What Rail Road was the Birthplace of American Rail Roading?(answer will be given July 13th)

[BaltoOhioRRFan]

[xgsft]

B&O

[csxt602]

I don't understand some of these polls on here. What kind of a poll is this?

That is like asking "What country did the United States win it's independence from?"

[1] England
[2] France
[3] Spain
[4] Jamaica
[5] Nigeria

[BaltoOhioRRFan]

its trivia just something fun i just found out what RR it was so i decided to see if anyone else knows

[NSFAN]

Its the Union Pacific. B&O was later. Union Pacific was one the first railroads built for the transcontinental railroad. The oldest railroad around probably

[Transcon]

That's an easy question... it's the B&O. I went to the B&O Museum in Baltimore just a few weeks ago.

[IcyFire]

the Pennsylvania railroad? well dont blame me if im wrong, thats what this site i just went to says

Heres what the site said

The first American locomotive was built by John Steven's in 1825. He tested his locomotive on a circular track at his home in Hoboken NJ..

John Steven's was granted the first charter for a steam powered railroad in America in March 21, 1823. The company was incorporated as the Pennsylvania railroad. The first part of the railroad was opened in 1829, and the line was completed between Columbia PA and Philadelphia on April 16th 1834

[csxt602]

>Its the Union Pacific. B&O was later. Union Pacific was one
>the first railroads built for the transcontinental railroad.
>The oldest railroad around probably

http://175.borail.org/history.asp

The B&O was the "First Railroad to be chartered and built in America-February 27, 1827" (straight from the B&O's 175th Anniversary website)

http://www.uprr.com/aboutup/history/uprr-chr.shtml

"1862 – President Abraham Lincoln signs the Pacific Railroad Act, which names and directs two companies, the Union Pacific and the Central Pacific, to construct a transcontinental railroad." (straight from UP's website)

The B&O was running trains west out of Baltimore by 1829, whereas the UP didn't even lay their first rail in Omaha until 1865!

[BaltoOhioRRFan]

i live near the B&O Museum lol

[BaltoOhioRRFan]

umm we are talkin about first track being laid ETC not Locomotives lol

[AM_ROAD]

B & O, that first 13 mile track did alot.

[FozzyBear]

>That is like asking "What country did the United States win
>it's independence from?"
>
>[1] England
>[2] France
>[3] Spain
>[4] Jamaica
>[5] Nigeria

None of the above!! ROFL... We gracioucly gave the USA to you cus quite frankly it was too big and full of a lot of nothing useful... Mind you your attempts to experiment with salt water tea had a lot to do with it.

I have given serious consideration to dumping 20Tons of Maxwell House into the Thames... But to be honest I wouldn't want to kill the fish, mind you I do hear it makes excellent rat poison. LMAO :D

The real answer to the opening post is "NON OF THE ABOVE!!" The birth of rail in The USA was with a locomotive called the "Stourbridge Lion" On a privately funded railway. (by The Delaware And Hudson Canal Company)... Nothing to do with the B&O as a lot of you seem to think. The Locomotive was built by the Foster Rastrick Iron Foundry, about ten miles from my original home town, Just outside the town of Dudley in the West Midlands.

It was shipped over to you in kit form from the UK first running under steam power in New York on May 27th 1829. It ran on it's own railway for the first time on the 8th August 1829, Five weeks before the B&O ran its first locomotive and Seven Weeks before the Pennsylvania ran its first locomotive. At which point you promptly desided you didn't really like steam locomotives, and it was very shortly converted into a staionary boiler that powered a saw mill for about 20 years before being more or less scraped. The remains of it are currently owned by the smithsonian.

I've got pictures if anybody wants them..... Let me know.


Best Regards,
Julian (Fozzy The Bear)
http://forums.flightsim.com/dcforum/User_files/3d1087cf4bc9bf7b.gif

P.S. I'm already building one for MSTS as a side project... How much use anybody will make of it I don't know. But It's a fun little diversion from the agonies of my other projects.

[FozzyBear]

>the Pennsylvania railroad? well dont blame me if im wrong,
>thats what this site i just went to says
>
>Heres what the site said

Well I don't know where they got that from because it's the biggest pile of cobblers ever written! Mind you it doesn't surprise me... ROFL John Steven's never actually managed to get his locomotive to work... The newspaper report on it was written prior to him actally having a working locomotive and a lot of researchers have compounded the error by repeating it. The Pennsylvania Railroad, in the end bought its locomotives from Stephenson in Northumbria UK... and the first of them ran seven weeks after the Stourbridge Lion was put into service. Several months in fact after the Stourbridge Lion ran in New York after being re-asssembled from the shiped parts.

Best Regards,
Julian (Fozzy The Bear)
http://forums.flightsim.com/dcforum/User_files/3d1087cf4bc9bf7b.gif

[MikeBrobst]

>None of the above!! ROFL... We gracioucly gave the USA to
>you cus quite frankly it was too big and full of a lot of
>nothing useful.
LOL, all my dead relatives just rolled over when I read that.

[tulloch]

Hi,


I answered Santa Fe, because I don't know crap about the American stuff, except, that the BigBoy was BIG!!!



http://forums.flightsim.com/dcforum/User_files/3d2bca6070dc17fd.gif http://forums.flightsim.com/dcforum/User_files/3d2bca6070dc17fd.gif

[tcain1]

For those that have Digital Cable or I assume Satelite TV. On the A&E History International Channel. There's a show on the history of Steam trains on now (11AM - 12PM EDT) It will also be on at 4PM this afternoon and for those early risers, or late sleepers. 4AM tomorrow morning. The show is called Voyages Trains Unlimited: Steam Trains

[sniper297]

If I remember correctly, the first steam train in the US was a sort of demonstration, called the "DeWitt Clinton" (Stephenson Rocket looking engine with an upright wooden boiler), ran from Albany to Schenectady, no clue what year. Sparks from the stack set fire to the canopies over the coaches (horse buggies with converted wheels) halfway thru the trip. The track was layed using wooden rails with iron strips nailed to the top of the wood. Tramways were used for quite a few years before, both in Britain and America, a cart or sting of carts on wooden rails pulled by a horse. Before James Watt did his thing, there were even wierd experiments with masts and sails on railcars, which obviously didn't work out too well!

