[DMoriarty]

David,

Pat has used the word Liar and Tom has called the story a total myth and bogus. If I pulled a piece of your Merion essay out and called it bogus and a total myth without you here to defend/explain yourself I think you would have every right to assume I was calling you a liar...especially when in the next post someone else uses the word liar and I don't distinguish my comments from theirs. These are not emotional and incendiary reactions, these are responses to the words used.

I agree the story is a very likely a myth, a legend, and bogus.  But there is a big leap from there to calling AWT a liar.   If Patrick called AWT a liar it was very likely in emotion and not all that productive, but come on, we are all adults here. What is the use of getting worked up over whether Patrick thinks that some guy got a little carried away with his creative license one hundred years ago? The righteous indignation defending some dead guy's honor is purely rhetorical.

I won't get into your analogy for a host of reasons, but surely you see the difference between calling me a liar when I am anything but and calling AWT's story false when it very likely is.  

[JESII]

You should run for office because only politicians could justify away the accusation of lying as well as you just did. Why are the words liar and lying so much more incendiary than their synonyms? MacWood believes, and hasn't hid his belief, that AWT was lying yet his efforts at proof are hollow and he has you here defending his behavior...as well as Pat's. I'm sure it was in emotion although it wasn't out of character.

I don't see the problem with my analogy. I disagree with many of the assumptions you made in your essay but I discussed them with you.

[DMoriarty]

I'm not condoning calling AWT a liar, but I honestly don't recall Tom M or even Patrick as having done so.  Not saying they haven't.  Just that I don't recall it if they did.  No offense to Patrick but I don't pay a tremendous amount of attention to every single one of his posts, as we are often on very different tracks and I barely have time keep up with my own discussions.  

As for Tom M, I think perhaps you are letting your opinion of TomM impact your reading of his posts and the supposed synonyms of lying.  I don't recall calling AWT a liar or thinking him a liar, yet I am in general agreement with TomM's views on AWT's writing style, and might even go further than Tom on some regards.   AWT was a writer of fact and fiction and he liked to entertain and weave a yarn, and sometimes in such situations the line between fact and fiction gets blurred. He was also very much a self-promoter, and self-promotion may well have been a necessity as he was trying to make a living as a designer.  Like TomM, I sense that in this regard he sometimes took a bit of creative license with his stories and perhaps overplayed his relationships a bit.  This is just my opinion, but even if accurate , it is not uncommon among writers or golf architects and it wouldn't make AWT a "liar" or a bad person.  We have had lots of examples of outright dishonesty on these threads, and I don't think in comparison AWT comes close to qualifying.  

But he does appear to have been wrong about the train story.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jeff,

Did the landform and the juxtaposition of the RR tracks and the landform change over the last century, or have they remained the same ?

Jim,
 
Did AWT get his facts wrong or lie in initially reporting the cause of Crump's death ?

When he came to know the true cause of Crump's death, whether immediate or subsequent, did he ever correct his initial statements or did he allow his mistake or lie to remain uncorrected ?

Was AWT incapable of lying ?

Did he live his entire life without ever lying ?

Get over it, people lie all the time, including every one of us.

If it's your position that his initial reporting of the cause of Crump's death, despite being a close personal friend, was just a seriously flawed error, then, is it not possible or likely, that his reporting of the sighting from the train was also a seriously flawed error ?

You can't have it both ways.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jeff,

You can determine what was physically visible.

I'll ask again.

Where was GAC when he FIRST saw the rolling hills and valleys, along with the sandy soils as his train was moving East at 88 feet per second, or more, for approximately 4,000 linear feet as the train sped by the unmarked property ?

Why has NO ONE answered that question with specificity ?

