The Creation of NGLA in Chronological, Contemporaneous News Articles

[Tom MacWood]

Tom,

I'll try to find it tomorrow...tied up this evening.

But think about it...most of the property was corn fields prior...they HAD to turn all of that over.

But there is also a letter where they talk about how much to spread in the roughs, on the greens, in the fairways.   I'll find it.

Thanks.

Good luck.

[Tom MacWood]

TomM,

I don't recall anything in the minutes indicating that they had prepared the entire parcel for seeding.    

David
To my knowledge there is nothing in the minutes or the letters, in fact just the opposite. This what Wilson wrote in his 1916 account:

"We collected all the information we could from local committees and greenkeepers, and started in the spring of 1911 to construct the course on the ground which had largely been farm land. We used an average of fifteen tons of horse manure to the acre on the fairways and eight tons of various kind so manure to a green, the greens averaging about 10,000 square feet in area. At the time of seeding, we added 300 pounds of bonemeal to the acre and 100 pounds to a green. After completing the construction of the greens, and thoroughly harrowing and breaking up the soil on both fairways and greens we allowed the weeds to germinate and harrowed them in about every three weeks. We sowed from September 1 to 15...."

[Mike Cirba]

Tom and David,

They ploughed, harrowed, manured, and seeded the roughs.

[Joe Bausch]

Call Mr. Plow, that's my name, that name again is Mr. Plow!

HughHomer IJ WilsonSimpson.

[Mike Cirba]

Joe,

Too funny!!

These guys have a .010 batting average and talk like Babe Ruth.

[Tom MacWood]

Here are excerpts from letters written by Wilson and Oakley that lead me to believe there was golf course (staked-out on the ground and/or on paper) when Wilson became engaged in the project. Now if you ignore what Wilson wrote in 1916 regarding fairways and greens, as Mike has done, you may come to a different conclusion. For some reason Wilson's own account is generally ignored by Mike and the others:

2/1/1911 Wilson to Oakley: "After studying the matter over, we find what a big problem we have on our hands and how little real knowledge. If you could find it possible to arrange to analize the soil, we will only too glad to stand any expense that you would be put to. Our idea is to get the best analysis we can of the soil and what is needed to fertilize the ground, with a view of getting the best short growing grasses. I am sending you under separate cover, a contour map, and it you could arrange a analize the soil and advise us what fertilizer it needs, please way what sections you would like samples of soil from and will send them to you. If by any chance you are coming up to Philadelphia, I sincerely hope that you will look it up, for it would be a great opportunity for us to take you out to the course and have chance to talk the matter over with you."

2/7/1911 Oakley to Wilson: "I question very much the advisability of going to any trouble or expense in having analyses made of the various soils on your course, as chemical analysis really tells is but very little, if anything, in regard to the treatment the soil requires. We would be glad to get an idea of their general characteristics. I will be glad to you write us definitely regarding the condition of the new land at the present time, whether it is all cleared and whether there is any grass growing on it. I think we will be able to give you good suggestions regarding seed to be used on the fair greens, probably also on the putting greens, and some advice seeding and fertilizing."

2/8/1911 Wilson to Oakely: "As soon as the snow goes off, we will send you small samples of the typical soils in order that you can give us advice in regard to treating them. I sincerely hope that you will get up to Philadelphia and if you do, please let me know a day or so in advance and I will arrange to take you out and go over the Course with you."

3/13/1911 Wilson to Oakley: "I have just returned from a couple of days spent with Mr. Macdonald at the National Golf Course. I certainly enjoyed having an opportunity of going over the Course and seeing his experiments with different grasses...I hope that you will come up soon and will have time to go out and see our new problem."

3/16/1911 Wilson to Oakley: "I enclose a blue print showing locations from which soil was taken, which we are sending you today. I do not know if I made it clear in my former letter that any suggestions you would make in regard to treating the soil, will be much appreciated by us....Would it be better to put on the manure before plowing up the ground? We do not intend to seed before the Fall. Or would it be the best plan to plow and harrow the ground, then put on the lime and fertilizer, and go over it again and plow and harrow before seeding, say in August?"

3/16/1911 Russell to Oakley: "I beg leave to advise you that we have shipped to you, today by express, samples of soil and sod, regarding which you will receive a communication from Mr. Hugh I. Wilson a very short time."

3/20/1911 Oakley to Russell: "I am in receipt of your letter of 16th instant, and have just received the samples of soil and communication from Mr. Hugh I. Wilson. I will write to Mr. Wilson within a few days and give him as much information as possible on the subject of putting your course in condition."