[FozzyBear]

>If I remember correctly, the first steam train in the US was
>a sort of demonstration, called the "DeWitt Clinton"
>(Stephenson Rocket looking engine with an upright wooden
>boiler),

DeWitt Clinton was much much later... Had a marine boiler and yes it was an upright...

>Before James Watt did his thing, there were even wierd
>experiments with masts and sails on railcars, which
>obviously didn't work out too well!

Maybe you mean Before Richard Trevithick did his thing... And before you correct me, James Watt did not invent the steam engine... Or in actual fact the thing you're refering to which technically isn't a steam engine it's an atmospheric engine.... Watt only improved the design... The Atmospheric Engine itself was invented by Thomas Newcomen... For use in pumping water out of cornish mines.

The first engine of our railway type was built by Richard Trevithick in Hayle Cornwall (just 2 miles up the road from where I'm typing this)at the Foundry which belonged to his Father In Law.... 1801 Steam Road Locomotive.. 1802 First Railway Locomotive 1803/04 First really sucessful railway locomotive...(for Pennydarren Iron works) Plus the invention of the high pressure steam engine (at 50psi)the high pressure Boiler and the Cornish Boiler... Which design principle was still in use on ships even into the middle of 1960's .... Much Pirated by the theiving scumbag Stephenson.... Invention and improvemnent of mine engines and rock drills... invention of steam dredger... invention of chanel flushing dredge sytem in Hayle Harbour (in use until the 1970's!)

Oh yeah and as an aside he also fought for Simon Bolivar during the Bolivian War... He was out there installing and setting up mine engines and got a bit caught up with it :-S

Best Regards,
Julian (Fozzy The Bear)
http://forums.flightsim.com/dcforum/User_files/3d1087cf4bc9bf7b.gif

[Kip]

Well...I never get involved with debates here, but I'm compelled to say something since I have several books in front of me stating otherwise or in this case, reaffirming the other posts.

The key word here is "Railroad" not locomotive, or tramway or a circle track in someone's backyard...but railroad.

The definition I get here in several books concerning "Railroad" is that is it as incorported common carrier of freight and passenger service on a regular schedule. The first "accepted" real railroad was chartered in 1827 as the Baltimore & Ohio aka B&O. Concerning the other post above, the Pennslynavia Railroad was not chartered in 1828...but... it's direct ansestor the "The Main Line of Public Works" was, by the Commonwealth of Pennslyvania. The B&O was the first "chartered" and "recognized" railroad of the U.S.

There were of course "tramways", but these "units" were not called railroads. This is how I read and understand railroad history to be concerning the first "real" railroad in America.

[AM_ROAD]

I beleave The Tom Thumb was an American loco.

[BaltoOhioRRFan]

AM_Road Tom Thumb was a B&O locomotive lol

[AM_ROAD]

I KNOW THAT! The first stationj on the B&O was Ellicot station. The first track was 13 miles. Tom Thumb was named after a famous circus star at the time and made of musket barrels. Maybe I mis read this or somethihg. But I thoug fuzzy said something how the B&o used english loco's.

[Kombatant]

Yeh i voted for "none of the above" as well because of the Delaware & Hudson. I thought that the reason they didnt continue using the loco was because it was heavier than expected and couldnt run on the track (which i think was steel-topped wooden rails).

Julian

[FozzyBear]

>Yeh i voted for "none of the above" as well because of the
>Delaware & Hudson. I thought that the reason they didnt
>continue using the loco was because it was heavier than
>expected and couldnt run on the track (which i think was
>steel-topped wooden rails).

Yeah! Pretty much so!! but it wasn't even that good.... the first track had been made entirely out of wood without even having iron strips on the top, and between the time they laid it and the time they came to run the locomotive on it, all the wood had warped and it was out of Gauge all over the place.....

The owner had so much trouble finding somebody brave enough to drive it that he had to do it himself LOL...

Best Regards,
Julian (Fozzy The Bear)
http://forums.flightsim.com/dcforum/User_files/3d1087cf4bc9bf7b.gif

[FozzyBear]

>I KNOW THAT! The first stationj on the B&O was Ellicot
>station. The first track was 13 miles. Tom Thumb was named
>after a famous circus star at the time and made of musket
>barrels. Maybe I mis read this or somethihg. But I thoug
>fuzzy said something how the B&o used english loco's.

I Did and they did.... You want to see a copy of the order for them??? I'll nip up to the National Railway Museum and get it for you?? You want to see the signed shipping doc??, I'll go get that for you as well.... I didn't say that they were the FIRST locomotive to turn a wheel on the B&O, but you ordered 12 locomotives from Stephenson's works... The first of which was called "The America" These were delivered in 1829 1830 and the final 6 in 1831. So Nerp :P LOL I can find you a picture of "The America" if you want??

Best Regards,
Julian (Fozzy The Bear)
http://forums.flightsim.com/dcforum/User_files/3d1087cf4bc9bf7b.gif

[FozzyBear]

>The key word here is "Railroad" not locomotive, or tramway
>or a circle track in someone's backyard...but railroad.

Agreed!! The Delaware and Hudson Canal Company's RAILROAD had 3 miles of track and 14 wagons plus the Stourbridge Lion to pull them. While it was not very sucessful because of the poor track it's still a railroad!! Much as you'd like to twist your history to suit you.

>The
>first "accepted" real railroad was chartered in 1827 as the
>Baltimore & Ohio aka B&O.

Accepted by who???? accepted by you becuse it suits you!! On top of that it might well have been Chartered in 1827 but it didn't turn a single wheel till the end of 1829. As I pointed out! 5 Weeks AFTER the Delaware and Hudson.

>The B&O was the
>first "chartered" and "recognized" railroad of the U.S.