[DMoriarty]

Ah ha, now I remember.   Much of the discussion about lying revolved around the apparent cover-up of Crump's cause of death.  I haven't really ever bothered with that discussion and have no desire to get into it now.  It is a perfect example though of how emotion takes over these things and clouds all reason and judgment.   Am I the only one who remembers the repulsive behavior on gca.com by TEPaul and his writing partner while Tom MacWood was trying to research and write his respectful piece on Crump?  Emotion run amuck, and a really pathetic attempt on their part to disparage Tom MacWood any way they could and to distract from and demean what turned out to be some really solid research and writing.  No one still here is as bad as they were, but there are still vestiges of their approach in this very discussion.

Why are you so focused on vilifying MacWood and Patrick rather than looking at the factual question at issue?   It must be clear to you and Bryan by now, that, whether you come to agree with him or not, MacWood has ample reason for thinking that that train story is more myth than fact.   So what exactly is his crime here?  Why not just acknowledge that, whatever grudge you have against him, MacWood's opinions on this matter have a solid foundation in the various stories of the event, and he had already done his research?

Maybe if you showed me precisely where MacWood blasphemed AWT regarding this issue, I'd better understand.  But even then I'd wonder why we can't just focus on the question at hand and leave the grudges out of it.  

[Patrick_Mucci]

David,

You have to deeply discount or completely ignore Jim's statements as he rarely quotes or restates comments accurately.
He's more prone to state what he wants the reader to believe rather than the actual facts.
Rather than use quotes, he misrepresents what has been said.

I've clearly indicated, to Jeff Brauer, my position on the train episode, and I think Jeff and I are in agreement on those circumstances.

TEPaul continues to misrepresent my position on his ever expanding blast emails and Jim has done the same thing.
TEPaul's conclusions are flawed beyond belief.
Once again, he states what he wants the reader to believe rather than the facts.
He too, fails to present quotes, choosing instead to misrepresent your position, MacWood's position and my position.

Jeff Brauer, alone, recognizes and understands my position, while TEPaul chooses to distort and misrepresent my position.

AWT's failure to accurately report the cause of GAC's death is a matter of record, it is irrefutable, as is his failure to correct his initial  misreporting of the cause of GAC's death in the years that followed.

Whether some choose to categorize it as a mistake, an intentional error, misrepresentation or lie is irrelevant, the fact is that AWT had years and years to correct his mistake/intentional error/misrepresentation/lie and chose NOT to do so.  His ongoing failure to correct the record forever categorized his act, his erroneous initial report, whether intentional or unintentional, as a distortion of the truth, and the perpetuation of a lie.  

For some strange reason, neither TEPaul or Jim understand that

[Patrick_Mucci]

I'll ask again.

Where was GAC when he FIRST saw the rolling hills and valleys, along with the sandy soils as his train was moving East at 88 feet per second, or more, for approximately 4,000 linear feet as the train sped by the unmarked property ?

Why has NO ONE answered that question with specificity ?

[JMEvensky]

Whether some choose to categorize it as a mistake, an intentional error, misrepresentation or lie is irrelevant, the fact is that AWT had years and years to correct his mistake/intentional error/misrepresentation/lie and chose NOT to do so.  His ongoing failure to correct the record forever categorized his act, his erroneous initial report, whether intentional or unintentional, as a distortion of the truth, and the perpetuation of a lie.  

From the peanut gallery,a belated Christmas/Chanukah present--an unlimited supply of the phrase "IN MY OPINION".You might think about using it.

You are an able rhetorician.Arguing that black is white/white is black is a fun exercise--in a college classroom.This back and forth will prove nothing--but then that's never been the goal.

The goal is to poison the water to such an extent that nobody will ever be able to ontologically prove anything.You (and others) have set yourselves up as judge and jury--and I'm amazed that some posters in this thread continue to allow it.They lose the minute they engage in the conversation.

Engendering ill will is,I guess,just an occupational hazard.Having interesting posters leave the discussion group,that's something the rest of us are poorer for.

When you've won this war of attrition,will you be satisfied with your prize?When no sane person will ever post any historical opinion on any golf course will this game finally be over?