3/23/1911 Oakley to Wilson: "As indicated previously in a letter, it is possible to five only general suggestions from an examination such as we are to make. This examination, however, is really as valuable in determining the course of treatment of the soils as if the soil were analyzed chemically. I think the whole course needs liming...We have found on our Arlington Farm on heavy clay soils that it is frequently impossible ti correct acidity even with a very heavy application of lime, but where we have used a dressing of barnyard manure in connection with the lime the soil has been sweetened very materially. It would hardly be practicable, of course, at this season of the year to use manure on your fair greens, but I would suggest that you bear this in mind and apply it next fall if it can be secured. You will find that manure in conjunction with lime is very beneficial, indeed....The grasses to be used on your fair greens, I think, without question are redtop and Kentucky bluegrass...A fine leaved bent grass, with creeping or Rhode Island bent, I feel quite certain will be most satisfactory for your putting greens. I judge however that this feature of the course is not the important one at the present time, and that you are mostly interested in getting the fair greens in a playable condition."

3/27/1911 Wilson to Oakley: "I am in receipt of your nice letter of the 23rd, giving us the results of your experiments in regard to out soil. We will follow your advise in regard to liming and manuring the soil. You state that we should lime and manure heavily, and I would ask that your advise is the proportions of each we should use per acre. Of course you can get a better idea if you will stop over on your trip to New England. I certainly hope you can. We are starting in this weeks to plow and do some of the rough work....If you will let me know a day or two before you come to Philadelphia, I will arrange to go out to the Course and go over it with you."

3/29/1911 Oakley to Wilson: "I am in receipt of your letter of the 27th instant and regret to find that I did not reply fully to your letter of the 14th instant...I note what you say in regard to plowing the land now and not seeding until next fall. The fall seeding is the most satisfactory. Manure, however, may be applied now and lime also. there is very little danger of loss of nitrogen from applying the two at the same time, especially if the lime is thoroughly slaked. We consider an application of two tons of lime not excessive by any means, and in fact we have found under many conditions that double the quantity is more beneficial....I would not advise the application of any commercial fertilizer until the time of sowing the seed, since if applied now it would mostly dissipated before the grass would have an opportunity of taking advantage of it. the see of redtop can be secured from any reliable seedsmen either in Philadelphia or New York City....I realize that you may have some difficulty in securing a sufficient quantity of well-rotted manure, but if this can be done an application of ten tons to acre would not be too much. The plan of plowing the land now and then again in mid-summer is a good one, but care, however, should be taken to have subservice of the sail thoroughly packed before sowing the seed."

4/5/1911 Wilson to Oakley: "Our idea is to plow the soil at once and then harrow in the manure at the rate of ten car loads per acre. Then scatter quick lim at the rate of 2 tons per acre....I am very glad that you are coming up to Philadelphia and will go over the course with us."

4/8/1911 Wilson to Oakley: "On account of the fact we are not going to seed until Fall, it occurred to me that is might be better to use fresh manure rather well rotted, as we gain in strength of the fertilizer and probably would not get many weed seeds."

4/8/1911 Oakley to Wilson: "I am in receipt of your letter of the 5th instant, and note what you say in regard to applying lime and manure to your course this spring. In your letter you state that you expect to apply manure at the rate of ten carloads to the acre. I think there must be some mistake in regard to this..."

4/10/1911 Wilson to Oakley : "I am in receipt of your favor of the 8th instant and in reply beg to say you are correct in that there was an error in my letter of the 5th instant. I should have stated ten tone, not carloads."

4/11/1911 Oakley to Wilson: "I am in receipt of your letter of the 8th instant, and am inclined to think that under your conditions fresh manure will prove quite satisfactory."

4/18/1911 Wilson to Oakley: "We are still hoping that you will come to Philadelphia and have a chance of looking over the course."

[Tom MacWood]

Tom and David,

They ploughed, harrowed, manured, and seeded the roughs.

Mike
I've read these letters and there is nothing about plowing, harrowing or manuring the rough. The only mention of rough, and by the way this is the first mention of rough in all of their correspondence, is this:

"In regards to the amount of seeds, we have been recommended to plant the greens, which are roughly 100 feet quare, 75 to 100 lbs per green. On the fair green, where want especially good condition, 100 lbs to the acre, and in the rough, where it does not make much difference, 30 lbs."

I doesn't sound like the rough was much of a priority, why would they go to the effort and expense of treating it like the fairways and greens, and why did Wilson not mention anything about the rough in his 1916 account? He is very specific of how they went about the treatment of the course and for some reason you have chosen to ignore it. Why?

[Mike Cirba]

Tom,

En route to golf.

More later but keep in mind that the place was mostly a corn field.

Were they just going to throw seed between the broken off stalks?

[Jeff_Brauer]

TMac,

My read on that is that there were two operationg (plow up and fertilize) in the spring.  Seeding (select grass type, seeding rates) in the fall.  Wilson was just planning ahead.  Nothing wrong with that.

I am still wondering about the historic methodology that would place the syntax of a bunch of agronomy letters as the top source to figure out when a course was routed, when club minutes tell us exactly when the final routing was completed?

Or, the motivation to exclude those minutes, or think something is "amiss" to use your word, because of a tense change from "your committee" to "upon our return."?

After about seven years of this, it still isn't clear to me what that part of this discussion is all about.

[Tom MacWood]

Tom,

En route to golf.