Chartered! That means they had a piece of paper that said they could build a railway. Recognised??? recognised by who as what?? a piece of paper doesn't pull trains. The simple fact is it wasn't even the first railway charter. The first Charter, which means, the US Government recognised it as much as they recognised the B&O charter, was, as has alredy been pointed out given to John Stevens. The First locomotive, as I pointed out, to turn a wheel in the USA hauling A paid load of goods (Which is the point you were making) Was the "Stourbridge Lion" on the Deaware And Hudson Canal Company Railway. No amount of twisting is going to change that to suit your love affair with the B&O.

>This is how I read and understand railroad
>history to be concerning the first "real" railroad in
>America.

ROFLMAO.. Suits you and suited the B&O to try and claim it, so it MUST be right. LOL ROFL :D just gota love the publicity departments of Railway Companies..... LOL Any old BS in the face of actual fact repeated by employees as much as possible then becomes the truth. I bet you even think that Bill Gates invented the PC and DOS opperating system. LOL ROFL..

I have absolutely nothing against the B&O which was a fine railway company with a superb service record and some wonderful locomotives. IMHO they also had one of the smartest looking liveries in the USA. But I won't sit back and listen to publicity department BS being repeated as if it were fact.

Best Regards,
Julian (Fozzy The Bear)
http://forums.flightsim.com/dcforum/User_files/3d1087cf4bc9bf7b.gif

[philmoberg]

The Granite Railroad in Quincy, MA, actually predated the B&O... -Phil

[jfroth1]

FYI:
http://www.dudleymall.co.uk/loclhist/agenoria.htm
for a neat animation:
http://www.stourbridge.co.uk/htm/lioncent.htm
and...
http://www.unicover.com/EA4PA2Y9.HTM

John Roth
http://forums.flightsim.com/dcforum/User_files/3c4c983150247d95.gif

[FozzyBear]

>FYI:
>http://www.dudleymall.co.uk/loclhist/agenoria.htm
>for a neat animation:
>http://www.stourbridge.co.uk/htm/lioncent.htm
>and...
>http://www.unicover.com/EA4PA2Y9.HTM

Thanks John!
Nice links... Especially that one with the animation. That's going to help me with the MSTS model of it.

BTW just as an aside, and because it isn't mentioned in those articles, the reason it was called Lion was because an employee of Foster Rastrick painted a red lion face on the front of the boiler to hide the fact that they screwed up during manufacture of it, and left a big dent in the front of the casing. The reason why a lion is that the "Red Lion" Public House, (A Coching Inn) is oposite the old works of Foster Rastrick... I know cus I've had a few pints in there at one time or other ROFL :D

Just as a final note for all you B&O believers the question was "What Railroad was the Birth of the American Railrods" mmmmmmm The first one to run a powered locomotive (as opposed to horses) hauling a paid load would seem to be the answer to that specific question. QED.

Best Regards,
Julian (Fozzy The Bear)
http://forums.flightsim.com/dcforum/User_files/3d1087cf4bc9bf7b.gif

[jfroth1]

Yes Mr. Fozzy, based on your Stourbridge Lion diversion project noted in post 11 above, I thought you might find the animation helpful.
That was an interesting note on the painting of the lion's face on the boiler. Hehe. Always enjoy your posts!
And note my little .gif down below is a Delaware & Hudson GP39-2...
John Roth
http://forums.flightsim.com/dcforum/User_files/3c4c983150247d95.gif

[Dwightman]

:

The Baltimore & Ohio was not the first railroad in the U. S., but it was the first common carrier railroad, the first to offer scheduled freight and passenger service to the public.

It just depends on what you define as a railroad. If you are talking about the physical plant, then no B&O was not the first railroad in the U. S. (and neither was D&H). If you are talking about a railroad company, then yes B&O was the first. The D&H was a canal company that happened to build a rail line from its mines to the head of navigation at Honesdale, PA. Btw, D&H, if it still exists inside CP, is the oldest continuously operating TRANSPORTATION company.

Dwight

[Matt Vince]

As Fozzy has mentioned, Stourbridge Lion was (to my knowledge) the first locomotive to operate in the USA. It's sister locomotive, Agenoria, is on display in the National Railway Museum, York, UK, after nearly 175 years. Just don't expect it to haul a steam special :D

quote from www.railroadextra.com

"DELAWARE AND HUDSON CANAL COMPANY,

SCRANTON February 26, 1870. WM. H BROWN, Esq.,

DEAR SIR: I have yours of the l9th last. C. F. Young, of Honesdale, Pennsylvania, our general superintendent, has been looking up, for you, the matters you refer to, and has doubtless written you ere this. In a conversation I had with him, Young, a few days ago, he told me that the time of the trial-trip he had found positively to have been between the 3d and 8th of August, 1829. That it was in 1829, and on one of the days mentioned, there is not the shadow of a doubt, and that it was the first locomotive run upon this continent is beyond question.

We take pleasure in affording you every opportunity in making a your investigation; and, that there may be no mistake, I will enclose your letter to Mr. Young, that his attention may be called to it again.

Very truly yours,

THOMAS S. DICKENSON, President."

(bold type by ones self)

Clear things up? To refer to the Baltimore and Ohio, while horse drawn services had begun apparently of May 24th 1830, no such powered locomotive to my information appears to have been run on the B&O until 28th August 1830! This was also a mere test run by a machine of construction by a Mr Peter Cooper. This was then followed by a series of competitive trials (a la Rainhill) to determine the eventual form of motive power of the aforementioned railroad, the B&O. I believe this to be the first american-built locomotive. However, in global rail terms, such an event was overshadowed by an event 16 days later, of 15th of September 1830, the opening of the Liverpool and Manchester Railway.

The techincal definition of a railroad, or railway for that matter, is a road of rails. Rails by definition a method of guidance for a vehicle. Therefore by that definition, railroads were invented by accident by the Romans! (the ruts formed by the passage of carts) The French term, Chemin de Fer, which transliterated means Road of Iron, is more specific, in that it refers to the rails being of iron.

