David,
Please see my comments in blue below, thanks.
You've distorted Francis's words beyond recognition.
Where did I mis-quote Francis? You think he meant that he acquired the entire 130x190 plot in the land exchange and I think he meant that's the dimension of what he ended up with after the exchange. Whether the original pre-exchange dimension of the northern-most land of the Johnson Farm was 0x0 as you believe, or 100x260 as the November 15, 1910 Pugh & Hubbard scale map measures, or some other dimension mapped by Richard Francis after the Wilson Committee was formed indicating 117 acres that were secured, we know that the final dimension of that plot after the exchange was 130x190.
We also know that Francis told us that they had already routed 13 holes prior to his brainstorm with the help of a little land north of Ardmore Avenue, which I hope we can agree was the leased Railroad Land. We also know Francis told us that his brainstorm solved the problem of how to fit the last five holes. We also know that within a day or two of his brainstorm they had workmen blasting away at the site of the 16th green so we can assume that they knew more or less where to place the last five holes prior to his brainstorm but didn't have enough room. We also know that this plan was the one the Committee settled on after creating numerous plans on the new land prior to their visit to NGLA in March 1911 and re-arranging the course and creating five new plans (on paper) after returning from NGLA. We also know that Francis told us that the land he exchanged across from the clubhouse did not fit in with "any golf layout" so we can reasonably assume that multiple plans were still under consideration at the time of his brainstorm. We also know that Merion didn't own any of the land in question prior to December 1910 when HG Lloyd purchased the entire 140 acres of the Johnson Farm and the 21 acres of the Dallas Estate. We also know that was because Mr. Cuyler, Merion's counsel, recommended in December 1910 that Lloyd do so because the boundaries of the golf course had not been determined at that juncture.
We also know that Merion reported to their members in November 1910 that they had secured 117 acres from HDC for the golf course, after five months earlier in July 1910 having stated that they would need "about 120 acres" for golf (which with the addition of 3 acres of leased land would equal the desired 120 acres which eventually became 123 acres in total as the plan they approved required them to purchase 120 acres from HDC, not the 117 they originally secured).
We also know that in February of 1911 Hugh Wilson wrote Piper & Oakley that the club had purchased 117 acres for the golf course and attached a contour map of the property, which was likely the work of Richard Francis. They would have needed to know what the working boundaries of the property were by that time as they were working on various routings (at least one of which evidently didn't fit). We also know that the Merion Cricket Club minutes of 4/19/2015 stated that the plan in question required them to exchange land already purchased for "adjoining" land plus the purchase of three additional acres. We also know that the final purchase from HDC was not the 117 acres originally secured but instead 117 acres + 3 acres additional for 120.01 acres.
Those are the facts. For someone to believe that Francis had his brainstorm prior to November 15, 1910 based on him saying 40 years later that he exchanged land not used in any golf layout for land 130x190 up where the 15th green and 16th tee are located, and the fact that a portion of that land is partially identified in green next to an approximated drawing of a road on the November 15, 1910 Pugh & Hubbard map (which also includes land identified as golf course in that triangle that never became golf course land), a map you recently stated you believed that Pugh & Hubbard never even attempted to measure the golf course, then they would have to either ignore or explain away all of those facts that fly in the face of that contention. To date, I've yet to hear a viable explanation from anyone reconciling all of the facts above with that November 1910 date for a finalized routing. That's why I was excited to see your new map, but that one has problems, as well, as I'll point out below.
As for what Bryan thinks, see his post 330.
I have great respect for both Bryan and Jim and give their positions serious credence. In this case, I think they are missing the forest for the trees, however. But, if we're looking to others for support of our position I'm happy to side with Jeff Brauer and others but I'd rather not get into that tit-for-tat. Everyone here can speak for themselves on what they believe and no one is very shy on-line.
As for what you think Macdonald should have said, it is all self-serving speculation on your part and adds nothing productive to the conversation.