More later but keep in mind that the place was mostly a corn field.

Were they just going to throw seed between the broken off stalks?

Mike
I take it from your last response that you are admitting you were just blowing smoke up our asses when you tried to represent those letters as proof they plowed, harrowed, and manured the roughs. Those letters do not mention anything about treating the rough.

On February 6th Wilson said half the Course had very fair turf and the other half had been a corn field. In his 1916 report he said: "We collected all the information we could from local committees and greenkeepers, and started in the spring of 1911 to construct the course on the ground which had largely been farm land. We used an average of fifteen tons of horse manure to the acre on the fairways and eight tons of various kind so manure to a green, the greens averaging about 10,000 square feet in area. At the time of seeding, we added 300 pounds of bonemeal to the acre and 100 pounds to a green. After completing the construction of the greens, and thoroughly harrowing and breaking up the soil on both fairways and greens we allowed the weeds to germinate and harrowed them in about every three weeks. We sowed from September 1 to 15...."

There is no mention in any of the letters of having to clear corn stalks. I'm not sure when the property was last an active farm. Whatever the case there are ways of clearing land without having to put 10 tons/acre of manure on it.

[Tom MacWood]

I've added the point on the timeline when they re-arranged the course, and I've marked it in yellow.

2/1/1911 Wilson to Oakley: "After studying the matter over, we find what a big problem we have on our hands and how little real knowledge. If you could find it possible to arrange to analize the soil, we will only too glad to stand any expense that you would be put to. Our idea is to get the best analysis we can of the soil and what is needed to fertilize the ground, with a view of getting the best short growing grasses. I am sending you under separate cover, a contour map, and it you could arrange a analize the soil and advise us what fertilizer it needs, please way what sections you would like samples of soil from and will send them to you. If by any chance you are coming up to Philadelphia, I sincerely hope that you will look it up, for it would be a great opportunity for us to take you out to the course and have chance to talk the matter over with you."

2/7/1911 Oakley to Wilson: "I question very much the advisability of going to any trouble or expense in having analyses made of the various soils on your course, as chemical analysis really tells is but very little, if anything, in regard to the treatment the soil requires. We would be glad to get an idea of their general characteristics. I will be glad to you write us definitely regarding the condition of the new land at the present time, whether it is all cleared and whether there is any grass growing on it. I think we will be able to give you good suggestions regarding seed to be used on the fair greens, probably also on the putting greens, and some advice seeding and fertilizing."

2/8/1911 Wilson to Oakely: "As soon as the snow goes off, we will send you small samples of the typical soils in order that you can give us advice in regard to treating them. I sincerely hope that you will get up to Philadelphia and if you do, please let me know a day or so in advance and I will arrange to take you out and go over the Course with you."

3/13/1911 Wilson to Oakley: "I have just returned from a couple of days spent with Mr. Macdonald at the National Golf Course. I certainly enjoyed having an opportunity of going over the Course and seeing his experiments with different grasses...I hope that you will come up soon and will have time to go out and see our new problem."

Re-arranged the course and laid out five different plans.

3/16/1911 Wilson to Oakley: "I enclose a blue print showing locations from which soil was taken, which we are sending you today. I do not know if I made it clear in my former letter that any suggestions you would make in regard to treating the soil, will be much appreciated by us....Would it be better to put on the manure before plowing up the ground? We do not intend to seed before the Fall. Or would it be the best plan to plow and harrow the ground, then put on the lime and fertilizer, and go over it again and plow and harrow before seeding, say in August?"

3/16/1911 Russell to Oakley: "I beg leave to advise you that we have shipped to you, today by express, samples of soil and sod, regarding which you will receive a communication from Mr. Hugh I. Wilson a very short time."

3/20/1911 Oakley to Russell: "I am in receipt of your letter of 16th instant, and have just received the samples of soil and communication from Mr. Hugh I. Wilson. I will write to Mr. Wilson within a few days and give him as much information as possible on the subject of putting your course in condition."

3/23/1911 Oakley to Wilson: "As indicated previously in a letter, it is possible to five only general suggestions from an examination such as we are to make. This examination, however, is really as valuable in determining the course of treatment of the soils as if the soil were analyzed chemically. I think the whole course needs liming...We have found on our Arlington Farm on heavy clay soils that it is frequently impossible ti correct acidity even with a very heavy application of lime, but where we have used a dressing of barnyard manure in connection with the lime the soil has been sweetened very materially. It would hardly be practicable, of course, at this season of the year to use manure on your fair greens, but I would suggest that you bear this in mind and apply it next fall if it can be secured. You will find that manure in conjunction with lime is very beneficial, indeed....The grasses to be used on your fair greens, I think, without question are redtop and Kentucky bluegrass...A fine leaved bent grass, with creeping or Rhode Island bent, I feel quite certain will be most satisfactory for your putting greens. I judge however that this feature of the course is not the important one at the present time, and that you are mostly interested in getting the fair greens in a playable condition."

