Merion's minimal bunkering in 1915 and NOW: Seaview Origins

[Tom MacWood]

I’m not sure any of this is quite as mysterious as we’re making it.   The timeline seems pretty clear to me.

Sometime in spring of 1913, shortly after Merion East opened for play the previous fall, construction on Seaview began.    By autumn of that year, probably right after seeding, very knowledgeable Philadelphia golf writer William Evans wrote;

Evans may have been knowledgeable, but he was also the main source for the confusion about Wilson's trip abroad, as seen in this article one year removed from his trip.

Could you post the entire Evans article?

[TEPaul]

"Evans may have been knowledgeable, but he was also the main source for the confusion about Wilson's trip abroad, as seen in this article one year removed from his trip."


For the record it is not true to say that Evans (and his article) was the main source for the confusion about Wilson's trip abroad. That confusion, at least as reflected and reported in the Merion history book of the late 1980s appears to have emanated from the fact that it was reported that Hugh Wilson returned from abroad with architectural drawings and such. That was reported about forty years after the fact by one of the men who served on Wilson's committee to design and construct Merion East. Wilson went abroad in the spring of 1912 and if he brought home with him a series of drawings and such from holes abroad he obviously had a specific purpose in doing that and it would appear from what we know now that that apparently had to do with the bunkering up of Merion East which had not been done previous to his trip abroad in 1912. That would take a number of years to design and accomplish. 

[Tom MacWood]

"Evans may have been knowledgeable, but he was also the main source for the confusion about Wilson's trip abroad, as seen in this article one year removed from his trip."


For the record it is not true to say that Evans (and his article) was the main source for the confusion about Wilson's trip abroad. That confusion, at least as reflected and reported in the Merion history book of the late 1980s appears to have emanated from the fact that it was reported that Hugh Wilson returned from abroad with architectural drawings and such. That was reported about forty years after the fact by one of the men who served on Wilson's committee to design and construct Merion East. Wilson went abroad in the spring of 1912 and if he brought home with him a series of drawings and such from holes abroad he obviously had a specific purpose in doing that and it would appear from what we know now that that apparently had to do with the bunkering up of Merion East which had not been done previous to his trip abroad in 1912. That would take a number of years to design and accomplish. 

Lets just say they Evans' numerous erroneous reports and Wilson's essay both contributed to the confusion. I'm not sure they would have misinterpreted Wilson's account so badly if it weren't for Evan's faulty reporting. Wilson simply said his later trip to the UK confirmed what he learned and saw from CBM at the NGLA. He did not specify when he went. And you are continuing to add to the confusion and misinterpretations by repeating the old wife's tale that Wilson returned with a series of drawings and sketches.

Didn't Wilson make a tour of eastern courses? When did he make that trip and where did he go?

[Tom MacWood]

Reid was the pro and stayed on for about 9 months.   Connellan was the Superintendent/Greenkeeper and was there until the fall of 1915, likely following Fred Pickering who Wilson probably used initially.   Ross came in the spring of 1915 to ”stiffen” the bunkering and although his drawings and suggestions are on the display in the clubhouse, only some of this recommendations were actually followed.  

Reid didn't even make it 9 months. He started on April 1, 1915 and it was announced he's relocated to Wilmington in August of that same year. Wasn't Pickering an employee of the construction company hired to build Seaview?

It was reported Seaview was bunkerless when the course opened (apparently they didn't consider those sandy mounds bunkers)....was the course bunkerless when it officially opened? If so, was Ross responsible for all the bunkers?

Does Geist's quick hire of Ross to bunker the course, with Wilson nearby willing and able, show some lack of confidence in HW?

It seems to me Geist's actions during these early years shows he was fairly volatile, and because of that I wonder what was going on between the spring of 1913 and Oct/Nov 1913 (Wilson's first mention of involvement).

[TEPaul]

Mike:

Regarding the origination of the Merion upswept sand bunker faces on clay/loam INLAND sites in America and if in fact it was at Merion East, Niall Carlton from abroad has been in touch to say he thinks he has found some bunker construction drawings from 1909 from Reginald Beale (Carter Tested Seed's primary agronomist) that may be more detailed than Robert White's bunker drawings and description from 1914 in Golf Illustrated posted above by Brad Anderson.

