RE: (erielack) A couple of items

["Michael Connor" <mjconnor_rr_@_hotmail.com>]

The NYC controlled the NKP from c. 1885.  It was ordered to divest the NKP 
by the Federal Government under the Clayton Act (IIRC) c. 1916.  President 
A. H. Smith of the NYC (no relation to the NY Governor and Presidential 
Candidate of the same name) sought out the Van Sweringens as purchasers of 
the NKP on the reasonable theory that they were the less of several evils.  
Disposition to the DL&W would have been a strategic blunder for the NYC 
creating, as it would, a new NY-Chgo competitor.  I don't believe the DL&W 
management had a lot of choice in this.
       The Lake Erie & Western, also an NYC-contriolled property, was also 
sold to the Vans for much the same reason.
       In the lost opportunity column it might be interesting to ask why the 
Erie did not actively pursue the other ultimate component of the pre-W&LE 
NKP, the Toledo, St. Louis & Western ("Clover Leaf").
       The House of Morgan and other banking interests had great influence 
on the management of the various railroads and worked to reduce empire 
building and competition.  I think that the folks that controlled the purse 
strings of the DL&W and the Erie were reluct6ant for either road to expand 
out of its geographic limits.  I believe this made each road much weaker by 
mid-century than they needed to be but by then the damage was done.
M J Connor

>From: "Montgomery, Edward T" <Edward.Montgomery_@_fcps.edu>
>Reply-To: "Montgomery, Edward T" <Edward.Montgomery_@_fcps.edu>
>To: <erielack_@_lists.railfan.net>
>Subject: (erielack) A couple of items
>Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2005 16:55:12 -0500
>
>It's taken me some time to collect my thoughts on this but in the recent
>CLASSIC TRAINS there story in CUT brought up some interesting items I
>had never thought of.  I had always thought Lackawanna management
>dropped the ball when it came to acquiring the NKP early in the 20th
>Century.  Well the article points out that New York Central had an
>interest in the NKP back then as well as owning Lackawanna stock.  If
>the Van Sweragin's didn't control the NKP, NYC would have probably
>either shut it down or transferred some of their mainline to NKP's ROW.
>I'm not sure who had the better grades.  NYC owning shares of NKP and
>DL&W probably prohibited any thought of DL&W acquiring the NKP.
>Lackawanna was effectively locked into the New York-Buffalo lines with
>little or no hope of expanding west.  Possibly they could have
>considered an end-to-end merger with the Wabash at Buffalo via Canada
>but NYC would have probably opposed that as well.  I wonder what
>Lackawanna Management thought of all that back then.  When the
>depression hit followed by the loss of the anthracite business
>Lackawanna was in a position where NYC didn't need it's interest and NKP
>or any other Midwest carrier probably didn't want DL&W as a partner.
>
>
>
>And then there is the MODEL RAILROADER article on the DL&W lightweight
>coaches.  Very interesting.  Question:  I never rode in these cars.  I
>have heard people complain about them.  Something about not being able
>to effectively see out the windows.  Where the seats too low?  These
>coaches are really unique.  Other lightweights have small windows at the
>car ends.  The Lackawanna coaches did not.  It looks like a kind of
>custom design.
>
>
>
>Ed Montgomery
>
>
>
>
>
>

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