Locomotive Roster -- Narrow Gauge, 1871 - 1903
Utah Northern Railroad (1871-1874)
Utah & Northern Railway (1874-1889)
Oregon Short Line & Utah Northern Railway (1889-1897)
Utah Western Railway (1874-1881)
Utah & Nevada Railway (1881-1889)
Oregon Short Line Railroad (1897-1903, end of narrow gauge operations)
By George E. Pitchard
This page was last updated on May 7, 2004.
(Return to George Pitchard Archive index page)
Once all is said and done here, this roster will cover the 32-year 'linear' history of the Utah Northern Railroad and its several successor companies, through to the final disposition of all narrow-gauge equipment remaining by the Oregon Short Line RR in 1903; and will necessarily include the locomotives of the Utah Western Railway/Utah & Nevada Railway, brought into the play in the August 1, 1889 merger of several earlier companies '(including the Utah & Northern) into the Oregon Short Line & Utah Northern Railway.
In all, there are some 56 locomotives on the following rosters, a few of which occur through to the 1903 end of narrow gauge; 52 are Utah & Northern; three are Utah Western/Utah & Nevada; and one 'off-line' loco added by the O.S.L. in 1897.
The arrangement here will be largely chronological, through the Utah Northern/Utah & Northern era, at which point the Utah Western/Utah & Nevada locomotives will be brought in, and then follow through the OSL&UN/OSL era, to the 1903 end of all narrow gauge so far as the Utah & Northern and its successors are concerned.
Utah Northern Railroad (1871, 1872 and 1874)
Numbers 1 through 5 were all built by the Grant Locomotive Works, Paterson, New Jersey (and, incidentally, comprising the entire locomotive roster of the Utah Northern Railroad)
|1||John W. Young||2-4-0||Oct 1871||9x16||48"||11 ton||Sold September 1881||1|
|2||Utah||2-6-0||Sep 1872||10x16||42"||14 ton||Sold September 1881||2|
|3||Idaho||2-6-0||Sep 1872||10x16||42"||14 ton||1885 No. 297; declared vacant in May 1886||2|
|4||Logan||4-6-0||Apr 1874||12x18||44"||17 ton||1885 No. 285; declared vacant in May 1886||3|
|5||Franklin||4-6-0||Jun 1874||12x18||44"||17 ton||1885 No. 286; declared vacant in May 1886||3|
(Go to Notes)
(See Note 4, below, for data on the tenders for the Grant locomotives.)
Utah & Northern Railway (1878-1880)
Nos. 6 through 21 were all 2-6-0 "Mogul" type, built by the Baldwin Locomotive Works, Philadelphia, Penna., having 12 x 18" cylinders, 40" drivers, and an engine weight of 39,000 pounds, as built, with tenders of the usual two-truck style, holding 1,200 gallons water and three (3) tons coal. Note that the system roster of. June 1st, 1885, shows this class with 42" drivers. These engines were of Baldwin class 8/18D, numbers 29-31, 35-41, and 46-51, in that order.