If they match what Wilson et al were going to do at Merion that may be the best link to date about where Wilson may've gotten this idea that was reflected in that paragraph of his on bunkers posted above.

I do know that Reginald Beale was in New York with Macdonald in the late spring/early summer of 1911 and that Macdonald introduced him by letter to Wilson and that Beale did visit Merion in the early summer of 1911 as that is confirmed by Wilson to Piper and Oakley in some of those "agronomy letters." Wilson's only mention of Beale to Piper and Oakley, however, was that he (and Macdonald) felt Merion should use about twice as much fertilizer (manure) per green as P&O and Wilson thought was necessary. But it is not unusual that Wilson would not have mentioned a bunker type or style to P&O as Wilson typically did stick just to the point of what he was dealing with P&O for and that was agronomy and not golf course architecture.

[Tom MacWood]

Speaking of P&O I think those series letters may be the strongest evidence to suggest Wilson was not involved at the beginning at Seaview, especially the letters between April 1913 and October 1913. Have you shared those letters with Mike?

[TEPaul]

"And you are continuing to add to the confusion and misinterpretations by repeating the old wife's tale that Wilson returned with a series of drawings and sketches."

Expert researcher/analyst  :


I'm afraid not. It is not me continuing to add to the confusion and misinterpretation by repeating the story that Wilson returned from abroad with a series of drawings and sketches. That information came from one Richard Francis in an article written for the US Open magazine in 1950 and Richard Francis certainly should have known those facts because he happened to be the member survey/engineer that was one of the four other men who served with Chairman Wilson on that committee right from the very beginning on!

Some "wife's tail", huh?

[TEPaul]

"Does Geist's quick hire of Ross to bunker the course, with Wilson nearby willing and able, show some lack of confidence in HW?"


Interesting theory and speculation but documented and factual evidence appears to indicate otherwise. In 1914 various letters state that Hugh Wilson became over-worked and apparently ill (as he was unfortunately wont to do throughout his life) and he significantly cut back on his work output with architectural work (He did have a very hard working position with his family insurance business) that also included giving up the chairmanship of the Merion Green Committee temporarily. The fact is Wilson stuck with Seaview and Geist significantly in later years primarily including overseeing that course's agronomic development.  During and following the war Wilson was still scrounging around to find and supply the best bent grass to Geist and Seaview. And Geist's dependence on Flynn and personal friendship with him in later years would certainly indicate no lack of confidence in Wilson/Flynn. Quite the opposite in fact!

It seems like the seven years long agenda of the self-described expert research/analyst from Ohio to trash the reputation and legend of Hugh Wilson is sort of like nothing much more than throwing constant "innuendo" spaghetti against the wall. As of late, as in the past, it definitely ain't sticking!

And this from the same person who is constantly ragging on others on here for engaging in blatant speculation?! 

[TEPaul]

"Speaking of P&O I think those series letters may be the strongest evidence to suggest Wilson was not involved at the beginning at Seaview, especially the letters between April 1913 and October 1913."


Interesting theory and speculation! Would you care to elaborate on that theory and speculation or do you feel that might be a bit too revealing of the fact that it makes very little sense? Are we going to be treated to another round of rationalization that if Wilson did not mention something about his involvment with Seaview to P&O that did not have to do with agronomy (the subject he pretty much stuck to with P&O) that that is some evidence that Wilson was not architecturally involved with Seaview back then?

This sounds to me something like that amazing remark some years ago from the expert researcher/analyst from Ohio that if something could not be found written by George Crump himself that he wanted to use trees to visually separate some of his holes at Pine Valley then that should serve as documentary evidence that he in fact DID NOT want to use trees to visually separate his holes at Pine Valley.   

[Tom MacWood]

You're right Francis did say Wilson came back with sketches in his 1950 account. To my knowledge he is the only person to ever mention this. I prefer Wilson's own account from 1916 in which he said the drawings and sketches were Macdonald's. Its obvious to me Francis was confused several decades later, and you continue to add to the confusion.