[BaltoOhioRRFan]

Dwightman im talking about company

[Gixxer86g]

Fozzy is 100% correct.Just because it was short,doesn't mean it wasn't a railroad.The NYSW operated the LASB when I worked for her.The Stourbridge Lion is pretty cool in person.There was also an excursion company operating on that line using a BL2!

[Dwightman]

Oh I understood the question. In fact, I had alredy given my response up above. I was just trying to show that the D&H was NOT the first railroad in the U.S., no matter how somebody tries to spin it. First to operate a steam locomotive, but not the first railroad.

Dwight

[FozzyBear]

>I was just trying to show that
>the D&H was NOT the first railroad in the U.S., no matter
>how somebody tries to spin it. First to operate a steam
>locomotive, but not the first railroad.

Nobody said the D&H was the first Railroad! But it certainly was a Railroad BEFORE the B&O. Which was the real crux of the debate here.

The fact that it didn't have a charter as such makes no difference whatsoever. It doesn't make it any less of a Railroad simply because the B&O had a piece of State or Government Paperwork saying that they could build one. It also doesn't mean that the B&O were the first to operate a revenue earning service, as has been suggested.

If we're extending the premise of what a railroad is.... then there were numerous horse drawn or gravity worked lines long before either the B&O or The D&H.... but the point of the original poll was in relation to a railway that is recognisable as the birth of the form of transport we have now. In assuming that premise we have to take it that we are talking about goods or passengers being hauld by a mechanical locomotive.

If indeed we don't assume that, then neither the D&H OR The B&O are in the running for debate here at all.

repeating factually incorrect B&O publicity literature doesn't make it true or factual.

Best Regards,
Julian (fozzy The Bear)
http://forums.flightsim.com/dcforum/User_files/3d1087cf4bc9bf7b.gif

[jfroth1]

The problem here is that Mr. BaltoOhioRRFan, who initiated this poorly worded post/poll, changed his criteria twice (posts 9 and 32) midstream to favor the B&O's utter rhetoric.

From historical data available,

Phil Moberg's answer, post 26, The Granite Railroad in Quincy, MA, Oct 7, 1826, is likely correct - if the definition is a HORSE-driven railroad.
http://ci.quincy.ma.us/tcpl/legacy/railway/railway.htm

The Switchback Gravity Railroad from Summit Hill, PA to Mauch Chunk (Jim Thorpe)PA, moving anthracite coal via mules,
http://www.switchbackgravityrr.org/sbfacts.htm#SECOND
is likely the second RR in the US. It has the unique distinction of becoming the prototype for the first Roller Coaster (!)

Both these railroads used animals and gravity to move their cargo.

For Steam Locomotive powered RR's, the D&H/Stourbridge Lion, in Honesdale, PA, as Fozzy stated in post 11 and my followup (post 27),
http://www.dudleymall.co.uk/loclhist/agenoria.htm
is correct as far as historical data for mechanical locomotion known.

The B&O meets NONE of those criteria, sorry.

John Roth
http://forums.flightsim.com/dcforum/User_files/3c4c983150247d95.gif

[Kip]

>The key word here is "Railroad" not locomotive, or tramway
>or a circle track in someone's backyard...but railroad.
Agreed!! The Delaware and Hudson Canal Company's RAILROAD had 3 miles of track and 14 wagons plus the Stourbridge Lion to pull them. While it was not very sucessful because of the poor track it's still a railroad!! Much as you'd like to twist your history to suit you.

Twist? I twisted nothing. I had several references in front of me that has stated that the B&O was the first recognized chartered railroad in the US. Horse pulled carts on rails may be called "Railroads", but in my opinion that just splitting fine hairs. As much as I hate forum debates I must stipulate that I have no desire to have a "war" over a railroad I have no personal interest in.

>The
>first "accepted" real railroad was chartered in 1827 as the
>Baltimore & Ohio aka B&O.

Accepted by who???? accepted by you becuse it suits you!! On top of that it might well have been Chartered in 1827 but it didn't turn a single wheel till the end of 1829. As I pointed out! 5 Weeks AFTER the Delaware and Hudson.

Apparently accepted by Acedemic Historians to a general agreement of terms deeming "railroad". To suit me? In what regard would it suit me? What advantage would I have to twist "history" to suit me? Granted, the B&O probably didn't have an actual working locomotive until later after the charter, however that still does not change any facts concerning what the accepted "history is.

>The B&O was the
>first "chartered" and "recognized" railroad of the U.S.

Chartered! That means they had a piece of paper that said they could build a railway. Recognised??? recognised by who as what?? a piece of paper doesn't pull trains. The simple fact is it wasn't even the first railway charter. The first Charter, which means, the US Government recognised it as much as they recognised the B&O charter, was, as has alredy been pointed out given to John Stevens. The First locomotive, as I pointed out, to turn a wheel in the USA hauling A paid load of goods (Which is the point you were making) Was the "Stourbridge Lion" on the Deaware And Hudson Canal Company Railway. No amount of twisting is going to change that to suit your love affair with the B&O. [/b]

[i] whew! My love affair? You over-estimate my intention of my post obviously. The B&O is just another RR to me with alot of history. In love with it? no. I am curious though because I do not know, does this D&H's charter say "Railroad"? If not, then techically is never was, though it was a "railroad" repectfully. If it does, then history is incorrect to state that B&O was first.

>This is how I read and understand railroad
>history to be concerning the first "real" railroad in
>America.

ROFLMAO.. Suits you and suited the B&O to try and claim it, so it MUST be right. LOL ROFL just gota love the publicity departments of Railway Companies..... LOL Any old BS in the face of actual fact repeated by employees as much as possible then becomes the truth. I bet you even think that Bill Gates invented the PC and DOS opperating system. LOL ROFL..

Well, I'm not entirely an idiot, and not as gullible as you assume. It's just to me that there is alot of "splitting" hairs going on here and now I have found myself involved in a debate that I should have known better to get involved in. [i/]

I have absolutely nothing against the B&O which was a fine railway company with a superb service record and some wonderful locomotives. IMHO they also had one of the smartest looking liveries in the USA. But I won't sit back and listen to publicity department BS being repeated as if it were fact.

