Re: (erielack) Railroads "That Should Never..." A&GW

["Jim Guthrie" <jguthrie_@_pipeline.com>]

> Again context is important, it wasn't only six foot gauge versus standard 
> gauge at the time, there were others like "Ohio" standard gauge as well. 
> Breaking bulk and transshipment between rail lines and rail lines, canals 
> and waterways was a huge issue at the time. Some profited from the 
> practice, but for a shipper it was definitely a bad thing.

Ah -- a different version of NIMBYs -- most citieswith multile railroads and 
multiple gauges fought tooth and nail against standardizing, on the theory 
that breaking bulk and hauling all this stuff across town (not to mention 
passengers desirous of a meal -- or better yet -- overnight accomodations) 
meant "economic development."

My old friend Will Schultz mentions the Erie Canal/NY State Barge Canal. The 
latter really was a useful economic development tool for the area it served, 
and I would argue its continuing importance throught he years.  One might 
argue its status as a recent ward of the NY State Thruway for recreation. 
But we live in a world where Amtrak "which has to run like a business" 
cannot do so because of 175 recreational boaters and their needs to haave 
drawbridges opened, so NY STtae taxpayers get off easy. But I think equal 
time demands the Thruway pay for restoring a daily Phoebe Snow to Buffalo to 
help the Southern Tier economy, but . . .

As for some of the other comments -- the Nickel Plate turned out to be a 
spry and worthy competitor of the LS&MS and NY Central. And it kept rates 
honest to intermediate common points. Ditto the West Shore, at least for a 
time. And consider that the Selkirk- Jersey City portion is one of the 
busiest and most important lines in the United States, and it looks like 
things turned out all right.

New York and Harlem's foresight turned out to make it (still) one of the 
most profitable railroad companies in the history of the United States. Half 
the main line is gone, but try to buy its securities <g>.

OTOH, the DL&W mainline is mostly gone -- and from start to finish, didn't 
last as long as the NY&OM/O&W. So, is the DL&W a line that should never have 
been built?

The PRR always complained bitterly that the Reading and its own lines 
scurried up the same valleys and were redundant. But the fact is that it is 
the Reading  (along with the West Shore) that is the clear winner over the 
long run, if one considers surviving, important mileage.

Heck -- Walter Rich has re-created the NYO&M as it **should** have been 
built (through Binghamton and Syracuse and with generaly better grades) and 
has made a go of it when the Erie, the Lackawanna, the NY Central, Lehigh 
Valley and the PRR are long gone, along with most of its mileage. Rich is 
only missing Syracuse-Oswego.

So what "should never have been built" ?  Well, I can't think of much on 
this list -- and has been pointed out, what came and went served local 
communities and increased wealth and the commonwealth. And that's as 
American as it gets.

This business of second-guessing because some investors at some point did 
not make a bundle is kooky thinking. Risk is built in -- and there are times 
when victim mentality of "duh, what's risk?" seems modernist hogwash. It's 
like insurance companies raking in premiums but refusing to pay claims after 
a hurricane. "Our duty is to our stockholders." Jay gould was a saint of the 
fiancial world <g>.

Cheers,
Jim Guthrie

PS Tim made mention of the Rockaway Valley -- well maybe. But one wonders if 
they'd effected the connection with the Morristown and Erie and established 
through rates, say, on CNJ anthracite. into Erie territory. Wudda shudda 
cudda -- but the RV made sense in terms of its original idea, and does not 
therefore fall into the catagory of "Never should have been built."  Maybe 
in ICC with b***s ealy one would have ordered an M&E connection with 
appropriate rates <g>.


	The Erie Lackawanna Mailing List
	Sponsored by the ELH&TS
	http://www.elhts.org

------------------------------