Wilson and Oakley (and Piper) wrote over 150 letters between 1911 and November 1913. Wilson did not take a crap during this period without writing to Oakley to ask for guidance. There is absolutely no mention of Seaview in any of those letters, there is not even a hint of the project. He was totally consumed with the East and New course at Merion. If I'm not mistaken the New course just opened May 1913, so its logical he would be focused on bringing it along (along with the still relatively new East).

Piper & Oakley made a special trip to Philadelphia to visit Wilson in early October 1913. They did not travel to see Seaview, and Wilson did not mention the course to them during their visit. Don't you think he would have mentioned something about the project, either in letters or in person, had he been involved for several months? His first mention to P&O about Seaview is a letter from November 1913.

There are only two logical explanations, and the first one is by far the most logical.

1) Wilson only became involved after P&O's visit, and after the course had already been staked out, or 2) Wilson was being paid by Geist and wanted to keep his involvement a secret.

[Tom MacWood]

Have you shared Wilson's letters with Mike?

[Joe Bausch]

FYI:  MWest opened late in May, 1914.

[Tom MacWood]

My mistake (Wilson wrote in 1916 the new course opened May 1913)...even more reason why he would've been totally focused on Merion.

[TEPaul]

"Have you shared Wilson's letters with Mike?"

Yes I have.

[TEPaul]

"To my knowledge he is the only person to ever mention this. I prefer Wilson's own account from 1916 in which he said the drawings and sketches were Macdonald's. Its obvious to me Francis was confused several decades later, and you continue to add to the confusion."


Wow! That's just the latest in a whole series of statements you've made on here that apparently results from some truly confused analysis of existing documents or I suppose just raw speculation.

Wilson at two separate times (1911 and 1916) mentioned going over sketches and drawings that were done by Macdonald in his preparation abroad for his creating NGLA. The first was in early March 1911, and that was when Wilson and apparently some of his committee visited NGLA. The next time was when Wilson wrote a chapter in 1916 for Piper and Oakley's book Turf Grass for Golf.

What Francis mentioned was the sketches and drawings Wilson brought back HIMSELF from abroad for Merion when he went over there a year later---eg March-April 1912.

If you're so interesting in running to ground the factual accuracy of some of these details perhaps it would be good idea for you to actually go to Merion for the first time in your life one of these days and personally look at some of these documents instead of sitting on your computer in Ohio and confusing all this stuff endlessly as well as accusing me of altering historic documents or whatever as you've been doing on here for a few years and again on here about a week ago.  

[TEPaul]

"Wilson and Oakley (and Piper) wrote over 150 letters between 1911 and November 1913. Wilson did not take a crap during this period without writing to Oakley to ask for guidance."


That could be on the subject of golf agronomy but if you've actually read those agronomy letters they pretty much solely concentrate on the subject of grass, turf problems and agronomy. Hugh Wilson hardly ever mentions golf course architecture with Piper and Oakley at any time during his fourteen years or correspondence with them. Alan talks about golf architecture with P&O more than Hugh ever did.



"There is absolutely no mention of Seaview in any of those letters, there is not even a hint of the project. He was totally consumed with the East and New course at Merion. If I'm not mistaken the New course just opened May 1913, so its logical he would be focused on bringing it along (along with the still relatively new East)."


Yes, you're mistaken again. Your string of misinterpretations seems to continue pretty much nonstop these days. In those drafts in 1916 of the chapter by Wilson for Piper and Oakley's book Wilson did say that two weeks after the opening of the East course the club was forced to buy 125 acres for the West course and he goes on to say the West course was seeded in March of 1912 and it opened for play in May of 1913. On both those dates Wilson made a mistake by a full year-----eg the East course did not open for play until Sept 1912----and the fact is the West course was bought in the fall of 1912, it was built in the spring of 1913, seeded, and it opened for play in May of 1914 after a year's grow-in which seemed to be SOP for both Merion courses.

