[DMoriarty]

One of your more frustrating traits is putting words in others mouths to change the subject, just to take a slam at them. In this discussion, we spoke only of what CBM said in Dec 1906 in those articles and the future work to lay out the holes, and we did quote him directly on that.  YOU had to go an add the bit about the building lots, not part of this discussion, for the sole purpose of slamming Mike.  That is pretty low, but typical of how you operate around here.

"One of your more frustrating traits" is to take ambiguous and inaccurate jabs at me, and then fly off the handle when I call you on it. Mike and I were arguing about the founders lots in addition to the design schedule, and that is what I thought you meant. Next time you want to take an juvenile shot at me, be more specific.  

As for your long description of how you would have designed NGLA, thanks, but you are ignoring much of what CBM had already told about the course in mid-December.  

Besides, I've never said that it was a fast process.  I've always said the opposite. But at the very least CBM seems to have had a rough idea of how the course would going to fit on the property before he optioned the property, and there is plenty of evidence so support this.  (See for example his detailed description of the characteristics of the course in December 1906.)

[Jeff_Brauer]

David,

Well, our posts crossed, but you certainly fly off the handle, misstate others opinions and motives, etc.  If someone was going to assess anger levels (other than the occasional short burst I have with Patrick for his general infantile behavior here) I think you would get the vote as most strident poster, or finish second to Patrick.  Let's just say neither of us handles constant rejection as well as Ghandi or some other near saint.

Besides, nothing ambiguous about my post. You and Mike were NOT discussing Founders lot in this exchange, but your inserted it needlessly.  However, this thread has taken some tangents, so confusion is possible.  I just doubt it and I will maintain that one of your best/worst arguing tactics is deflection from simple premises.

You can read my previous posts. But saying he found a few holes is a long way from saying he had the routing complete, or nearly so.  I will agree (and don't think I ever disagreed) that CBM could have easily sketched out a rough idea of at least the land mass that would work for him given his design criteria.  There is still a lot of work to be done, and CBM's own words in December tell us he had five more months of work to do in all that.  So, obviously, you seem to be ignoring what he said in December because it suits your preconceptions.

[DMoriarty]

 

And I will concede that with the option basically in place in October, that the second earnest study of contours could have very well been between October and December.  Which is why I have always said I don't think Dave and I are that far apart, unless he insists that the second earnest study of the contours occurred prior to October general agreement to buy the land.

Read the book Jeff.  Look at what CBM says he found during what you call "the second earnest study."   The same stuff CBM discussed in mid-December.  It is not a matter of "could have."  The second study was before the December newspaper accounts.

This is where your timeline (and Mike's) are wrong.

CBM still says he will spend the first five months of 1907 setting hole lengths, picking features to replicate and what not. I have to ask, if it has already been done, why do it again?  

Because as you say it is a process.  For example, he had to understand and finalize the widths of the playing corridors and the details of the holes he envisioned before he could set the final width of the property, and that took additional planning.  And he had to work out the details of all he envisioned to make sure it worked.  And on some holes he may have had to decide where to place the tees, and features, and probably some green sites.  But he still had a rough idea of how his course would fit on the land.  

Also, he did want to get all of his friends overseas to sign off on his ideas (even if only for credibility sake) and that likely took some time, , so you could call that a "second check" if you like.

If Dave wants to argue that they were simply "triple checking" their original ideas, I can't say that is impossible.  However, they just mailed maps out in October, whereas Dave seems to imply it was all done before the topo maps were finalized.  I don't see why or how that could be.  Without the maps, they would be flying blind.

Jeff, now instead of twisting CBM's timeline you are twisting mine.

I didn't claim the course design was completed before mid-October.  Only that the process had already started at some point before then, and that by mid-December, they had a very good idea of how the course would fit on the land.

And the article doesn't say "just they mailed maps out in October."  It was reported in October, but the article doesn't say when it happened.  Could have been months before as far as we know.  

Dave, just what newspaper are we contradicting?  Certainly not the October article that puts design largely in the future?  Do you have another one you want to run by us as your proof?  Or, are you and your "common sense" your source for your theories again?  I hate to ask you to post another article again, but if you posted one earlier in this thread that I forgot, or found convincing, it eludes me.

You were contradicting the articles by claiming that what you call the "second earnest study" occurred after mid-December 1906, whereas they seem to confirm it happened before.  I see you have begun to see the light on this issue, though.