|6||4425||10 Sep 1878||20 Sep 1878||10||Dropped from equipment prior to January 1, 1891; scrapped||5|
|7||4429||12 Sep 1878||20 Sep 1878||11||To Utah & Nevada No. 4, probably in May 1888||6|
|8||4430||13 Sep 1878||20 Sep 1878||12||Dropped from equipment prior to January 1, 1891; scrapped||5|
|9||4555||8 Mar 1879||24 Mar 1879||13||Sold November 1887 to Salt Lake & Ft. Douglas RR., $3,500, No. 13, later No. 6||7|
|10||4558||12 Mar 1879||24 Mar 1879||14||Dropped from equipment prior to January 1, 1891; scrapped||5|
|11||4559||12 Mar 1879||24 Mar 1879||15||Dropped from equipment prior to January 1, 1891; scrapped||5|
|12||4561||14 Mar 1879||29 Mar 1879||16||Sold November 1887 to Salt Lake & Ft. Douglas RR., $2,500, No. 16, later No. 3||7|
|13||4562||14 Mar 1879||29 Mar 1879||17||Per September 1888 journal entry, sold for $2,000, believed to Salt Lake & Ft Douglas RR, No. 17, to No. 2 by November 15, 1888||8|
|14||4563||17 Mar 1879||29 Mar 1879||18||Sold June 1887 ($4,500) to Coeur d'Alene Ry & Nav. Co No. 3||9|
|15||4564||18 Mar 1879||29 Mar 1879||19||Sold June 1888 ($2,500) to Ilwaco Steam Nav. Co. (later Ilwaco Ry & Nav. Co.) No. 1; scrapped in about 1911.|
|16||4964||14 Feb 1880||27 Feb 1880||20||Dropped from equipment prior to January 1, 1891; scrapped||5|
|17||4966||14 Feb 1880||27 Feb 1880||21||Dropped from equipment prior to January 1, 1891; scrapped||5|
|18||4967||16 Feb 1880||27 Feb 1880||22||To Utah & Nevada No. 5, probably in April 1889||10|
|19||5121||28 May 1880||10 Jun 1880||23||Sold February 1888 ($3,000) to Portland & Willamette Valley Ry No. 1||11|
|20||5122||31 May 1880||10 Jun 1880||24||Per September 1888 journal entry, sold for $2,000, believed to Salt Lake & Ft Douglas RR, No. 8 or 9||8|
|21||5129||2 Jun 1880||10 Jun 1880||25||Per September 1888 journal entry, sold for $2,000, believed to Salt Lake & Ft Douglas RR, No. 9 or 8||8|
(Go to Notes)
- C/N: Builder construction number, or 'shop number'
- Date of trial: On Baldwin locomotives, this is the date given in the 'Register of Engines Made,' and is the date of the trial in steam of the new locomotive, ordinarily about a week or ten days prior to shipment.
Utah & Northern Railway (September 1880)
Summit County Railroad Nos. 1 and 2, both 2-6-0 "Mogul" types built by the Baldwin Locomotive Works, were in this month officially sold to the Utah & Northern Rwy.
|U&N 22||SC 1||Sep 1880||3113||27 Jan 1873||U&N 2||5|
|U&N 1 (2nd)||SC 2||Sep 1880||3663||11 Nov 1874||U&N 290||5, 12|
Summit County No. 1, was Baldwin class number 12D-16, had 11 x 16" cylinders, 36" drivers, and engine weight of 35,000 pounds, and became U & N No. 22, in 1885 renumbered to No. 2.
Summit County No. 2, was Baldwin class number 8/18D-11, had 12 x 16" cylinders, 36" drivers, and engine weight of 39,000 pounds, and became U & N 2nd No. 1 before being renumbered in 1885 to No. 290.
Both engines were dropped from equipment prior to January 1, 1891, and scrapped. See notes 5 and 12.
Utah & Northern Railway (1881 - 1882)
Utah & Northern Nos. 23 through 44 were yet more 2-6-0 "Mogul" engines, this lot built by the Brooks Locomotive Works, Dunkirk, New York, having 14 x 18" cylinders and 41" drivers as built; the system roster of June 1, 1885 shows this class as having 42" drivers, and an engine weight of 45,800 pounds, with tenders (of the usual two-truck style) holding 1,358 gallons of water and three (3) tons of coal.