As of late about Wilson and Merion and Seaview you seem to preface everything you say with 'If I'm not mistaken' and then each time you are mistaken and we have to constantly point out why and what proves you're mistaken. Again, maybe some day you should try checking the actual administrative records of MCC in which it talks a lot about the land they intended to buy for the West course, when, as well as when they built it, seeded it and then opened it for play. For my part, I really don't want to make correcting your mistaken interpretations a daily occurence, and so I should probably sort of desist and decease from it. You really do need to do some legwork of your own on this subject as some of us have been doing for years now, particularly if you want to keep questioning us on it.

[TEPaul]

"Don't you think he would have mentioned something about the project, either in letters or in person, had he been involved for several months? His first mention to P&O about Seaview is a letter from November 1913."


I do not at all. Again, Hugh Wilson very rarely corresponded with Piper and Oakley about golf course architecture.



"There are only two logical explanations, and the first one is by far the most logical.

1) Wilson only became involved after P&O's visit, and after the course had already been staked out, or 2) Wilson was being paid by Geist and wanted to keep his involvement a secret."


The second explanation is about as ridiculous as is possibly imaginable and on the first there were a few projects that Wilson was involved with that he never mentioned to Piper and Oakley at all as far as I can see in those agronomy letters. He never mentioned Cobbs Creek, Philmont or Phoenixville to P&O either.  The only courses he regularly mentioned but only to do basically with agronomy were the Merions, Pine Valley and Seaview. Occasionally he spoke about Sunnybrook (which he was not involved with) because of the unusual green construction and the quality of the turf (perhaps due to that particular method). It was Wilson and Piper and Oakley's interest in the experimentations of Frederick Winslow Taylor at Sunnybrook (as well as Pine Valley) that essentially kicked off the idea of forming the USGA's Green Section when Taylor died suddenly in 1915. As far as I can see the only courses Wilson visited with Piper and Oakley in tow were Pine Valley, Merion and Sunnybrook.

[Mike Cirba]

Go figure, but after Hugh Wilson's design at Merion opened in the fall of 1912, I guess he became sort of a local rock star!  At least that's what some folks around Philadelphia will tell you, although I'm glad I'm on GolfClubAtlas and can learn the real story.  

I guess I'm sort of like that lucky bloke in the grocery line who has access to "The Star", or "News of the World", or even the "New York Post", so that I can find out the REAL truth behind what those shadowy conspirators that are everywhere don't want you to know....like they're protecting us for our own good!  

Well, dumb folks around here believe that after Merion opened for play, pretty soon ole' rube Hugh was hobnobbing with the well-heeled gentry and the top brass of the Golf Association of Philadelphia, including the presidents of all the top clubs who banded together during the annual January 1913 meeting to form a committee whose goal was the creation of a public golf course in Fairmount Park.

That committee formed a working committee of guys who...I don't know....who I guess some crazy folks around here thought designed and built golf courses....to try and locate suitable land in the park.



What's more amazing is that sometimes these rich guys even allowed the Wilson's and Crump's to tag along with their reindeer games!  

Why, here in the spring of 1913, which is the same time the Seaview project evidently got underway, why here you have one Mr. Hugh Wilson, who evidently never designed a single hole in his life as I hear tell if one hangs around this discussion group long enough, actually out with Clarence Geist, Ellis Gimbel, Robert Lesley, and John Pepper at a site in the Belmont section.



One account of the day even went so far as to call that Mr. Wilson an "expert", which we know had to be a misprint or another Philadelphia reporter mistake, because we've been told time and again around these parts that that was language reserved only for people (preferably non-Philadelphians) who actually designed golf courses, and at that time the only course some foolish folks thought Wilson might have created was Merion East, as Merion West wouldn't open for over another year.



Well, now that I think about it, those fallacious Philadelphia reporters actually did it again right after that.   Why, now here they call BOTH Ab Smith AND Hugh Wilson "experts"!      

Was this that dastardly William Evans again, or Joe Bunker, or Peter Putter, or even that Tillinghast fellow?   Liars!  All of 'em, I say!!  