[DMoriarty]

David,

Well, our posts crossed, but you certainly fly off the handle, misstate others opinions and motives, etc.  If someone was going to assess anger levels (other than the occasional short burst I have with Patrick for his general infantile behavior here) I think you would get the vote as most strident poster, or finish second to Patrick.  Let's just say neither of us handles constant rejection as well as Ghandi or some other near saint.

Jeff, while you think you know me, you don't.  I do get frustrated with Cirba for what I consider obvious reasons, but I am not angry in these posts to you.   Mostly I am just amused.  Even with Cirba I am usually more dumfounded than angry.

You can read my previous posts. But saying he found a few holes is a long way from saying he had the routing complete, or nearly so.  I will agree (and don't think I ever disagreed) that CBM could have easily sketched out a rough idea of at least the land mass that would work for him given his design criteria.  There is still a lot of work to be done, and CBM's own words in December tell us he had five more months of work to do in all that.  So, obviously, you seem to be ignoring what he said in December because it suits your preconceptions.

It is not just finding a few holes.  His description went well beyond this.

And I am not ignoring anything he said in December.  He said he had five months to get everything done and ready for construction, although one report says three, I think.

It is just that I can think of some other reasons that construction wouldn't have start until late spring other than your theory that they needed every minute for the design process.

You do understand how an option works, don't you?  Do you expect that they would have started construction before the owned the land?  

Even if so, do you really think they would have planned to start during the winter?  Or do you think it might have made some sense to them to wait until closer to the season?  

[Jeff_Brauer]

David,

Well, I think some or most of it did. I based that on the December articles which seemed to be the option contract.  And, in fact, I think you wrote that the option was signed in December 1906.  So, what I missed was the obvious agreement in principle also reported in October.

While they certainly found some holes in the summer, I suspect they didn't confirm their intent to buy until they could get an overview of the site via survey, about October, or however much earlier it would take them to negotiate the preliminary deal.

So, yes, at this point, I have no qualms saying the second earnest study could have started anywhere after October.  Any earlier just seems wrong.

As to your last post, sometimes I believe you will argue ever more minute differences just to argue.  For instance,

I don't see his description as going well beyond finding the holes.  We can never know.

I believe the actual option gave him three months to finish the design work and set the boundaries, while the newspaper accounts said five.  I have no idea if there is time for recording the purchase to make it final or what might account for the difference, but even on sandy soil, starting construction in New York earlier than May isn't very productive, except for maybe clearing, but that usually gets to be a big mess when wet.

I never said they would start construction before they owned the land.  Another example of you twisting, or at the very least not understanding what I said.  There are so many times when both of us seem to speak right past each other, perhaps from our different perspectives.

I just reread the chapter you typed out in post 80. You got it wrong.  Hence, why Mike and I think your earlier timeline is wrong.

[DMoriarty]

 Jeff, I just noticed your insulting post number 474. I can't keep up. I did not misrepresent CBM's timeline, you just misunderstand it. I will respond in a while when I get a chance.

[MCirba]

David,

If you think that post of Jeff's is insulting you really need to read and consider many of your own. 

Carry on

.

[DMoriarty]

Mike. Sometimes the truth hurts.  The difference here, though, is that Jeff is wrong.  There is nothing deliberately/disingenuously or even erroneously stated in my NGLA chronology.  He just doesn't understand it.

[DMoriarty]

Jeff, in post 474 you falsely accused me of doctoring CBM's words to try and make my point.

It seems you deliberately/disingenuously or erroneously misstated CBM's own words and flipped the order of events from what he wrote to make your point, launching 20 pages of debate.

You again claim I got it wrong in post 479.

Here is the chronology from post 80.  

1.  There were 450 or so acres available on Sebonac Neck.
2.  CBM and HJW spent two or three days on horseback inspecting the property andy studying the contours and determined that they wanted the land if they could get it at a reasonable price.
3.  The land company agreed to sell them 205 out of the 450 acres at a reasonable price, and let M&W choose the acres to suit their purposes.
4.  CBM and HJW (and others) earnestly studied the contours and figured out where the holes would go, and staked out the land they wanted.
5.  After staking out the land they wanted, CBM and HJW acquired on option of on the property, leaving wiggle room for the exact final boundaries to be determined later.  
6.  At that point surveying was done of the holes, and a relief map may have been created (one was created, but I am not sure of the date.)
7.  At that point the purchase was finalized and construction began.