[i] Agreed. However, there is still room for debate in some ways. I just think we need better clarification and definations of terms concerning legal matters and history for that matter. I agree on certain points and I do not argue certain historical facts that you stated, but as it stands now and basically accepted...well almost, it is the B&O RR


Kip
http://home.kendra.com/comet61/prrrlogo2aa.gif
Priest River Railroad...Chartered in 2002...no BS there.

[Dwightman]

>Nobody said the D&H was the first Railroad! But it certainly
>was a Railroad BEFORE the B&O. Which was the real crux of
>the debate here.

So you're saying that the railroad that was the birthplace of American railroading (by your argument, the D&H) and the first American railroad were not the same? That's a very interesting take. Care to explain how to resolve this?

>The fact that it didn't have a charter as such makes no
>difference whatsoever. It doesn't make it any less of a
>Railroad simply because the B&O had a piece of State or
>Government Paperwork saying that they could build one. It
>also doesn't mean that the B&O were the first to operate a
>revenue earning service, as has been suggested.

No, but the fact the D&H had a charter defining it as a canal company makes it less of a railroad. :) And no, just because the B&O had a charter defining it as a common carrier railroad didn't make it the first to operate in revenue service. The fact that it was the first to operate in revenue service did that. Btw, if you have proof to the contrary, I would love to see it.

>If we're extending the premise of what a railroad is....
>then there were numerous horse drawn or gravity worked lines
>long before either the B&O or The D&H.... but the point of
>the original poll was in relation to a railway that is
>recognisable as the birth of the form of transport we have
>now. In assuming that premise we have to take it that we are
>talking about goods or passengers being hauld by a
>mechanical locomotive.
>
>If indeed we don't assume that, then neither the D&H OR The
>B&O are in the running for debate here at all.

I'm not extending the premise of what a railroad is. I'm merely trying to figure out your premise of what a railroad is. Why stop at mechanical locomotive? Why not say it has to have T-rails and crossties? Or automatic couplers? These are all technological improvements that increase safety and productivity, just like a mechanical locomotive.

Now, I would contend that a railroad (based on what is recognized as American railroading, which is what we are looking for in this debate) is defined not just by the physical plant, but also the services provided. A common carrier railroad offers freight and/or passenger service to the public. This is where the B&O and D&H differ. The B&O's services were available to the public. The D&H's rail line was available to, well, the D&H. It was not a common carrier railroad so it could not offer it's rail services to the public (it was a canal company until 1898). Again, if you have proof to the contrary, please provide it.

>repeating factually incorrect B&O publicity literature
>doesn't make it true or factual.

I have no idea where you got this from. Where did I cite anything from any B&O publicity literature? As far as I can remember, I have never seen any before. Telling me that I am wrong with no proof to back it up doesn't make it true either.

Anyway, just so nobody can say they don't know where I stand:

The Baltimore & Ohio was the first common carrier railroad. The Delaware & Hudson, if it still exists (does anybody know for sure?), is the oldest continuously operating transportation company, predating the B&O (remember, it was originally a canal company).

Dwight

[Dwightman]

The B&O was the first common carrier railroad, which is what he was looking for. And yes it was poorly worded.

Dwight

[jfroth1]

Hi Kip,
I read your response and I agree that a better definition of 'railroad' is needed to better clarify historical "railroad" events.

John Roth
http://forums.flightsim.com/dcforum/User_files/3c4c983150247d95.gif

[FozzyBear]

>>Nobody said the D&H was the first Railroad! But it certainly
>>was a Railroad BEFORE the B&O. Which was the real crux of
>>the debate here.
>
>So you're saying that the railroad that was the birthplace
>of American railroading (by your argument, the D&H) and the
>first American railroad were not the same? That's a very
>interesting take. Care to explain how to resolve this?

With the greatest of pleasure... You have so far claimed that the B&O IS the birthplace of the American Railroad by the definition of the opening question. That has already been proven to you to be complete and utter nonsense. The D&H was a RAILROAD by all logical definition of the term which operated before the B&O even had a working locomotive or completed their track. If the B&O Didn't do that first, then how can it possibly be the birthplace of American Railroading.

>>The fact that it didn't have a charter as such makes no
>>difference whatsoever. It doesn't make it any less of a
>>Railroad simply because the B&O had a piece of State or
>>Government Paperwork saying that they could build one. It
>>also doesn't mean that the B&O were the first to operate a
>>revenue earning service, as has been suggested.
>
>No, but the fact the D&H had a charter defining it as a
>canal company makes it less of a railroad.

It was a Railroad!! It had RAILS it also had a working steam locomotive hauling goods BEFORE the B&O. How is it less of a Railroad if somebody who also owns canals built it, than if, For example, "Joe Blogs" who doesn't own anything else comes along and builds exactly the same Railroad. It was still a Railroad built and operated before the B&O.

>And no, just
>because the B&O had a charter defining it as a common
>carrier railroad didn't make it the first to operate in
>revenue service. The fact that it was the first to
>operate in revenue service did that.

The B&O didn't begin operation in revenue service until OVER a year later. How in any event does that make it the birthplace of the American Railroad?? as you're suggesting?? I fail to see how.

>I'm not extending the premise of what a railroad is. I'm
>merely trying to figure out your premise of what a railroad
>is.

Ahhhh but unfortunately you did. You're claiming that a Railroad isn't a Railroad at all unless it's a common carrier (i.e. Goods and Passengers for public revenue payment) AND That it MUST be built by someone who doesn't own any other forms of transport other than the Railroad itself. That sounds like a pretty big expansion of the definition of what a Railroad is. I've never seen that definition used in any legislature anywhere in the world. Or in any accepted history.

As for my definition of a RAILROAD.. This is What Chambers American Dictionary says "RAILROAD US = Railway.... 1 a track or tracks made of rails upon which goods trucks or passenger trains run normally by the power of a mechanical locomotive engine. 2 such a system worked by a single company e.g. "The Union Pacific"."