3/27/1911 Wilson to Oakley: "I am in receipt of your nice letter of the 23rd, giving us the results of your experiments in regard to out soil. We will follow your advise in regard to liming and manuring the soil. You state that we should lime and manure heavily, and I would ask that your advise is the proportions of each we should use per acre. Of course you can get a better idea if you will stop over on your trip to New England. I certainly hope you can. We are starting in this weeks to plow and do some of the rough work....If you will let me know a day or two before you come to Philadelphia, I will arrange to go out to the Course and go over it with you."

3/29/1911 Oakley to Wilson: "I am in receipt of your letter of the 27th instant and regret to find that I did not reply fully to your letter of the 14th instant...I note what you say in regard to plowing the land now and not seeding until next fall. The fall seeding is the most satisfactory. Manure, however, may be applied now and lime also. there is very little danger of loss of nitrogen from applying the two at the same time, especially if the lime is thoroughly slaked. We consider an application of two tons of lime not excessive by any means, and in fact we have found under many conditions that double the quantity is more beneficial....I would not advise the application of any commercial fertilizer until the time of sowing the seed, since if applied now it would mostly dissipated before the grass would have an opportunity of taking advantage of it. the see of redtop can be secured from any reliable seedsmen either in Philadelphia or New York City....I realize that you may have some difficulty in securing a sufficient quantity of well-rotted manure, but if this can be done an application of ten tons to acre would not be too much. The plan of plowing the land now and then again in mid-summer is a good one, but care, however, should be taken to have subservice of the sail thoroughly packed before sowing the seed."

4/5/1911 Wilson to Oakley: "Our idea is to plow the soil at once and then harrow in the manure at the rate of ten car loads per acre. Then scatter quick lim at the rate of 2 tons per acre....I am very glad that you are coming up to Philadelphia and will go over the course with us."

4/8/1911 Wilson to Oakley: "On account of the fact we are not going to seed until Fall, it occurred to me that is might be better to use fresh manure rather well rotted, as we gain in strength of the fertilizer and probably would not get many weed seeds."

4/8/1911 Oakley to Wilson: "I am in receipt of your letter of the 5th instant, and note what you say in regard to applying lime and manure to your course this spring. In your letter you state that you expect to apply manure at the rate of ten carloads to the acre. I think there must be some mistake in regard to this..."

4/10/1911 Wilson to Oakley : "I am in receipt of your favor of the 8th instant and in reply beg to say you are correct in that there was an error in my letter of the 5th instant. I should have stated ten tone, not carloads."

4/11/1911 Oakley to Wilson: "I am in receipt of your letter of the 8th instant, and am inclined to think that under your conditions fresh manure will prove quite satisfactory."

4/18/1911 Wilson to Oakley: "We are still hoping that you will come to Philadelphia and have a chance of looking over the course."

[Tom MacWood]

TMac,

My read on that is that there were two operationg (plow up and fertilize) in the spring.  Seeding (select grass type, seeding rates) in the fall.  Wilson was just planning ahead.  Nothing wrong with that.

I am still wondering about the historic methodology that would place the syntax of a bunch of agronomy letters as the top source to figure out when a course was routed, when club minutes tell us exactly when the final routing was completed?

Or, the motivation to exclude those minutes, or think something is "amiss" to use your word, because of a tense change from "your committee" to "upon our return."?

After about seven years of this, it still isn't clear to me what that part of this discussion is all about.

Wilson tells us in his 1916 report what he did, and there is nothing about treating the rough.

The routing of the golf course was in place on February 1, 1911, and it was on that blueprint. That is what I believe. Wilson would had to have been an idiot to send blank topo map and ask Oakley to recommend where take samples. You might as well use of blindfold and dart if that was the case. The minutes confirm there was a golf course in March. In those letters they discussed and implemented specific treatments for the fairways and greens prior to April 14.

As far as those minutes being amiss, all the other minute entries we've seen are well written and clear. This one is anything but. Lesley was a former journalist and newspaper editor he would be the last person to produce something so poorly written and confusing. What we have been given does not make sense, and correct me if I'm wrong but I believe this is the only original document that has not been posted on this site or appeared in the Nature Faker.

[Jeff_Brauer]

TMac,

As to the factual questions, you have long claimed that Hugh Wilson was a novice.  Could sending blank property line maps in order to get soil samples as quickly as possible just be one of those rookie mistakes (or him following his initial advice from CBM, perhaps blindly?)  I think it could be.

For that matter, since we know that the routing wasn't final until the April 19 Board Resolution, in the end, it wouldn't matter - he was either sending soil samples from a wrong routing or no routing.  Both stand the chance of a soil sample coming from a wrong area, no?

That said, the site is so tight, that I would believe the soil samples and the ploughing/manuring would still encompass all but those three holes that were said to have an excellent stand of grass, and perhaps the bottom of the quarry and what were to be parking lots, clubhouse, or maintenance area.  Look at old maps, and those fw pretty well extended right to each other, side to side.  They were wider than they are now.  I don't think there would be a big advantage to not adding fertizers to the rough.  It still required similar grass seed to grow, even if planted at 30 lb./acre rather than 100.