Odd local myths later stated that Hugh Wilson right around this time began working on Geist's Seaview, Gimbel's Philmont, and even worked on J. Franklin Meehan's North Hills CC, but of course, that's all just local mythology and speculation.

I'm beginning to think that perhaps Wilson merely served as a butler to these men, because they sure seemed to like having him hang around, so he must have served some useful purpose.  

Why, I also hear round these parts that there must have been some feudin' and fallin' out between Geist and Wilson, so much so that ole wily Mr. Geist brought in Donald Ross to "stiffen" the trapping, because evidently some of the top players who came to the course told Mr. Geist that his original idea of a fun winter vacation resort course that wasn't too taxing actually meant that it was kind of easy for the top players, so it seems he probably had a change of heart in that respect.  





But I guess these two guys were so angry at each other that when Francis Ouimet visited the course in April of 1915, the very same month Ross was hired, Geist actually paired Hugh Wilson with Francis Ouimet (certainly in a bald-faced attempt to embarrass him! ) in a match against Mr. Geist and new pro Wilfred Reid.   My lord, his audacity must have known no bounds!!  



Joe Bausch...if you're reading, I suggest you burn all those faulty articles by William Evans, Joe Bunker, Billy Bunker, Peter Putter, and other local writers who credited Hugh Wilson with Seaview's design.

Most suspicious are those like this July 1914 one from the Philadelphia Record where the author is NOT EVEN NAMED, and yet credits Hugh Wilson...it was a conspiracy, I Tell You!!    




And now, thanks to reading my GolfClubAtlas religiously, I suspect that amateur Hugh Wilson was actually "on the take" with Mr. Geist, if you get my giest...er...gist.  

You gotta wonder what a poor rube like Hugh Wilson ever did to deserve all of this?    


Tom MacWood,

Et Tu, to William Evans?    

He wrote in depth for a long time on the Philadelphia golf scene and was good friends with all of the prominent players and officials.   Is there anyone in the Philadelphia region, past or present, who you won't try to throw under the bus in your odd, ongoing quest?  

Here...I dug up the original article that I culled that specific section from as you requested...start picking!    

It appears construction started in June of 1913 (presumably the plans were drawn just prior) and it wasn't until October 1913, a full four months later after construction was completed that Hugh Wilson's name was mentioned in any newspaper we've been able to find as the person responsible for the layout.    Of course, no other news articles prior or post mentioned anyone BUT Hugh Wilson, but that shouldn't matter, right?  

Which begs the question;  if Wilson came on board in October 1913 after the course had already been designed, constructed, and seeded, what exactly did he do?    

I'm beginning to see a pattern.    

[Mike Cirba]

Finally, to help determine who was responsible for construction of the course at Seaview, Joe Bausch may know the exact date of this article, but it appears that Hugh Wilson's man, Fred Pickering, likely did the work.  



BTW...how could Hugh Wilson have come to the project in October 1913 if the article above states that Wilson "has been Geist's right hand man" and "has laid out the Seaview course"?   Wouldn't the past tense indicate that he was there prior, and by definition, prior to construction starting in June of that year?   

[Bradley Anderson]

Good work Mike.

[Tom MacWood]

That could be on the subject of golf agronomy but if you've actually read those agronomy letters they pretty much solely concentrate on the subject of grass, turf problems and agronomy. Hugh Wilson hardly ever mentions golf course architecture with Piper and Oakley at any time during his fourteen years or correspondence with them. Alan talks about golf architecture with P&O more than Hugh ever did.

That's true, the letters concentrated on all aspects of agronomy. Wilson's first letter to P&O is 2/1/1911, and those letters continued unabated through the first seeding September 191, or seven months before they began trying to grow grass. Most of the letters in this period were focussed on preparing the ground and choosing the right seed.

On 12/16/1912 Wilson first mentions the proposed West course. "We are contemplating building eighteen more holes, possibly next year, and will still continue to bother you for a while". The letters continued non stop and the West course opened May 1914. Like the East, the first questions about the West began seven to nine months prior to laying seed and trying to grow grass.