[Patrick_Mucci]

JME,

What interesting posters voluntarily left the site ?

[Bryan Izatt]

Patrick,

A history test for you; who wrote each of the following:

I don't buy the train ride story for a second.

Crump discovered the huge Pinelands region of NJ while traveling on the train to AC. As a boy Crump used to hunt in portions of the huge Pinelands region of NJ. That Crump discovered the specific site while on a shooting trip in 1912. Crump was on horseback on that hunting trip when he discovered the specific site.

this is what I think;

1) Crump hunted in south Jersey as a young boy, and throughout his life and was likely familiar with the land in question prior to the train ride.

2) Crump perhaps had the discovery, connecting the site to a potential golf and/or hunting site while riding the train and mentioned it to Tillinghast at the time, who was likely riding along with him.

3) When other possible sites for the course these guys were looking to build didn't pan out (in Absecon, etc), Crump went back to the site with Perrin at first, and then others, stopping at Sumner Station and then getting out to explore on foot.

Once Crump was satisfied in his mind, and perhaps had some discussions with the owner negotiating terms and feasibility, he went back to his group, sending a letter, and starting the club.

I don't understand the need here for some to try and prove the unprovable - that one story or another is a myth or made up.  Why do we need to make out that either Tillie or Shelly were mistaken, or worse yet, purposely misleading.

The 1910 train story is bogus.

And, finally your current position:

Crump was familiar with the property due to his prior personal experience/s hunting/ horseback riding on the land and SUBSEQUENTLY, while riding on a train with AWT pointed out the approximate location of the land that he had already selected as his site for his golf course.

After 5 months and hundreds of posts you've finally come out of the jungle-like underbrush and stunted pines to state a clear position.  Now, which other poster does your position most closely match (from 4 or 5 months ago).

______________________________________________

And, perhaps we should all follow the lead of this other poster, and not pay any attention to any of Pat's argumentative posts:

No offense to Patrick but I don't pay a tremendous amount of attention to every single one of his posts

[Patrick_Mucci]

Bryan

When you answer the question in reply # 57, I'll consider taking your test.

[Tom MacWood]

I'm happy to see that you edited out one of your other derogatory remarks about AWT.  There is really no need to try to posthumously tear down the man's reputation and credibility.  Just because men are successful or priests doesn't mean they are either credible or reliable witnesses to history.

Bryan
What did I edit out?

[Bryan Izatt]

Pat,

I've already answered it twice.  Please look in the back pages.  Jim has answered it several times.  Go look in the back pages.  What does this debate have to do with anything now that you agree that Crump told Tillinghast about the site while on the train?

[DMoriarty]

Bryan,  

I don't appreciate you taking my words out of context above and using them to take another swipe at Patrick. You suggest that I said that do I "not pay any attention to any of Pat's argumentative posts."   This is not true.  I generally read Patrick's posts, but I may have missed some posts or missed some details in some others.  That is all I meant.

If you want to continue to take shots at Patrick, use your own words, not mine.

Thanks.

[JESII]

Ah ha, now I remember.   Much of the discussion about lying revolved around the apparent cover-up of Crump's cause of death.  I haven't really ever bothered with that discussion and have no desire to get into it now.  

I wasn't in that argument either. Maybe a single post if at all.

No, Macwood began th Pine Valley and Topos thread with the statement "the train story is bogus and a myth" and has repeated himself dozens of times since and for months refused to actually post any of his supporting source material. Bryan searched out the 8 sources he provided as proof because they all have identical stories about hunting. Well, unfortunately the stories are not only inconsistent but none are contemporaneous, most notably Travers.

[DMoriarty]

Patrick,

I think Jim tries to present the material accurately and generally does, but in this case he may have let his emotion get the best of him.  Happens to the best of us. 