And, I don't see how agronomy letters really affect what happened, or our understanding of it.So what are you alleging?  That TePaul has faked the minutes to protect the legend of Hugh Wilson? That Merion is the poster child for unethical behavior among historians?

I am just trying to figure out what could be "amiss" other than some poor tense changes, at least as you see it.

So what are you alleging?  That TePaul has faked the minutes to protect the legend of Hugh Wilson? That Merion is the poster child for unethical behavior among historians?

Still seems to me that the simplest, most obvious answer is that between talking for the committee, etc. that we just have one document that YOU don't think reads as it should.  And of course, if you are of a mindset that the committee didn't design the golf course, then, if you look long enough, its a good bet you can find some snippets that lead to whatever conclusion you want.

[Mike Cirba]

Wilson did not send a blank map.

The different areas of the roughly 100 acres that needed development were coded alphabetically, which would have been ridiculous if the course was already routed.

[DMoriarty]

Funny how you guys are always accusing us of parsing words, yet you tell us that "golf course" doesn't even mean "golf course" in these letters.  

_______________________________________________________

Jeff Brauer,   You accused me of lying and you are standing by that?  You know damn well that your accusation is completely false, yet you have neither set the record straight nor backed up your claim. You are a real gentleman.  

Reminds me of when Wayne called me a liar for correctly measuring the 10th hole at Merion using Google Earth. He wasn't man enough to set the record straight either, even when proven wrong.  More evidence that you guys really aren't interested in setting the record straight, but are perfectly happy to let false statements stand if they advance your petty grudges.
  
___________________________________________________________

TomM,  

Thanks for transcribing those in one place.  A few comments:

-- In addition to your underlines, in his 3/23/11 letter, Oakley gives us a good idea of what they meant when they referred to "the course" when he wrote:  "I think the whole course needs liming . . . It would hardly be practicable, of course, at this season of the year to use manure on your fair greens, but I would suggest that you bear this in mind and apply it next fall if it can be secured.[/color]" It would make little sense to lime the areas they were not using; so "the whole course" most likely referred to the golf holes. This is further confirmed when he wrote of using manure on "your fairgreens."

-- Another telling statement not underlined is in Wilson's 3/13/1911 letter written right after his NGLA trip, where Wilson invited Oakley "to go out and see our new problem."   During this time period, course layouts and/or hole layouts were often referred to as a "problem" because the course and/or hole presented  the golfers with a problem they would have to try and resolve.  This seems to be the likely reference here, otherwise to what was he referring?  

-- At the beginning of February Wilson apparently had a contour map of "the course" and Wilson mentioned he would send soil samples as soon as the snow melted.  He did not send soil samples and the corresponding blueprint marking the locations until mid-March, shortly after returning from NGLA.  While not dispositive of anything in particular, this timing fits well with the theory that they had a plan from the beginning (by Barker and/or CBM/HJW) but it hit a snag or change (the swap) and they wanted CBM to review the plan and sign off on the change.

-- If "the golf course" meant the entire property and not just the golf course, then what was Wilson talking about when he wrote of having  the "opportunity of going over the Course."  What was meant by the course?   Plans for Merion's course?  NGLA's golf course?  Or perhaps Wilson was there interested in purchasing one of the 90 estate lots which Mike thinks were there in addition to the golf course?

_____________________________

As to the supposed Lesley report, Tom is correct that copies of this report and the actual minutes from which it came have not been brought forward.  

And, despite the repeated claims on here by know-nothings who do not represent Merion, those particular documents have NOT been available for review, not even at Merion.  I am curious as to what Wayne is hiding this time.

That said, as they are,  I agree with Tom MacWood that they do not make much sense, and in this contrasts sharply with similar material, such as other writings by Lesley and other transcriptions from the minutes.  This is especially curious given that TEPaul had already posted multiple different and conflicting versions of this supposed report, none of which made sense either.

Moreover, even the Fakers' presentation of this supposed report is strange on their .pdf.    

1. The order the material is presented is odd. The Fakers first quoted a resolution noting that the "the Golf Committee presented a plan showing a proposed layout of the new Golf Ground . . . ."  Then after an unrelated paragraph, the Fakers brought up that on the same date, "Lesley submitted a report to the Board of Government . . . ." Is this where the Golf Committee submitted a plan?  Because reading it makes it seem as if Merion voted on the plan before Lesley even presented it.    This could just be part of the nearly incoherent presentation, but it certainly raises some questions.

2.  It is unclear whether all the relevant material from this Meeting has been presented.  The only items presented are the resolution and the supposed Report.   There is no indication of what else is in there, so we have no idea whether or not this is just continued cherry-picking by the Fakers.  