You will note it says nothing about it having to be a common carrier in fact quite the opposite, nor does it say that it has to be by a company that ONLY owns the Railroad and nothing else. By your definition most of the current Railroad companies are not Railroads, because they also operate road vehicles, and ships, and aircraft etc etc Several of the current Railroad owners did not start their business building railroads, in your own words: "No, but the fact the D&H had a charter defining it as a canal company makes it less of a railroad."

SO you are stating that every Railroad or Railway has to be a public carrier in order to be a Railroad or Railway... What a nonsense. SO the Stockton & Darlington Railway, which pre dates any Railway on the US continent by your definition was not a Railway.

The opening question WAS NOT! Which was the first Common Carrier Railroad. Which is the premise on which you are attempting to answer it. If indeed that had been the question you would have been quite correct in stating the B&O.

It was in fact, which Railroad was the Birth of American Railroads. Simple, the answer remains (On The US continent at least) the D&H regardless of whether the company running it also owned canals or not. They still built a RAILROAD with a mechanical locomotive hauling goods, Which I believe is adequately described by the dictionary definition AND they did it before the B&O. FACT....END OF STORY!!


>Anyway, just so nobody can say they don't know where I
>stand:
>The Baltimore & Ohio was the first common carrier railroad.

Nobody is arguing with you about that. But that wasn't the premise of the opening poll question. The truth here is that the person opening this poll should have been much more specific and clear with the question!! If he'd asked "What was the First Common Carrier Railroad" He'd have got the answer he clearly wanted. But he didn't ask that.

>The Delaware & Hudson, if it still exists (does anybody know
>for sure?), is the oldest continuously operating
>transportation company, predating the B&O (remember, it was
>originally a canal company).

Its RAILROAD also pre dated the B&O Railroad So that puts the B&O completely out of the running in the question "What Rail Road was the Birthplace of American Rail Roading?" (The Opening Question) It remains the D&H by the dictionary definition. Unless of course you don't accept that more or less universally accepted definition of what a Railroad is for whatever reasons of your own you might have.


Best Regards,
Julian (Fozzy The Bear)
http://forums.flightsim.com/dcforum/User_files/3d1087cf4bc9bf7b.gif

[FozzyBear]

>Agreed. However, there is still room for debate in some
>ways. I just think we need better clarification and
>definations of terms concerning legal matters and history
>for that matter.

It doesn't require any better definition of the history... The history is a matter of fact. The D&H Built and opperated a RAILROAD before the B&O... There is no other possible interpretation of it. I've already stated the sequencial dates. If you don't like the order things happened in I'm sorry. But they remain FACT.

>I agree on certain points and I do not
>argue certain historical facts that you stated, but as it
>stands now and basically accepted...well almost, it is the
>B&O RR [/i]

How exactly is the B&O an answer to the question "What Rail Road was the Birthplace of American Rail Roading?" When it was quite clearly and wihout question NOT the first Railroad to operate. Charters or bits of paper, have no relevance whatsoever to which Railroad actually got built operated first. If that was not the B&O then the B&O is NOT the correct answer to that question.

The problem here lies NOT in the answers given.... because on the whole I have to say that everybody here is right depending on how you define the question. The real problem lies with the question. It needs to be much more clearly defined. AS does the definition that is being applied to what a Railroad is or isn't. If we can't agree on that then we are never going to be able to answer the question.

So we just have to agree to disagree. As far as I'm concerned the chronological history speaks for itself. The B&O was not the first, and therefore cannot even be considerd as a contender in that question.


Best Regards,
Julian (Fozzy The Bear)
http://forums.flightsim.com/dcforum/User_files/3d1087cf4bc9bf7b.gif

[FozzyBear]

Thanks for that confirmation Matt!

I think this whole debate centers around definitions and a very poorly worded question in the poll that started it.

I'm afraid the B&O Mob are never going to be prepared to accept the chronological history even if it is fact.

It seems their only defense of their position is to try and claim that the D&H wasn't a Real Railroad, because it was built by a Canal Company.. LOL ROFL :D The fact that it had Rails Locomotives Wagons and hauled Goods, before the B&O did, seems to conviniently escape them.

And to argue that because their beloved B&O had a charter describing it as a railroad before the D&H was built and that the D&H didn't, that the B&O was therefore the first real railroad. They also conviniently ignore the fact that John Stevens was granted the first charter for a steam powered railroad in America in March 21, 1823. As was pointed out by "IcyFire" So in actual fact not only did someone else build a railroad before the B&O but someone also held a charter to build one Before the B&O.

I mean.... What a complete load of rubbish their argument is. ROFLMAO :D You just got to love em! they seem to have forgotten that time only travels in one direction and that if Fred builds a house on Tuesday, James who built his house on Wednesdy didn't build his house first LOL :D

Best Regards,
Julian (Fozzy The Bear)
http://forums.flightsim.com/dcforum/User_files/3d1087cf4bc9bf7b.gif

[Dwightman]

>With the greatest of pleasure... You have so far claimed
>that the B&O IS the birthplace of the American Railroad by
>the definition of the opening question. That has already
>been proven to you to be complete and utter nonsense. The
>D&H was a RAILROAD by all logical definition of the term
>which operated before the B&O even had a working locomotive
>or completed their track. If the B&O Didn't do that first,
>then how can it possibly be the birthplace of American
>Railroading.

It depends on what you consider "American railroading." To me, since the U.S. economy is a free market economy, the term "American railroading" (which is an ambiguous term, at best) implies a common carrier, a railroad that offers its services to the public. The B&O was the first to do so. The D&H could not (until it's charter was ammended to designate it as a common carrier; anybody know when that happened?)

>>No, but the fact the D&H had a charter defining it as a
>>canal company makes it less of a railroad.
>
>It was a Railroad!! It had RAILS it also had a working steam
>locomotive hauling goods BEFORE the B&O. How is it less of a
>Railroad if somebody who also owns canals built it, than if,
>For example, "Joe Blogs" who doesn't own anything else comes
>along and builds exactly the same Railroad. It was still a
>Railroad built and operated before the B&O.

