John WR Greyhounds, To repeat myself for a third time, I said "builders." I did not say owners or stockholders or anything like that. And I did that deliberately to distinguish between the two. There is a difference between investing in a company, even in a closely held company, and actually working for that company. I suppose the difference escapes you but it is there. Volumes have been written about the relationships of Crocker, Hopkins, Huntington and Stanford. I, however, did not discuss them and I am not inclined to go to that discussion now. You criticize a figment of your imagination that has nothing to do with me. John
Greyhounds,
To repeat myself for a third time, I said "builders." I did not say owners or stockholders or anything like that. And I did that deliberately to distinguish between the two. There is a difference between investing in a company, even in a closely held company, and actually working for that company. I suppose the difference escapes you but it is there.
Volumes have been written about the relationships of Crocker, Hopkins, Huntington and Stanford. I, however, did not discuss them and I am not inclined to go to that discussion now. You criticize a figment of your imagination that has nothing to do with me.
John
I ask what fraudulent practice or practices "The Builders" of the Central Pacific engaged in that burdened the railroad with additional debt. You apparently don't have an answer. But you sure made the accusation.
If you've got some specifics then post them. Otherwise I'll suggest you quit making baseless accusations.
In case you missed it you are not going to provoke me into your misguided thinking simply by using ugly falsehoods to misrepresent what I write.
Geez guys! How 'bout when the bell rings, you both go back to your own corner? (( Ding Ding!! ))
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
I really tried, Murphy. I dislike personal invective and I suggested we should drop it precisely because it becomes oppressive for all of the other posters. I really believe you and other people are capable of making up your own minds and are unlikely to be mislead by anyone. I apologize to you and everyone else who has to put up with this crap. I sure regret it.
John,
Greyhounds simply called you on two things. One, who the builders of Central Pacific were. He is correct, you are not. Second you accused the builders of CP of some evil doing. He asked you what the evil doing was. Instead of sharing with us what evil they did, you got all in a snit and are now trying to shift the blame for your snit to Greyhounds. I do agree that anyone reading the thread can figure out what is going on.
Mac
I posted some factual information about the CP and the construction company that built it. I do not know if there is any evidence of corruption in the construction, but neither John nor Ken presented any information about that issue.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
Mac,
I completely disagree with you. And I am trying to accept Murphy's suggestion because I think he speaks for a lot of people here. You are entitled to your opinion but I find it hard to understand why you are trying to add to the problem.
You are welcome to any opinion you wish to hold. You are not welcome to your own facts.
.
schlimm I posted some factual information about the CP and the construction company that built it. I do not know if there is any evidence of corruption in the construction, but neither John nor Ken presented any information about that issue.
I posted the same information about the CP having its own construction company. I don't know of any evidence of fraud in the the construction of that railroad either. That's what I kept asking for. Basically, "Who did what."
You well know that it's difficult, if not impossible, to prove innocence. That is, to prove someone didn't do something. I mean if they tried to say I killed Billy Bob Joe's chickens over in Lake Villa last Saturday night and I said I couldn't have done it because I was in jail in Toledo last Saturday night; that's a pretty air tight alabi. It would pretty much prove I didn't kill the chickens. But most people aren't in jail, in Toledo or elsewhere.
That's why the burden of proof is on the accusers. Heck fire, I couldn't even get any specifics on what, if any, fraudulent activities were being alleged.
"This Guy" has certainly done this before. And I'm going to get in his face every time he smears people without specifics or proof.
But I'm done for this series.
PNWRMNMYou are welcome to any opinion you wish to hold. You are not welcome to your own facts.
The facts as I see them is that history is made by a great many people. In the case of the transcontinental railroads there many hundreds of men. Perhaps we cannot know each one individually but neither do we have to exclude any. I would try to understand railroad history by trying to look at the lives of all who were involved.
Some people, and you may be one, see history as being made by a very few great men. The problem I have with that is that it requires us to strip away the human qualities of our heros. We then re-create our either heros or monsters which really do not exist in human life.
And I do think I am entitled to understand historical facts as I do. I would invite you to consider it too.
John WR Many of the problems the early transcontinentals faced were caused by the fraudulent practices of their builders, practices that left the railroads with massive amount of debt. However, these were not problems inherent in railroading itself. John John, So were the evil builders the coolies? Mac
Many of the problems the early transcontinentals faced were caused by the fraudulent practices of their builders, practices that left the railroads with massive amount of debt. However, these were not problems inherent in railroading itself.
Gee, You mean they cheated? Sarcasm intended.
Norm
"Evil" is the word you used; I didn't. But thank you for pointing out the idea that I disagree with. The idea that people can be divided into two groups, good and evil. If you want to talk about "evil," feel free to do so.
The one instance of fraud I am aware of in the construction of the Central Pacific was claiming that the foothills of the Sierras were on the outskirts of Sacramento as opposed to be about 20 miles east of Sacramento. The reimbursement for construction was higher for the Sierras than for level ground due to higher construction costs, so the Big Four had an incentive to fudge were the hills began.
The Central Pacific was had quite a bit of on-line traffic from silver mining in northern Nevada, connecting with several rail lines serving mining districts, e.g. the V&T, Nevada Central and Eureka and Palisades. The profit from the CP was enough to provide funding for construction of the various Southern Pacific with only a portion of those lines benefiting from land grants.
- Erik
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.