3. The form of this report diverges from other similar reports.   Most notably, other transcribed submissions and reports contain some sort of attribution or signature at the end, even if just the word "Secretary."  Lesley's earlier report from summer 1910 ends as follows:

Respectfully submitted for the Committee,
(signed) Robert W. Lesley,
Chairman

Yet Lesley's March report just abruptly cuts off after the one sentence paragraph about the deal with the construction company.   Is that the way it appeared in the minutes, or is something missing?   And what came before and after the report?

It could be that this is exactly as it appeared and the entirety of the minutes dealing with the issue, but given the cherry picking these guys have done in the past, surely these things need sorting out.  
____________________________________________________

Wilson did not send a blank map.

The different areas of the roughly 100 acres that needed development were coded alphabetically, which would have been ridiculous if the course was already routed.

Above Cirba asserted as fact his theory that the rough had been plowed and fertilized, even though there is ample indication that THIS DID NOT HAPPEN.  Now he is again blowing smoke up our asses with another unsupported proclamation.  

And he says our batting average is 10%?   Mike theories are the unfortunate proof that one can fail repeatedly and miserably, yet still not learn anything.  

Where did the 100 acre figure come from?

And if there was NO PLAN, then how come only 100 acres needed to be developed?   How did they know which 100 acres to develop?  What about the other 20 acres?

[Mike Cirba]

David,

You really need to keep up with your reading.   Perhaps you should start with the P&O letters.

Wilson determined that about 25 acres were sodded well enough that they didn't need seeding.   That leaves roughly 100 to develop.

As far as what they called it, perhaps you would have preferred if Wilson said, "hey, can't wait til you can come up and see our cornfield"...or how about, "we need to spread some manure on our farmland".

It was land they were going to develop for golf so he called it a golf course.

You guys should really take your act on the road as it's becoming the best comedy duo since Rowan and Martin.   And then when you guys get Patrick wound up, man...I have to tell you, I've come to count on your guys to brighten my day with sunshine and laughter. 

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mike,

You should know that others, non-interested parties, don't agree with you.

This past weekend I had half a dozen individuals approach me with their opinion on this thread and not one of them sided with the Merionettes.

Now, you can say that they're wrong.  But, when independent prudent people don't agree with you, you have to ask yourself, WHY ?

Perhaps your arguments aren't as convincing as you think.

Perhaps David's arguments have merit.

One of these independent parties, who doesn't participate on GCA.com, labeled you (the Merionettes) as pedantic.
Others thought that the Merionettes and the other side were ...... unspooled.

As I've said many times, I don't know for a fact, exactly what happened at Merion, but, I have my opinions, as do others.
Some may agree with you, some may agree with David, but, it's clear, there's no unanymity.

So, please, don't categorize those that disagree with you as unknowing, stupid or clownish.

If there's a burden of proof, it would appear that neither side has produced it, to date, despite your proclaimations to the contrary.

Perhaps David and Tom will seek access to the archives, but, it's wrong to expect them to do so through or under the supervision of the Merionettes.

Better that an independent third party should make the arrangements, since the interested parties are at swords point.

You may remember how hard you tried to dispute that Wilson hadn't traveled prior to March of 1912.
But, you were wrong.
Don't ever think that you couldn't be wrong about other matters.

While I have my opinions, they may be completely wrong.
Hopefully, time will tell

[Tom MacWood]

Wilson did not send a blank map.

The different areas of the roughly 100 acres that needed development were coded alphabetically, which would have been ridiculous if the course was already routed.

Mike
You are confused. He sent two blueprints. He included a map with his first letter and asked where they should take samples. He sent a second map in March with the samples. It would be ridiculous if the course wasn't routed in February and it was blank map and he was asking where we should take samples.

[Jeff_Brauer]

David,

I agree with Mike that his acreage estimate is easily supportable - 117 acres, less the amount of existing Merion Blue, a few acres for clubhouse, maintenance, quarry bottom, creek bottoms, the occaisional treed area, etc.  Not too far off 100 acres, but thanks for another example of you being both an insulting (insert your own insulting name here) and your ability to logically reason. I am sure its on par with the rest of your logical analysis over the years, and your method - insult and attack first, think later. Geez.

TMac,

As it happens, I have had soil samples taken before there was a routing.  It might have helped them decide what areas to avoid.  And, if you say that the course was too packed in for them to avoid anything, well, then, it really didn't matter if they had a routing or not.  On a site like that, it would be almost guaranteed you would be in or near a fw. 

For that matter, if you missed by a few yards, would you really think the soil would be that much different just a few yards apart?  I have seen it happen occaisionally, but usually there is some kind of evidence on the ground - change in vegetation (I wouldn't be surprised if the native bluegrass areas were low lying and wet, and thus not farmed, and perhaps of a different soil due to the constant flooding of Cobbs Creek, for example)  The soil near the quarry would probably be similar, etc.

I am still trying to figure out your use of the word "amiss." I understand your past posts concerning the inaccuracies of club histories, by guys like Tollhurst, who failed to do much than regurgitate old records, and incomprehensively at that.  I tried to reason out (and got slammed by David for doing so) how Alan Wilson could write "as a first step" which later got translated into Wilson going abroad earlier than he actually did.