Here is the relevant passage from Scotland's Gift through acquisition of the option, with my bullet point numbers added in red:
    However, 1. there happened to be some 450 acres of land on Sebonac Neck, having a mile of frontage on Peconic Bay and laying between Cold Spring Harbor and Bull's Head Bay.  This property was little known and had never been surveyed.  Every one thought it more or less worthless.  It abounded with bogs and swamps and was covered with an entanglement of bayberry, huckleberry, blackberry and other bushes and was infested by insects.  The only way one could get over the ground was on ponies. 2. So Jim Whigham and myself spent two or three days riding over it, studying the contours of the ground. Finally we determined what it was we wanted, providing we could get it reasonably. It joined Shinnecock Hills Golf Course.  3. The company agreed to sell us 205 acres, and we were permitted to locate it as to best serve our purpose.  4. Again, we studied the contours earnestly; selecting those that would fit in naturally with the various classical holes I had in mind, after which we staked out the land we wanted.
    We found an Alps; found an ideal Redan; then we discovered a place we could put the Eden hole which would not permit a topped ball to run-up on the green.  Then we found a wonderful water-hole, now the Cape.   We had a little over a quarter of a mile frontage on Peconic Bay, and we skirted Bull's Head Bay for about a mile. The property was more or less remote, three miles from Southampton, there thoroughfares and railroads would never bother us-- a much desired situation.
    When playing golf you want to be alone with nature.
5. We obtained an option on the land in November, 1906 . . .

My points are straight out of Scotland's Gift with a few further explanations from the articles, and they are presented in the exact same chronological order as in Scotland's Gift.  Show me where I doctored or manipulated CBM's passage.

Apparently, you mistakenly think that the day the company agreed to sell the land was the exact same day that CBM obtained the option. But this isn't what CBM said.  He doesn't mention anything about obtaining an option until later, after further earnest study, and after he had found locations that would fit naturally with the holes he had in mind (including but not limited to the Alps, Cape, etc.), and after he had roughly staked out the land he wanted (2 mile by "4 acre" strip, starting near the Shinnecock Inn, one mile of Bullshead Bay frontage, one quarter mile of Peconic Bay frontage.)

[Patrick_Mucci]

Sven,

If CBM knew where landforms were that he wanted to use for at least 4 holes in December 1906 and that he wanted to start near the Shinnecock Inn and go as far as Peconic Bay, how many months do you think it would take to connect the dots (as you say) to come up with a routing plan before construction could begin? 

Bryan,

I would submit that the routing was basically complete prior to the date that the land was purchased in it's unique configuration.

Unless of course you feel that CBM bought the land, "randomly" and somehow created the holes to fit within that unique configuration after he bought the land.

Given that he was trying to design his ideal course and apply a lot of template holes to the property in some kind of coherent routing, it can't have been a quick job. 

I would disagree.

If you accept your own premise of the four (4) holes and the Shinnecock Inn as the core of the routing, the rest of the holes fall in line like a simple jigsaw puzzle.  And, it was more than just four (4) holes.

You completely forgot about the "Road" hole, the current 7th hole, which CBM states "was easy to duplicate"

With the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 7th and 13th holes in place, not to mention his other "template" holes, such as the Cape, in conjunction with the Shinnecock Inn as your starting and ending point, the routing becomes immediately obvious within the confines of the property purchased.

And, if CBM always intended to use the present site for his clubhouse and the Shinnecock inn as the temporary clubhouse the routing becomes even more obvious.

There are many things you don't understand.

For example:  after finding his Eden, where else could he go, if not north, with the Cape.
Having found his Sahara, how could he get to the tee for his Sahara.
Having found his "road" hole, how was he going to get to the Shinnecock Inn ?
And Lastly, from the Shinnecock Inn how was he going to get to his Eden ?

The answer is that he had routed the course prior to purchasing the land.
He knew what holes he wanted and he knew where they were located, and that's why he purchased the land in that specific configuration

If you were more familiar with the property I think you'd agree.

Was he not working at his regular day job during this timeframe too.

The course was routed BEFORE the land was purchased

[Jeff_Brauer]

David,

Of course, you change the order in your last post.  The earnest study came after the option in his exact words.  You placed both studies ahead of the option.

And abobe, you add (not CBM) that the option was obtained after all of it as point 5, in bold as all the other CBM quotes, to make it seem as if CBM wrote that, too. But, he didn't. You superimposed your words and interpretations on his, in a sly and sneaky way. Of course, the agreement to sell the land had to be the option.