As for TEPaul, he has proven he is not capable of productively participating in these conversations.   Let's not waste our time bothering with what he might have posted in his circle jerk emails.   I've no time for him or his pathetic grabs at attention.
__________________________________


Jim,  I too think that the train story is bogus and a myth.  But doubting the accuracy of the description is a far cry from calling AWT a liar.   I doubt TomM ever said every single story was exactly the same or that any or all of them were contemporaneous, so I fail to grasp your point.  One thing all the various accounts have in common is they all contradict the train story, which leads me to believe that the train story is bogus and a myth.

But perhaps we should stop trying to make this about TomM or Patrick or even pompous posters from posts past?  Aren't we supposedly trying to figure out what happened?

If that is the goal then perhaps we can all agree that the various versions all contradict the AWT train story, which even by itself waspretty unlikely on its face.    

[Tom MacWood]

Tom,

Thanks for posting the Baker stuff.  Do you have his complete remembrances?

Is the quoted part contiguous or are there missing pieces.  It seems a little disjointed.  For instance, he mentions the other people he played with in the early years and then segues in the next paragraph to "we" went to Europe.  I assume that didn't mean the 9 people in the preceding paragraph.

There are a couple of things that don't seem to match other sources.  See below.  My guess is that some of the details were a little fuzzy after 38 years.  They would be for me.

In 1950 Joseph Baker wrote down his recollections:

"The recollections of Joseph H. Baker of the PVGC and of George A. Crump, the founder - good friend of many years and hunting companion on more than fifty trips over the United States.

GAC started to play golf in Merchantville, NJ - his home - St. Davids, and Torresdale with Howard Perrin, Andy Carty, Wister Harvey, Jack Edwards, WW Atterbury, William P. Smith, Dick Hanson, Arnold Dawson, Frank Hayes and Cameron Buxton.

In 1910 we made a three months trip to Europe, playing on various golf courses - Walton Heath, Sunningdale, Turnberry, Prestwick, Hoylake (where he played with John Ball, champion of England - who best him two in one) and St. Andrews (where I bought my first golf clubs). I bought a corduroy bag and five clubs for about $15.00 and then we went down to Cirgere in Dover, where there are three golf courses, and he played fifty-four holes in one day. From there we went to Carlsbad, Luzerne, Nice and the Cagnes Club. Rome and Paris completed our trip to Europe and returned home.

Once home Crump paid a visit to Brown Mills, where he thought of building a golf course. Then with the same object in view he went to Absecon, where the present country club is located. In Absecon he found the mosquitos so many and vicious that he decided it would not do. He came back to Merchantville and started to buy the ground at Sumner station, which was later changed to Pine Valley. He paid $50.00 for most of it, and for some ground paid $100 per acre.  There is a discontinuity between this and the deeds.  In the deeds Crump paid $8,750 for 184.31 acres.  That's $47.47 an acre, not some for $50.00 and some for $100.00.   He secured the right-of-way from the Ireland property for a road one hundred feet wide for about ninety-nine years and in the old days that is the way we came to Pine Valley - by way of Watsontown.  In 1914 Virginia Ireland granted Pine Valley free and unhindered access from the Clementon - New Freedom Road to Pine Valley across her property on an existing 30 foot wide (not 100) road - what is now called Old Mill Road.  It was forever, not 99 years.

At one of the luncheons at my house I had Andrew T. Dice, President of the Reading Company, and he said since we had no station at PV he would have one built, which was done. in those days we had lots of trains stopping at PV - express trains to and from.  I wonder where?  All the other sources only mention Sumner Station.  One wonders how many trains there were to serve 200 members and their guests?

After buying the property Mr. Crump sent for Mr. Colt, who laid out the Sunningdale course in England...."

Baker is the primary source for a lot of info. The 1910 trip to the UK, the consideration of two sites prior to, and the train station. I suspect is also the primary source for Crump's familiarity with the site from hunting. Is there a mention of hunting in Baker's recollections?  I don't see it in what you quote above.  Or, is it just your suspicion?  Do you suppose that Baker was the source for Uzzell's and Nunneville's discredited claims in 1927 that Crump inherited or purchased a 300 acre hunting preserve years earlier?