But, I am struggling to figure out how you think what Lesley wrote in the club minutes (or read into the club minutes) could be "amiss?"  I agree there is some clumsy wording, but I wonder what it is that could make someone honestly think that they had a course on the ground, etc.  As you can tell, it reads pretty simply to my eyes and ears.

Thanks.

[Tom MacWood]

David,

I agree with Mike that his acreage estimate is easily supportable - 117 acres, less the amount of existing Merion Blue, a few acres for clubhouse, maintenance, quarry bottom, creek bottoms, the occaisional treed area, etc.  Not too far off 100 acres, but thanks for another example of you being both an insulting (insert your own insulting name here) and your ability to logically reason. I am sure its on par with the rest of your logical analysis over the years, and your method - insult and attack first, think later. Geez.

TMac,

As it happens, I have had soil samples taken before there was a routing.  It might have helped them decide what areas to avoid.  And, if you say that the course was too packed in for them to avoid anything, well, then, it really didn't matter if they had a routing or not.  On a site like that, it would be almost guaranteed you would be in or near a fw. 

For that matter, if you missed by a few yards, would you really think the soil would be that much different just a few yards apart?  I have seen it happen occaisionally, but usually there is some kind of evidence on the ground - change in vegetation (I wouldn't be surprised if the native bluegrass areas were low lying and wet, and thus not farmed, and perhaps of a different soil due to the constant flooding of Cobbs Creek, for example)  The soil near the quarry would probably be similar, etc.

I am still trying to figure out your use of the word "amiss." I understand your past posts concerning the inaccuracies of club histories, by guys like Tollhurst, who failed to do much than regurgitate old records, and incomprehensively at that.  I tried to reason out (and got slammed by David for doing so) how Alan Wilson could write "as a first step" which later got translated into Wilson going abroad earlier than he actually did.

But, I am struggling to figure out how you think what Lesley wrote in the club minutes (or read into the club minutes) could be "amiss?"  I agree there is some clumsy wording, but I wonder what it is that could make someone honestly think that they had a course on the ground, etc.  As you can tell, it reads pretty simply to my eyes and ears.

Thanks.

Are you drunk? Did you send a topo map to the testing group and ask where they'd like the samples to come from?

You've already stated the excerpt from the minutes did not make sense to you either so I'm not quite sure why you don't understand.

[Jeff_Brauer]

TMac,

Well, I am trying to be nice, but thanks for the insults. I presume you use them because its all you got for the arguments.

And yes, using independent agronomists, they sometimes can spot those likely different areas of soils based on topo, trees (if marked on map) flood plains, and their general knowledge from USDA soils maps.  Not sure how much general soils info was available for Philly then.  And, as a novice, I don't see it as that unusual that Wilson would ask the agronomist for his advice on where to take them, since he would know little at this point, other than that CBM told him soil samples were of paramount importance.

But, that said, if I am in a housing project, yes, I do wait until I have a routing in place, or nearly so, to get the soil tests.  I just keep thinking that on a tight site that they knew would be fully utilized, that it might not have made much difference, as long as they got some of the basically different areas - the existing native grasses, the quarry, etc.  Of course I base that on taking soil tests for about 50 new projects and similar amount of remodels.  I doubt that experience can substitute for reading of numerous historical accounts........

I didn't say the minutes didn't make sense to me, I said the wording was clumsy in some respects.  But as usual for the Moronics, you subtly twist words to make them say what they don't say.  Not only my words, but those of the committee, etc.  Seriously, I just don't know how the words "upon our return we laid out five plans" could mean much other than they drew up five plans.  

I can't come up with a logical explanation as to why Lesley's words are amiss.  Do you think he had an obligation to write them to your satisfaction?  Personally, I think as he read the report to those immediate people in the room, he left out what would have been obvious to them - that the committee was the special committee on construction - because they all knew it, and they knew who was on it.  I would not ever take it to mean that some other unmentioned committee really went to NGLA.

But, we have covered that ground.  The entire Moronic theory (to the extent its consistent) seems based on Merion's records being wrong in some way, shape, or form, or you three being the smartest three guys in the last 100 years and being the only ones to break the code.  I am not saying its impossible, I am saying I have all the coincidences falling into place at under 2% or so.  I would love to hear the list of names from Pat of those who really support you guys.  Maybe they can explain it a lot better than you do.

BTW, since I mentioned going to Top Golf, I will presume you just figured I was drinking there.  But, I was not, other than Diet Coke.  But, its still an insult without foundation.  Not that you don't seem to come up with a lot of things I don't think have foundation........but I am trying to understand if from your point of view, even as I disagree.

[Tom MacWood]

TMac,

Well, I am trying to be nice, but thanks for the insults. I presume you use them because its all you got for the arguments.