I suppose the good news for you is I respected you enough to take your transcription at face value. Finding that you play with to impose your interpretation was very insulting to me, and I am sure anyone following, and very disappointing. Thus, the insulting tone of my post.  And of course, I am sure more than just me are insulted at your insinuation that I am just too dumb to understand. How many times have you called me that over the years or called me or Mike disingenuous, as if we were trying to sneak something by? Well, I have lost count.  Especially since you do it all the time, and then accuse others of it to cover your tracks.

But this is simple.  We post CBM's exact words without your interpretation, and of course, they say that much of the design was done after the option. You can type 100,000 words, but I understand the truth, we all do, and you can't change it by the sheer force of your will power.

In any case, I do understand how options work. You take one to do the type of earnest study you need to do to assure you still want to make a land purchase.  And, that is what CBM did, no?  Prior to that, he made enough study to believe he wanted the land, but obviously wasn't entirely sure, or he just would have purchased it outright in October, or December, whenever it actually was.

Pretty simple explanation, and usually, the truth is simple, and rarely as convoluted as your many theories.  

[DMoriarty]

Jeff.  Show me where I switched the order.   Everything in my chronology comes directly from CBM, and it is in the exact same the same order as Scotland's Gift.  Both of your "earnest studies" did occur before the option. Look at what CBM wrote.  

The earnest study came after the option in his exact words.

FALSE.  CBM address the option in the same order I addressed the option.  My point 5.  CBM at the bottom of page 187.

You placed both studies ahead of the option.

As did CBM.

And abobe, you add (not CBM) that the option was obtained after all of it as point 5, in bold as all the other CBM quotes, to make it seem as if CBM wrote that, too. But, he didn't.

FALSE.  CBM did write it.  See the last sentence of page 187. Right after "When playing golf you want to be alone with nature." Exactly where I put it.

You superimposed your words and interpretations on his, in a sly and sneaky way. Of course, the agreement to sell the land had to be the option.

FALSE. I superimposed nothing.  I conveyed his words in his order.

I suppose the good news for you is I respected you enough to take your transcription at face value. Finding that you play with to impose your interpretation was very insulting to me, and I am sure anyone following, and very disappointing. Thus, the insulting tone of my post.  And of course, I am sure more than just me are insulted at your insinuation that I am just too dumb to understand. How many times have you called me that over the years or called me or Mike disingenuous, as if we were trying to sneak something by? Well, I have lost count.  Especially since you do it all the time, and then accuse others of it to cover your tracks.

You are making a fool of yourself, Jeff.  Read what CBM wrote.

In any case, I do understand how options work. You take one to do the type of earnest study you need to do to assure you still want to make a land purchase.  And, that is what CBM did, no?  Prior to that, he made enough study to believe he wanted the land, but obviously wasn't entirely sure, or he just would have purchased it outright in October, or December, whenever it actually was.

It doesn't really sound like you know how options work. Generally the option would have given CBM the right to buy the property at a set price for a set amount of time, but it would NOT have given CBM right of entry to the property to study the property.  Allowing CBM entry would have been at the good graces of the developer, regardless of whether or not CBM had obtained an option on the property.  Oftentimes in these situations an option will be obtained to hold the property while the potential purchaser raiseS the money for the purchase.  (That is what happened with a number of the parcels which ultimately made up Merion; the development company owned options on the property, not the property, and exercised options with the money from the sale to Merion.)  Recall that CBM sent out a notice that $1000 per founder was due.  

Pretty simple explanation, and usually, the truth is simple, and rarely as convoluted as your many theories.  

Not really that simple but definitely wrong.  Read Scotland's Gift.  Compare it to what I wrote.

[Bryan Izatt]

Sven,

I guess I was trying to get to first principles with the questions.  It seems to me, a rank amateur, that routing must be difficult to do well and quickly.  I remember some years ago standing in the midst of Bandon Trails and wondering how in the hell C&C could have found that routing and the holes that make it up in the midst of a primeval forest.  Perhaps CBM had it easier at NGLA as the site was more open, but then he sisn't have modern design tools and ideas.  He was breaking new design ground.  Being an early pioneer usually makes things more difficult and time consuming.  It just seems likely that it must have taken some months, maybe all five that were reported, to get the whole route plan together.  I'm just skeptical that so many holes of a template nature would just leap out of the site in a month or two or shorter.  I know you're not advocating the overnight premise.