Baker's home at PV was the first house, after Crump's, built on the property in 1916. He lived there for about forty years, and I believe Shelly later lived in that same home. Shelly became a member in 1928. I believe both men served many years as mayor of the town of PV. Baker was a major source, and is quoted often, in Wind's extensive article on PV written in 1950. I suspect he was an important source for Shelly as well.

Baker's mention of the three courses at Dover is most likely the three courses at Sandwich. Apparently Finegan, quoting Baker, says they were Royal St. George's, Royal Cinque Ports, and Princes.

Although Crump and Tilly no doubt were acquaintances, being among the better players in Philadelphia, I wonder if Tilly didn't over play their relationship. All of Crump's closest friends were among the original founders of the club; Tilly was never even a member of the club. Based on what I have read I get the impression Tilly was sort of a lose canon, socially, financially and professionally, where as Crump's friends and founders were all very successful men in their respective fields...including Dr. Carr, the Catholic priest.  I'm happy to see that you edited out one of your other derogatory remarks about AWT.  There is really no need to try to posthumously tear down the man's reputation and credibility.  Just because men are successful or priests doesn't mean they are either credible or reliable witnesses to history.

Bryan
What the hell are you talk about...back pages? You just made this claim one page ago (see above), and you have ignored my question. Again, what derogatory remarks did I edit out of my of post #17?

[JESII]

David,

I haven't let emotion get the best of me. I stand by each comment I've made.

In th eopening post Bryan posted nine sources who mentioned Crump and some version of the discovery of the land that became Pine Valley. You suggested that they were all contradictory to the train story. I count four of the nine that preclude the train story. Of those, Travers precludes one or two of the others so I understand your desire for them to be complimentary they are a long ways from it.

The point of the stories being contemporaneous is my presumption that Crump would have had the opportunity to correct Tillinghast if the train story were a bogus myth and evidence suggests he never did...but he never had the chance to correct any of the others...

[DMoriarty]

I don't know Jim . . . I doubt Crump had anything to prove about the discovery to AWT.  He may not have been as vigilant about trying to put others in their place about such trivial details as some around here.   After all, AWT was promoting the course and his version did a very good job of emphasizing that this was not run of the mill New Jersey flatland.  He also give everyone something to look for on the passage to Atlantic City.   Besides, we don't know if Crump bothered to set him straight or not.  AWT told the story in 1913 and then next time was after Crump was dead, wasn't it?   

I don't read the accounts as you do, but we've covered that.

[Bryan Izatt]

Bryan,  

I don't appreciate you taking my words out of context above and using them to take another swipe at Patrick. You suggest that I said that do I "not pay any attention to any of Pat's argumentative posts."   This is not true.  I generally read Patrick's posts, but I may have missed some posts or missed some details in some others.  That is all I meant.

If you want to continue to take shots at Patrick, use your own words, not mine.

Thanks.

Sorry you feel the quote is out of context.    At least you recognized it as your quote, even though I didn't name you. It is what you said, and it seemed to me to stand on its own, particularly since you've said it before.

Now, your second sentence is just wrong (even correcting the grammatical error).  I did not say that YOU did not pay attention to any of Pat's argumentative posts, as you say above.  I said that the rest of us should follow your lead in not paying attention to every single one of his posts, specifically the "argumentative" ones. 

Thanks for the clarification in the next sentence of what you really meant. 

I guess I'm left wondering how you managed to miss all of Pat's posts about the picture view over the 2nd green and 3rd tee.  You've spent at least tens of posts arguing the point with me and others.  Strangely, to me, on the point that you can't see hills beyond the  2nd green and 3rd tee, you and I have agreed, yet you have argued long and loud with others, but not Pat, who continues to this day to place the 2nd green and 3rd tee in the middle of the picture.  Why did you not debate the physical impossibility of that with him?  Months back you told me you missed it.  I never understood how that was possible.  Did you miss his many posts, or just some of the details in his many posts?   