|23||494||26 Jan 1881||80||Sold September 1889 ($2,500) to Oregon Improvement Co., as Colombia & Puget Sound Railroad 2nd No. 3.||13|
|24||495||26 Jan 1881||81||Dropped from equipment prior to January 1, 1891; scrapped||5|
|25||504||21 Feb 1881||82||Dropped from equipment prior to January 1, 1891; scrapped||5|
|26||505||21 Feb 1881||83||Declared vacant December 31, 1891; scrapped prior to January 1, 1891||14|
|27||514||18 Mar 1881||84||Noted still in service in April 1891 (Salt Lake Tribune, April 2, 1891); no journal entry found for disposition, gone by December 31, 1892||15|
|28||515||18 Mar 1881||85||Dropped from equipment prior to January 1, 1891; scrapped||5|
|29||520||1 Apr 1881||86||Declared vacant December 31, 1891 (at $6,700) (Pitchard says possibly to Sumpter Valley Ry. as their No. 1, in about April 1891; Tufford disagrees.)||16|
|30||529||30 Apr 1881||87||Dropped from equipment prior to January 1, 1891; scrapped||5|
|31||530||30 Apr 1881||88||On hand on December 31, 1890, no journal entry found for disposition, gone by December 31, 1892 (Pitchard says possibly to Sumpter Valley Ry. as their No. 3, in about January 1892; Tufford disagrees)||15|
|32||536||20 May 1881||89||Dropped from equipment prior to January 1, 1891; scrapped||5|
|33||554||27 Jul 1881||90||Dropped from equipment prior to January 1, 1891; scrapped||5|
|34||559||27 Jul 1881||91||To O.S.L. No. 3 in March 1897 (Pitchard says possibly to Sumpter Valley Ry. as their No. 12, in April 1903; Tufford disagrees.)|
|35||562||27 Jul 1881||92||Dropped from equipment prior to January 1, 1891; scrapped||5|
|36||566||11 Aug 1881||93||Dropped from equipment prior to January 1, 1891; scrapped||5|
|37||567||10 Aug 1881||94||Sold in November 1889 ($2,400) to Oregon Improvement Co., as Columbia & Puget Sound RR 2nd No. 4.||13|
|38||579||3 Sep 1881||95||Dropped from equipment prior to January 1, 1891; scrapped||5|
|39||587||30 Sep 1881||96||Noted still in service, per Salt Lake Tribune, August 19, 1891; no journal entry found for disposition, gone by December 31, 1892.||15|
|40||597||21 Oct 1881||97||Declared vacant December 31, 1891 (at $6,700) (Pitchard says possibly to Sumpter Valley Ry. as their No. 2, in about April 1891; Tufford disagrees.)||16|
|41||605||5 Nov 1881||98||Dropped from equipment prior to January 1, 1891; scrapped||5|
|42||626||15 Dec 1881||99||On hand on December 31, 1890, no journal entry found for disposition, gone by December 31, 1892||15|
|43||627||15 Dec 1881||100||Dropped from equipment prior to January 1, 1891; scrapped||5|
|44||826||14 Dec 1882||101||Ordered, built and delivered as Kansas Central No. 12, diverted upon receipt by parent Union Pacific to Utah & Northern No. 44. Transferred in May 1886 to Denver, South Park & Pacific No. 101, to replace DSP&P bogie No. 50, destroyed in wreck on U&N on May 12, 1886; to DL&G No. 101, in 1889; dropped from equipment on December 31, 1891, presumed scrapped.|
(Go to Notes)
Utah & Northern Railway (December 1882)
Nevada Central Ry. 2nd No. 3 transferred to Utah & Northern Ry. in December 1882, to be used 'temporarily' (according to the journal entry), but which was retained, and assigned U & N No. 45. The engine was an 0-4-4T "Bogie" built by the Mason Machine Works, Taunton, Mass., construction number 461, 1 Jul 1872, having 10x15" cylinders, 33" drivers, and an engine weight of 14 tons. In 1885, this engine was renumbered to U&N No. 296, with the system roster of June 1, 1885 showing the engine as having 11x15" cylinders, 34" drivers, and engine weight of 29,900 pounds As No. 296, this engine was declared vacant in May 1886, and scrapped. (For additional info, see note 17.)