I agree that they would likely have wanted to have a full construction plan and routing in place before starting.  If they didn't have money for a clubhouse initially, it seems to me that they must have been on a budget and would not want to waste money through poor planning.

Sven,

If CBM knew where landforms were that he wanted to use for at least 4 holes in December 1906 and that he wanted to start near the Shinnecock Inn and go as far as Peconic Bay, how many months do you think it would take to connect the dots (as you say) to come up with a routing plan before construction could begin?  Given that he was trying to design his ideal course and apply a lot of template holes to the property in some kind of coherent routing, it can't have been a quick job.  Was he not working at his regular day job during this timeframe too.

Bryan:

I'm not in the camp that believes the details were worked out overnight.

I do think that they had a very good idea of the general routing as early as Dec. 1906 (if not earlier), and that they used the first part of 1907 to finalize the plan, including staking out the entire property so that the plaster model (for investor purposes) could be produced.  I would guess that once they settled on the land, CBM and others would have spent a great deal of time coming up with a turf plan, as his later writings indicate the amount of preliminary work that went into determining the types of grasses they would use and the treatment of the land necessary to make them grow.  So in addition to completing the routing, they were working on other basic course construction issues and setting in place everything they would need to start construction as planned in the late Spring and early Summer of 1907.

I don't think these guys were the type to start actual construction work until they had a pretty darn good idea of what they were actually constructing.

Sven

[Bryan Izatt]

Indeed I haven't "proved" it.  I was reporting what I saw from a credible source.  It could be wrong, like so many historical accounts and interpretations we see.  Or, it could be right.  I think the source is credible so I'll stick with it until something comes along that disproves it.  The deeds would be proof one way or the other.

Mike,

The Realty company offered the 2.5 acre addition at $1875 (or about $750 an acre).  CBM tried to haggle it down to $400 an acre but the Realty Co wouldn't budge as they had CBM over the proverbial barrel knowing that he wanted it for his clubhouse.  So he paid the asking price.

Bryan:

You have yet to prove that the 2.5 acres was for the clubhouse.  It may have been for the proshop, but that is a different story.

Sven

[Bryan Izatt]

Sven,

Agreed in concept, but think coming up with a finalized routing and all hole conceptions was more complicated and time-consuming than we know based on how overgrown the property was before it was cleared sometime in 1907.   The article I posted yesterday from mid-August of that year makes it sound like it was still a bit of a safari at that point.   Thanks.

Mike:

In Piper & Oakley, CBM notes they were cutting brush throughout the summer.*  Where would they have known to cut the brush if they didn't already have the routing in place?


From early pictures of the course that I've seen it looks like they took out pretty much all of the brush.  Is there any evidence that they only cleared the playing corridors?


Its pretty basic, they weren't going to do more work than they had to.

Sven

*I assume this was the summer of 1907, because we know that by the summer of 1908 they already had the course in place.

[DMoriarty]

Also Jeff, for further evidence that your "second earnest study" happened before the option, look closely a the entire description of your "second earnest study" in Scotland's Gift . . .
       . . . Again, we studied the contours earnestly; selecting those that would fit in naturally with the various classical holes I had in mind, after which we staked out the land we wanted.
        We found an Alps; found an ideal Redan; then we discovered a place we could put the Eden hole which would not permit a topped ball to run-up on the green.  Then we found a wonderful water-hole, now the Cape.   We had a little over a quarter of a mile frontage on Peconic Bay, and we skirted Bull's Head Bay for about a mile.  The property was more or less remote, three miles from Southampton, there thoroughfares and railroads would never bother us-- a much desired situation.
       When playing golf you want to be alone with nature.
       We obtained an option on the land in November, 1906, and took title to the property in the spring of 1907. . . .

Look familiar?   It is basically the same description that CBM description as printed in the December 15 articles. He had already found these holes and made these determinations by mid-December 1906. Then CBM goes on to discuss the option.

[Sven Nilsen]

Indeed I haven't "proved" it.  I was reporting what I saw from a credible source.  It could be wrong, like so many historical accounts and interpretations we see.  Or, it could be right.  I think the source is credible so I'll stick with it until something comes along that disproves it.  The deeds would be proof one way or the other.