[Bryan Izatt]

..................................

Bryan
What the hell are you talk about...back pages? You just made this claim one page ago (see above), and you have ignored my question. Again, what derogatory remarks did I edit out of my of post #17?

Tom,

What are you on about the "back pages".  Did you not read closely enough to understand that that post was addressed to Pat, not to you and was on a different subject?


Re the derogatory remark, you need to understand the conundrum.  If I tell you what you wrote, then I'll be posting the same derogatory remark under my name.  You deleted it.  I don't want it associated with my name, so I will not repeat it.  I'm sure you know what it was; you've used it before in trying to undermine Tillinghast's character and reliability as a witness to history.  Except for others who may have seen it, it will just have to go down as "he said - he said".

[Bryan Izatt]

...........................


Besides, we don't know if Crump bothered to set him straight or not.  AWT told the story in 1913 and then next time was after Crump was dead, wasn't it?   

................................

There are many things we don't know.  One thing we do know is that the train story was published three times in 1913, in one newspaper and two magazines.  Of course we don't know if Crump read newspapers or magazines, so we don't know if he saw the three articles.

[Bryan Izatt]

Just a couple of other minor points:

_________________________________

It has been reported on here since at least 2004 that Crump either told his friends or wrote to his friends that:

"I think I landed on something pretty fine"

What is the source of that quote? I assumed it was Carr in 1915.  But, Carr quoted Crump as saying:

""I think we have happened on something pretty fine,"

Are there two conflicting sources, or have we here just modified it over time?

"Happen on" means "to find by chance" today.  Do you suppose it meant the same thing in 1915?  Did Crump find PV by chance looking out a train window?

__________________________________________

It seems to be part of the PV story that Crump sold the Colonnade Hotel in 1910 and then went on to discover the property and build PV, presumably with the money from selling the hotel.

The Hotel was built by Crump's Uncle John Crump.  When he retired, he leased it to two of his sons Henry J. and George R.  They had some financial difficulties with the hotel that they overcame, as Tom MacWood described in his Opinion piece.  Does anyone know how George A. Crump came into ownership of the hotel, presumably from his cousins Henry J. and George R. Crump?  And, when that might have occurred? 

I came across the following quote in an article  in the NY Times on January 31, 1909 about a horse show in Atlantic City: "Henry J. Crump, owner of the Colonnade Hotel, Philadelphia, is a visitor at the St. Charles."  Did George A. buy it and sell it within a year?  Or, inherit it?  Did both cousins die?  Other explanations?

[Tom MacWood]

..................................

Bryan
What the hell are you talk about...back pages? You just made this claim one page ago (see above), and you have ignored my question. Again, what derogatory remarks did I edit out of my of post #17?

Tom,

What are you on about the "back pages".  Did you not read closely enough to understand that that post was addressed to Pat, not to you and was on a different subject?


Re the derogatory remark, you need to understand the conundrum.  If I tell you what you wrote, then I'll be posting the same derogatory remark under my name.  You deleted it.  I don't want it associated with my name, so I will not repeat it.  I'm sure you know what it was; you've used it before in trying to undermine Tillinghast's character and reliability as a witness to history.  Except for others who may have seen it, it will just have to go down as "he said - he said".

Bryan
That is weak. Your conundrum is being called out on your bogus claim. I did not edit anything derogatory out of that post, and the fact you are claiming I did but not backing it up is one of the biggest acts of cowardice ever on this site. You obviously have no idea what I've said in the past about Tilly, and like the other claim this most recent one will go unsupported as well. In the future may I suggest you avoid making claims about others if you don't have the balls to back it up.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()