Umm.. I take it you missed the smiley. That was joke. Just trying to lighten things up a little. Nowhere did I say that the D&H was not a railroad. Perhaps a time or two, I have let my use of the word railroad waver to also mean common carrier railroad and railroading. For that I apologize. But nowhere did I intend to claim that the D&H was not a railroad.

>>And no, just
>>because the B&O had a charter defining it as a common
>>carrier railroad didn't make it the first to operate in
>>revenue service. The fact that it was the first to
>>operate in revenue service did that.
>
>The B&O didn't begin operation in revenue service until OVER
>a year later. How in any event does that make it the
>birthplace of the American Railroad?? as you're suggesting??
>I fail to see how.

Again, you are missing the point. The D&H's railroad did not produce any revenue until it could offer its services to the public. You were the first one to bring up revenue as part of the debate. Yet you seem to ignore it when it suits you. The B&O's rail line produced revenue before the D&H's rail line did.

>Ahhhh but unfortunately you did. You're claiming that a
>Railroad isn't a Railroad at all unless it's a common
>carrier (i.e. Goods and Passengers for public revenue
>payment) AND That it MUST be built by someone who doesn't
>own any other forms of transport other than the Railroad
>itself. That sounds like a pretty big expansion of the
>definition of what a Railroad is. I've never seen that
>definition used in any legislature anywhere in the world. Or
>in any accepted history.

Where did I say that a railroad isn't a railroad unless it's a common carrier? As I stated above, you were the one to bring revenue into the debate, not me. In order to produce revenue, a railroad had to be chartered as a common carrier, which the D&H was not (at least the rail line wasn't).

>As for my definition of a RAILROAD.. This is What Chambers
>American Dictionary says "RAILROAD US = Railway.... 1 a
>track or tracks made of rails upon which goods trucks or
>passenger trains run normally by the power of a mechanical
>locomotive engine. 2 such a system worked by a single
>company e.g. "The Union Pacific"."
>
>You will note it says nothing about it having to be a common
>carrier in fact quite the opposite, nor does it say that it
>has to be by a company that ONLY owns the Railroad and
>nothing else. By your definition most of the current
>Railroad companies are not Railroads, because they also
>operate road vehicles, and ships, and aircraft etc etc
>Several of the current Railroad owners did not start their
>business building railroads, in your own words: "No, but the
>fact the D&H had a charter defining it as a canal company
>makes it less of a railroad."

Like I said, that was merely an attempt to lighten things up, hence the smiley (which I notice you've left out). As for the other stuff, the ICC had a very strict policy regarding railroads offering more than one form of transportation. During the '30's, '40's and '50's, railroads were forced to sell their trucking lines and bus companies. These days, no railroad company is allowed to own a trucking or shipping company. That is why every major railroad is owned by a parent company which is allowed to own other transportation companies. Yes railroads still own trailers these days, but they cannot be used in over-the-road service that would compete with the railroad itself. (At least that's the way it used to be. I'm still not sure what all deregulation has allowed)

>SO you are stating that every Railroad or Railway has to be
>a public carrier in order to be a Railroad or Railway...
>What a nonsense. SO the Stockton & Darlington Railway, which
>pre dates any Railway on the US continent by your definition
>was not a Railway.

I did not say that.

>The opening question WAS NOT! Which was the first Common
>Carrier Railroad. Which is the premise on which you are
>attempting to answer it. If indeed that had been the
>question you would have been quite correct in stating the
>B&O.
>
>It was in fact, which Railroad was the Birth of American
>Railroads. Simple, the answer remains (On The US continent
>at least) the D&H regardless of whether the company running
>it also owned canals or not. They still built a RAILROAD
>with a mechanical locomotive hauling goods, Which I believe
>is adequately described by the dictionary definition AND
>they did it before the B&O. FACT....END OF STORY!!

Once again, since the U.S. economy is a free market economy, the term "American railroading" implies a common carrier. To me at least. To you it obviously means something else. That's fine. Just don't tell me that I'm factually wrong for interpreting an ambiguous term differently from you.

>>Anyway, just so nobody can say they don't know where I
>>stand:
>>The Baltimore & Ohio was the first common carrier railroad.
>
>Nobody is arguing with you about that. But that wasn't the
>premise of the opening poll question. The truth here is that
>the person opening this poll should have been much more
>specific and clear with the question!! If he'd asked "What
>was the First Common Carrier Railroad" He'd have got the
>answer he clearly wanted. But he didn't ask that.

Now there's something we actually agree on. The question should have been more clear. But instead of telling everybody they are wrong, perhaps you should have asked for a clarification.

>>The Delaware & Hudson, if it still exists (does anybody know
>>for sure?), is the oldest continuously operating
>>transportation company, predating the B&O (remember, it was
>>originally a canal company).
>
>Its RAILROAD also pre dated the B&O Railroad So that puts
>the B&O completely out of the running in the question "What
>Rail Road was the Birthplace of American Rail Roading?" (The
>Opening Question) It remains the D&H by the dictionary
>definition. Unless of course you don't accept that more or
>less universally accepted definition of what a Railroad is
>for whatever reasons of your own you might have.

One last time, the problem is that we don't agree on what was meant by "American Rail Roading." I understood this to mean "common carrier railroad." You understood it to mean "steam powered railroad." That's fine. We don't have to agree. But that doesn't necessarily make either of us wrong.

Dwight

[FozzyBear]

Here is the final answer to the propositions by Kip and DWightman, That the Delaware & Hudson was not a proper RAILROAD Compay and it's Railroad was not Valid, Because it's Charter specified it as a Canal Company.

"The Delaware and Hudson Canal and Railroad Company" has a charter dated April 3, 1823. Notice that it IS defined as a RAILROAD Company, your suggestion that its railroad is not valid, because it was not defined as a Railroad Company in its charter, is therefore proven to be total hogwash. The D&H Charter Pre dating the Railroad Charter of the B&O by two years. A copy of this charter is held by the Library Of Congress.