Mike,

The Realty company offered the 2.5 acre addition at $1875 (or about $750 an acre).  CBM tried to haggle it down to $400 an acre but the Realty Co wouldn't budge as they had CBM over the proverbial barrel knowing that he wanted it for his clubhouse.  So he paid the asking price.

Bryan:

You have yet to prove that the 2.5 acres was for the clubhouse.  It may have been for the proshop, but that is a different story.

Sven

Please identify the source so the rest of us can determine the credibility for ourselves.

[Bryan Izatt]

Two other thoughts as David and Mike are getting tedious.

The current 1st hole runs to the east and into the rising sun.  The current 18th runs to the west and into the setting sun.  Was it not part of the design ethos in the early 1900's not to do that.  The originally intended 1st and 18th both run north-south avoiding the rising and setting sun issue. Maybe CBM really intended to avoid the sun issue and that was another reason he originally started at the south end of the property.


The source I've seen also suggests he made another overseas trip in late 1906 and early 1907 and following that trip that he winnowed down his template holes from Scotland and his original concept holes to his final 18.  Anybody aware of this trip?  Can it be verified through ship manifests?


 

[Bryan Izatt]

Sven,

Please identify the source so the rest of us can determine the credibility for ourselves.

Sorry, I don't want to do that yet.  I'm still trying to determine what it is I'm seeing.  You can take what I say with a grain of salt, but that's true of most everything posted on here.  Even CBM is known to have misstated things on occasion.

[DMoriarty]

In case anyone is thinking that maybe the routing wasn't completed by the Summer of 1907 . . .  There is a May 4, 1907 NY Evening Post article extensively quoting Whigham about the course.  Whigham did not mention every hole, but he did describe a number of holes including their hole numbers and some of the distances.  I don't think this would have been possible if the routing wasn't in place.

[Steve Lang]

  David,

Back on Reply #333 you promised me it'd take 20 more pages to get to the Inn burning down..  i can't wait that long!

[DMoriarty]

Come on, Steve, that was only 6 pages ago.  If you can't wait another 14 pages maybe you don't really want to know . . .

[Steve Lang]

  All,

The words  are a blur, there needs to be more visual aids, for describing this 200+ acres like:

1) the gross course areas delineated below add up to about 165 acres, I note CBM's Ballyshear was reported as 200 acres [edit] and sold off land now a paltry 32-35 acres [edit, depending on search links], and now Mr Bloomberg has a nice practice area..  riding a horse can jog  & affect one's perception of distance or areas

2) the western boundary is about 2750 yards long; if lots extended 216 ft west from that boundary, that'd be ~41 acres ....

 

3) the gross polygon areas delineated below add up to about 32 acres; surveyors , surveyors, surveyors... straight lines..

 

[Sven Nilsen]

Sven,

Please identify the source so the rest of us can determine the credibility for ourselves.

Sorry, I don't want to do that yet.  I'm still trying to determine what it is I'm seeing.  You can take what I say with a grain of salt, but that's true of most everything posted on here.  Even CBM is known to have misstated things on occasion.

Well, perhaps when you get the deeds you can prove that they did not own the portion of the property that lay between the 1st and 18th holes, on the interior of the course.

Until I see that, I'm going to go on the basis that they did, and the 2.5 acre purchase was for the proshop, in an entirely different area, one located on the borders of the course, not the interior.

With regards to clearing the fairway areas, I'd suggest you read Piper and Oakley again.  You'll get a better understanding of exactly what they were doing in the summer of 1907, and why.  And as David just noted, there is solid evidence the routing was in place by May of 1907.

As for your setting/rising sun theory, it may have been a concern, but it may not have.  I will say there were other courses built at the time and later with the same configuration, including Pebble Beach.

Sorry if this sounds dismissive, but you've really not presented anything with any teeth.  Unnamed and unverifiable sources, comparisons to modern day practices, general feelings and the use of the phrase "it seems likely" rank fairly low on my list of reasonable evidence (or whatever you want to call it).

Sven

[DMoriarty]

Thanks Steve!

Can you show me where CBM planned on putting the 60 or 70 building lots for his founders?  There doesn't seem to be a place for them along the western border.

As for Ballyshear, I've read at least three different accounts of the acreage.  One at 200 acres (which I referenced somewhere above), one at 100 acres, and now yours at 32 acres. Not that it matters to this thread, but any idea which one is correct?

Also, any idea where "Sebonac Creek" is located?  Is it a creek feeding into Bullshead Bay? Or is it just the west inlet into Bullshead Bay?

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()