where any of us today can find out in real detail what it was all about for him back then in 1936 on the sale of that Harrington Park property and that would be the Recorder of Deeds probably in the county in which Tillinghast's real estate property was in back then.

That's all I'm saying here. This isn't about me acknowledging what Phil or the Tillinghast family said is right or wrong. And this isn't about my math or your math or anyone else's math. This is only about how one really can find out exactly what happened with his property in 1936 because it should all be recorded there in black and white. Is there something about that you don't understand or that makes no sense to you?

[Kalen Braley]

"For once can we just keep that other stuff out?"


Kalen:

Do you have what you think might be a decent proposal of how to do that?

Tom Paul,

I have the perfect solution.  I would be endowed with the status that starts with M and ends with R...and no its not "MotherF$%^ER".    

These threads could indeed use some moderation on topics like this because in my opinion the valuable information that could come out otherwise on Tilly and his work shouldn't be halted just because a few rabble rousers want to stir up the muck. This kind of insight and information is just too valuable to be sabatoged in the process....all in my opinion of course!!

Sure I insert my fair share of OT comments in other threads, but would like to think I don't interrupt valuable threads like this which really should be the heart and soul of what this site is about!!!

P.S.  And yes I realize this is OT of sorts, but needed to be said!

[TEPaul]

Kalen:

What or who exactly do you think is sabotaging the process of this thread? I, for one, am not and never have asked whether Phil and the Tillinghast family are mistaken and I have never asked about the details of Tillinghast's real and personal property and tax lien problems. Somebody else has done that all on his own. Are you suggesting that none of us should even respond to him when he asks these kinds of questions?

If so, Kalen, THAT, might be a damn fine proposal afterall. 

[Kalen Braley]

Kalen:

What or who exactly do you think is sabotaging the process of this thread? I, for one, am not and never have asked whether Phil and the Tillinghast family are mistaken and I have never asked about the details of Tillinghast's real and personal property and tax lien problems. Somebody else has done that all on his own. Are you suggesting that none of us should even respond to him when he asks these kinds of questions?

If so, Kalen, THAT, might be a damn fine proposal afterall. 

Tom Paul,

I think everyone knows who the saboteur is, including him. I don't doubt his intellect for one second and think he knows full well what he is doing.

As for responding to it, I understand its tough to resist, but if the Merion threads have taught us anything, it sometimes laying off is a good thing...especially when you know the other side of the arguement is way off into the weeds.

[TEPaul]

"Why would Tilly be closing down his home in September 1936 (mentioned in his letter to Jacobus) if the house and personal property were being sold off in the spring of 1936 (as Phil claimed)? Why would Tilly be lying?"



Tom:

That too may be able to be found at the recorder of deeds. It is not at all unusual in certain cases in something like a foreclosure sale for the former owner (title holder) to be given even some months to vacate. I have no idea how that Tillinghast Harrington Park  foreclosure and auction sale was performed but if it was done through some Court of Equity that too is probably all still recorded. I believe New Jersey was or still is one of the states that maintained some distinction between a court of equity and a court of law.

That could probably explain what Tillinghast said to Jacobus in September 1936 about his house.

[JMEvensky]

Even though I have little to no standing in this court,I agree with Kalen.

If Phillip Young is willing to take the time to post all this stuff,why not first say "thank you" before trying to inflict some kind of death by a thousand small cuts?People are trying to learn about Tillinghast's golf courses not whether he's qualified for sainthood.

Maybe a solution would be to allow him to post the entire Tillinghast tour and then answer questions or have people present opposing facts and/or opinions.

[TEPaul]

So Kalen, what exactly are you saying there? Please be clear about it. Are you saying you think it is pointless for me or anyone else on here to even respond to Tom MacWood's constant questioning about Tillinghast's financial problems in 1936 including mortgage and tax lien details?

If you don't want to get into a simple yes or no to the second question will do.