I repeated exactly what Macdonald told them in his first paragraph, that the quarry and brooks could be made much of. If you think he wouldn't have advised them to take as much land around the quarry as they could for flexibility, and instead wouldn't have noticed that the land they were considering acquiring painted them into a quarry bound corner when much more land was directly availble to them north of the quarry, I think that gives us a very good idea how much actual routing CBM was actually doing for the Committee.
As for the the 117 acres vs. 120, I know what they said, but I've seen nothing other than the 1910 plan identifying the land they supposedly secured, and that plan has more than 117 acres included in the golf course. In my opinion they thought they were purchasing the land equal to identified on that map, which is why the sent it to their members. (This was your opinion too, before you knew it wasn't 117 acres.)
David, respectfully, it sounds like you're trying to have it both ways.
The other day you told us that you don't think Pugh & Hubbard measured the golf course for that map and now you're saying that "they thought they were purchasing the land equal to identified on that map, which is why they sent it to their members." If you thought that that map specifically identified the land they were acquiring for the golf course, at what point did you notice that the triangle on the northern part did not measure the 130x190 that Francis specified but instead measured something like 100x260, much narrower and much longer than the land they actually purchased? As far as the 117 acres they secured, you know that figure was specified in every club document during the period from November 1910 into February 1911, all before needing to go to the Board of Governors to gain approval for the purchase of 3 additional acres in April 1911 in conjunction with the swapping of other land "already purchased" for other land. In fact, this exchange and additional purchase is the only reason that the Golf Course plan with Macdonald's blessing had to go to the Merion Cricket Club Board of Governors for approval at all.
We can pretend that they didn't secure 117 acres but that isn't consistent with the facts. Instead, that November 1910 Pugh & Hubbard map with an "Approximate Location of Road" serving as the golf course boundary that actually measures about 124 acres, not 117 acres is simply consistent with the fledgling state of the planning effort at that point and is consistent with what Cuyler wrote in late December 1910 that the boundaries of the golf course had not yet been determined.
As for your theory about 3x the land, I don't know what you think you are looking at. Look again at the image I just posted showing 120 acres. Merion eventually purchased 120 acres. So the net difference between what is shown and what they bought is zero.
The Johnson Farm property was 140 acres and the western boundary could flex many more into other properties under HDC control. Drawing 120 acres south of Haverford College is not a difficult exercise, but lets not forget that the 130x190 property you say they acquired in the Francis Exchanged measured 4.8 acres, so under your premise, any give across from the clubhouse had to measure exactly 4.8 acres, as well and it looks to me like you've got considerably in excess of that, no?
However, my initial comment about 3x the land referred to your overlay map. If you think the new map you found is perhaps an earlier HDC Land Plan, then for your theory about an even swap to be real, the amount of land across from the clubhouse should equally match the land they would newly aquire up in the triangle. Yet, compared to the as-built of the Atlas, the land across from the clubhouse fitting outside the final boundaries is considerably greater (I estimated 3x) than the land falling out in the triangle above. For this map to support your theory, those acreages should be exact, correct?
***ADDED***
For discussion purposes, let's consider that November 15, 1910 Pugh & Hubbard map on it's face with the “Approximate Location of Road” as just that – it wasn’t accurate, because Merion simply didn’t know the exact 117 acres at that point or even over a month later according to Cuyler's letter.
So, let’s roll with that. You and Bryan claim it doesn't represent 117 acres, that it is more (124 acres) and we know it changed, with me and Brauer and others believing the road was simply re-aligned a bit.
However, the corollary is that it doesn’t mean anything, then why should it mean anything in particular, i.e., including that a land swap had taken place? Most likely Pugh & Hubbard just drew a curving line that approximated the existing roads in the area, connecting with College Ave. on the north, right?
Given those known inaccuracies and uncertainties, why is it logically ok to assume it meant the swap was in place? Isn't that fallacious on its face given the dimensions of that land on the map doesn't equal the 130x190 that they ended up with? If a finalized routing was in place by November 15, 1910, wouldn't it logically follow that the map commissioned "For the Merion Cricket Club" would include a stick drawing, much like is seen on the Atlas above and/or at least the finally correct property line?