Sorry boys! your argument just fell apart! So how would you like to change the question this time to squeeze it into fitting your proposition. ROFLMAO :D

Best Regards,
Julian (Fozzy The Bear)
http://forums.flightsim.com/dcforum/User_files/3d1087cf4bc9bf7b.gif

[FozzyBear]

>It depends on what you consider "American railroading." To
>me, since the U.S. economy is a free market economy, the
>term "American railroading" (which is an ambiguous term, at
>best) implies a common carrier, a railroad that offers its
>services to the public.

Sorry, you just can't infer something and then claim it as fact or modify the original question based on that inference. The only fact I can see here is that the original poster change his definition of the question (TWICE) to make it fit the proposition and still failed to squeeze it into fitting the facts.

First of all he changes it to "We're talking about tracks here" I think that's a fairly clear clarification of what he's talking about, (Plant and Machinery). DING DONG!! ooops nope B&O didn't have the first tracks..... So he changes it again to "I'm talking about Company" Another clarification that has an entirely different slant. DIN DONG!! Ooops The D&H had a charter that defined it as a Canal & Railroad Company before the B&O...... Then you decide to come along and change the definition again, to that of "Common Carrier Railroad" Which one is it!!! The original question or the other three interpretations of it.

But also that you are further changing the question to make it fit that proposition. The original question does not fit with your proposition, quite simply the only thing the B&O did was to be a common carrier.. (and btw it was not me who brought that into the debate as you attempt to suggest three times). HOWEVER as you bring the subject up! lets just clear that one up as well. You are now suggesting that a Railroad in free market economy, does not generate revenue unless it is a common carrier. That is clearly nonsense. The Company it is generating revenue for, is obtaining that revenue by virtue of being able to move its goods more quickly and easily and cheaply thus to generate greater revenue from them. It's called competitive advantage in a free capitalist market, There's a very American definition of a Railroad for you.... Although it's still not the dictionary definition.

>One last time, the problem is that we don't agree on what
>was meant by "American Rail Roading." I understood this to
>mean "common carrier railroad." You understood it to mean
>"steam powered railroad." That's fine. We don't have to
>agree. But that doesn't necessarily make either of us wrong.

No! I understand it to be the same thing as the dictionary definition, which mentions Mechanical Locomotive Engine (not necessarily steam) So you don't agree with the Dictionary definition of what a Railroad is... mmmmmmmm

As I said to Kip the chronological evidence is perfectly clear. The Railroad built by the Delaware and Hudson pre dates the Railroad built by the Baltimore & Ohio. That's all there is to it. Whichever way you look at it you can't change that simple fact, or make your proposition fit the original question. If the B&O Didn't exist first it can't have been the Birthplace of American Railroading. See post (45) your proposition is based on the B&O having a pre dating "Railroad" Charter. Now proven not to be the case.

I'm also not suggesting that everybody is wrong.. Where did I say that. In fact In my reply to kip you will find, that I said exactly the opposite. I actually said everybody is right here!! Just that the definitions are at the very least wildly inaccurate So if you don't agree with the Chambers American Dictionary Definition of what a Railroad is, then that really is something for you to take up with them.

We are just going to have to agree to disagree on this. Your interpretation of the question is not a matter of evidence as you seem to think. The hard paper evidence does not support your suppositions. (see Post 45)


Best Regards,
Julian (Fozzy The Bear)
http://forums.flightsim.com/dcforum/User_files/3d1087cf4bc9bf7b.gif

[CNfavorite]

Thank you Fozzy, I knew I was on the, ahem... right track. ;-)
All I could think of was 'Delaware' when I voted early on.

BTW - Have you seen the new Weezer video for 'Gone Fishing'?
Jim Henson would be very proud of it. :)

[dejoh]

How about a couple of mules and a few workers pushing a mine car down to the river, and dunping the load into the waiting barge, around 1740. Virginia, Thats a railroad right?

[FozzyBear]

>How about a couple of mules and a few workers pushing a mine
>car down to the river, and dunping the load into the waiting
>barge, around 1740. Virginia, Thats a railroad right?

Yup! That's a Railroad..... I'd have to agree with you on that. No doubt on that one at all.

I think Matt put it quite well where he said: "The techincal definition of a railroad, or railway for that matter, is a road of rails. Rails by definition a method of guidance for a vehicle. Therefore by that definition, railroads were invented by accident by the Romans! (the ruts formed by the passage of carts) The French term, Chemin de Fer, which transliterated means Road of Iron, is more specific, in that it refers to the rails being of iron."

I think we're refering to the modern definition of a railroad in terms of the original question though, and maybe we need to be clear that that definition includes using a Mechanical Locomotive of some description.

Best Regards,
Julian (Fozzy The Bear)
http://forums.flightsim.com/dcforum/User_files/3d1087cf4bc9bf7b.gif

[Kip]

I guess Rollercoasters are considered "railroads" since they are on rails and go in on a specified track...in a circle and are mechanized in some way shape or form.

There are "railroads" and then there are Railroads two fine sides of one hair....

Kip

[FozzyBear]

>I guess Rollercoasters are considered "railroads" since they
>are on rails and go in on a specified track...in a circle
>and are mechanized in some way shape or form.

Yes and No.... Yes because given that one of the first US gravity Railroads, was definately the birth place of the Rollercoaster. But No as well, because in relation to the question being debated you wouldn't actually describe a Rollercoaster as American Railroading.

>There are "railroads" and then there are Railroads two fine
>sides of one hair....

No I actually think that there is a huge distinction between a Railroad and a Rollercoaster... even if technically it is a form of Railroad of sorts, a Rollercoaster falls outside of the Dictionary definition of a Railroad. You wouldn't ever see goods being carried on one as they go from point A to point A not Point A to Point B and the normal form of propulsion isn't by Mechanical Locomotive Engine.

Actually I quite like Rollercoasters especially wooden ones.... The modern ones just don't feel the same.

Best Regards,
Julian (Fozzy The Bear)
http://forums.flightsim.com/dcforum/User_files/3d1087cf4bc9bf7b.gif