And yes, using independent agronomists, they sometimes can spot those likely different areas of soils based on topo, trees (if marked on map) flood plains, and their general knowledge from USDA soils maps.  Not sure how much general soils info was available for Philly then.  And, as a novice, I don't see it as that unusual that Wilson would ask the agronomist for his advice on where to take them, since he would know little at this point, other than that CBM told him soil samples were of paramount importance.

But, that said, if I am in a housing project, yes, I do wait until I have a routing in place, or nearly so, to get the soil tests.  I just keep thinking that on a tight site that they knew would be fully utilized, that it might not have made much difference, as long as they got some of the basically different areas - the existing native grasses, the quarry, etc.  Of course I base that on taking soil tests for about 50 new projects and similar amount of remodels.  I doubt that experience can substitute for reading of numerous historical accounts........

I didn't say the minutes didn't make sense to me, I said the wording was clumsy in some respects.  But as usual for the Moronics, you subtly twist words to make them say what they don't say.  Not only my words, but those of the committee, etc.  Seriously, I just don't know how the words "upon our return we laid out five plans" could mean much other than they drew up five plans.  

I can't come up with a logical explanation as to why Lesley's words are amiss.  Do you think he had an obligation to write them to your satisfaction?  Personally, I think as he read the report to those immediate people in the room, he left out what would have been obvious to them - that the committee was the special committee on construction - because they all knew it, and they knew who was on it.  I would not ever take it to mean that some other unmentioned committee really went to NGLA.

But, we have covered that ground.  The entire Moronic theory (to the extent its consistent) seems based on Merion's records being wrong in some way, shape, or form, or you three being the smartest three guys in the last 100 years and being the only ones to break the code.  I am not saying its impossible, I am saying I have all the coincidences falling into place at under 2% or so.  I would love to hear the list of names from Pat of those who really support you guys.  Maybe they can explain it a lot better than you do.

BTW, since I mentioned going to Top Golf, I will presume you just figured I was drinking there.  But, I was not, other than Diet Coke.  But, its still an insult without foundation.  Not that you don't seem to come up with a lot of things I don't think have foundation........but I am trying to understand if from your point of view, even as I disagree.

Jeff
I'm sorry, it is sometimes frustrating dealing with you because you seem only interested in being a devil's advocate, you obviously have no interest or curiosity in discovering what happened. The map had no indication of trees or existing vegetation. Oakley asked in a later letter what was on the ground, and Wilson explained half had very fair turf and the other half had been a corn field.

[Jeff_Brauer]

TMac,

Well, I mentioned the "occaisonal tree area' in the post.  I didn't say there were trees all over the place. There had to be a few, even if they didn't show up on the map.

I do not think Mike's rough estimate of 100 acres is either unsupportable, far off.  I wasn't being devils advocate, but doing simple math for David, who seemed to jump to a too fast conclusion.

For that matter, I have no idea why we are even discussing agronomy letters.  It would seem to me that its just a nice bit of deflection, or searching beyond hope that some word parse might affect and change the basic wording of "we laid out five plans on our return".  It doesn't, but I am just trying to figure out a way that it logically could.


David slammed me for at first agreeing to his theory, and then backing off. Of course, in his mind, I cannot think for myself, I only puppet for TPaul.  Not true.  If I wasn't interested, why would I have read his essay four or five times, taken the trouble to post many of his seemingly unsupported conclusions regarding the timeline, and give him a chance to answer them?  I haven't done any digging like David, Joe Baush and others, but I have read and stuck with this thing for what, seven years now?    BTW, I think I have made more attempts to find middle ground than others, too.  Sometimes it seems like we edge that way, but other times, we don't.  And, unlike a few, I have admitted when I am wrong, and admitted certain points from the other side.

Hey, we all get frustrated,  perhaps because its an unwinnable argument given how entrenched everyone is.  Now that I think of it, maybe I should get drunk before entering this fray again....Thanks TMac, great idea!

[Tom MacWood]

Jeff
Are you most interested in discovering what happened or most interested in protecting the Hugh Wilson legacy?

[DMoriarty]

Here we go again.

On the one hand we have Wilson, who told us what happened in no uncertain terms.  And on the other hand, we have you guys ignoring him and pretending he wrote something entirely different. How many times do we have to go through this?
______________________________________

 

David,

You really need to keep up with your reading.   Perhaps you should start with the P&O letters.

Wilson determined that about 25 acres were sodded well enough that they didn't need seeding.   That leaves roughly 100 to develop.

As far as what they called it, perhaps you would have preferred if Wilson said, "hey, can't wait til you can come up and see our cornfield"...or how about, "we need to spread some manure on our farmland".

It was land they were going to develop for golf so he called it a golf course.

25 acres?   As usual, Cirba is just making things up.   And the area in question isn't even half of 25 acres.  He wrote that three fairways were pasture turf. To give you an idea of their priorities, when these fairways became too weak, the sodded the landing areas (70x45 yards) using turf from the rough, "which was of no value there."  

What is the source of the 100 acre figure?  Is that somewhere or did Cirba just make that up as well?