Wilson was involved in a continuous, non-stop dialogue with P&O from 2/1911 onward, well past Seaview being ready for play, if he was involved with Seaview from the beginning, in the spring of 1913, why did it take him until November 1913 to ask for P&O's advice?

[Tom MacWood]

Here are Wilson's first two letters to P&O dealing with Seaview. What strikes you, if anything, about these two letters?

[Tom MacWood]

"There are only two logical explanations, and the first one is by far the most logical.

1) Wilson only became involved after P&O's visit, and after the course had already been staked out, or 2) Wilson was being paid by Geist and wanted to keep his involvement a secret."

The second explanation is about as ridiculous as is possibly imaginable and on the first there were a few projects that Wilson was involved with that he never mentioned to Piper and Oakley at all as far as I can see in those agronomy letters. He never mentioned Cobbs Creek, Philmont or Phoenixville to P&O either.  The only courses he regularly mentioned but only to do basically with agronomy were the Merions, Pine Valley and Seaview. Occasionally he spoke about Sunnybrook (which he was not involved with) because of the unusual green construction and the quality of the turf (perhaps due to that particular method). It was Wilson and Piper and Oakley's interest in the experimentations of Frederick Winslow Taylor at Sunnybrook (as well as Pine Valley) that essentially kicked off the idea of forming the USGA's Green Section when Taylor died suddenly in 1915. As far as I can see the only courses Wilson visited with Piper and Oakley in tow were Pine Valley, Merion and Sunnybrook.

Don't completely discount the second possibility, it was not uncommon for these men (professional and amateur) to receive a retainer under the table from these seed/construction companies.

What year or years was Wilson involved at Cobbs Creek, Philmont and Phoenixville? Could you give me some idea of what the Philmont and Phoenixville projects involved?

[Bradley Anderson]

Don't completely discount the second possibility, it was not uncommon for these men (professional and amateur) to receive a retainer under the table from these seed/construction companies.

What year or years was Wilson involved at Cobbs Creek, Philmont and Phoenixville? Could you give me some idea of what the Philmont and Phoenixville projects involved?
[/quote]

Mr. MacWood,

Are you suggesting that Wilson accepted a bribe from one of the seed companies?

[TEPaul]

Regarding posts #145-147 and some of the questions in them that relate to correspondences of Hugh Wilson and Piper and Oakley of the US Dept of Agriculture (generally heretofore referred to on this site as "The Agronomy Letters"), I feel they contain a very important sub-section in the development of American golf and architecture as a nexus to how those areas relate to the development in America of golf course agronomy and vice versa.

As far as I can tell, there are only two people on this website who have read those so-called "Agronomy Letters" in their entirety between the Wilson Brothers representing Merion and Pine Valley and Piper and Oakley of the US Dept of Agriculture. Those correspondences lasted for many years (with Hugh Wilson from 1911 to 1925 and with Alan Wilson from around 1915 until the late '20s or early '30s). The only other person I'm aware of who has read them in their entirety but is no longer on this website is Wayne Morrison.

I feel the origination, the gist and meaning and the purposes for which those people became involved in the development of American golf agronomy tells a very important historical tale.

I think Brad Anderson is the most valuable particpant of all in this historical understanding because this area happens to be something he is expert in anyway as he is a superintendent with a real interest in the details of the history and development of American agronomy including the history and development of American golf course construction machinery and processes as well as the development of American golf course maintenance machinery and processes.

I realize that these letters that run to well over a thousand are sometimes not the sexiest material to read as they mostly involve the experimentation with all kinds of grasses as well as all kinds of diseases and problems that effect their development and use for golf course turf.

I think the points and questions in posts #145-147 show a lack of understanding and/or a naivete about the gist, meaning and purposes about what-all those men were concentrating on and what they weren't. But as Bob Crosby said in his excellent essay on Joshua Crane, the discussion of this subject is well worth the candle, in my opinion, and I know in Brad Anderson's opinion.

So we will try to help out on here with a better understanding of this subject and what it meant in the over-all to the development of American golf agronomy and how and when that influenced and effected golf construction and golf architecture.