Utah & Northern Railway (1886)
Early in the year, six 2-8-0 "Consolidated" locomotives were added to the roster, as Nos. 260-265. Built by the Rhode Island Locomotive Works, Providence, R.I., shop numbers 1592-1597, two each in February, March and April, 1886, and having 16 x 18" cylinders, 37" drivers and an engine weight of 70,118 lbs, with tenders holding 1,750 gallons water and 4-1/2 tons coal. Officially to OSL&UN 260-265 in August 1889, entire class sold in July 1890 to Denver, Leadville & Gunnison Ry. 260-265; in January 1899 to Colorado & Southern Ry. Nos. 57-62. C&S No. 60 (formerly U&N 263) donated to Idaho Springs, Colorado, for display in 1941 (and still there), the others having been scrapped, in the 1923-1938 period. (For more info on earlier history, see note 18.)
Notes for Utah Northern / Utah & Northern:
1 - "John W. Young" received at Ogden on 30 October 1871; first known operation in early April of 1872. Believed to be out of service and 'retired' not later than September 1880 (allowing Summit County Railroad No. 2 to be numbered as U&N 2nd No. 1); sold September 1881 to Barrows & Co., dealer working out of New York City; freight paid by U & N either to Council Bluffs in October 1881 (probably), or to Kansas City in November (less likely), for unknown later owner.
2 - Moguls No. 2 and No. 3 received 13 or 14 October 1872; placed in service on 18 October and 20 October 1872. Names as shown in roster are correct for these two engines, but nothing has surfaced to connect specific name with number - the assignment given here is merely conventional, and could possibly need to be reversed upon discovery of new information.
No. 2 was sold in September 1881, with No. 1, to Barrows & Co., with freight being paid by U&N to whichever of the two places (Council Bluffs or Kansas City) shown in note 1 that U&N No. 1 did not go to; and, as above, for unknown later owner.
No. 3 remains on the roster, renumbered to No. 297, dropped from equipment in May 1886, and apparently put to use as shop steam boiler at the South Butte shops of the U & N Ry - see Salt Lake Herald of 5 November 1885; if so, date of retirement as shop boiler is not known (however, it is known that the South Butte shops, together with all other U&N property between Butte and Garrison, Montana, were transferred to the Montana Union Ry. in mid-1886).
3 - "Logan" received at Ogden on or about 25 May 1874, trial run made on 27 May 1874; the engine "Franklin" received at Ogden on 7 July 1874. Renumbered from U&N Nos. 4 and 5 to 285 and 286 in 1885. Both noted as 'condemned' by March 1886, and dropped from equipment in May 1886, and subsequently scrapped.
4 - Tenders on the Grant locomotives were of two types - those on engines 1, 2 and 3 were of a six-wheel type, with one fixed wheelset at the front (having inside bearings), and one ordinary four-wheel truck at the rear, while the tenders on Nos. 4 and 5 were of the usual two-truck style. In the June 1, 1885 roster, the tender of the old No. 3 is shown as holding 584 gallons water and 2 tons coal; those of old No. 4 and No. 5 are shown as holding 900 gallons water and 2-1/2 tons of coal. The low capacity of No. 3's tender would seem to indicate it still had its original tender - at least above the frame.
5 - For the 19 locomotives shown herein as "dropped from equipment prior to January 1, 1891; scrapped," the relevant text of the journal entry, made under date of December 31, 1891, is here quoted:
For Value of scrap derived from locomotives dropped from the equipment prior to January 1, 1891, but not heretofore credited in the accounts now credited to the following accounts:
Oregon Short Line & Utah Northern Ry. Co.
19 Narrow Gauge Locomotives, Nos. 2, 10, 12, 14, 15, 20, 21, 81, 82, 85, 87, 89, 90, 92, 93, 95, 98, 100 and 290; at 250.00 each... $4,750.00
(This entry, crediting to the equipment account the value of scrap obtained from locomotives obviously scrapped, the scrap being valued at $250 per locomotive, ought to be sufficient to show that the U.P. did not sell complete U & N locomotives at the ridiculous price of $150, as is stated (without any source noted) in 'Rails, Sagebrush and Pine,' page 103 (and from that 'source' repeated in "American Narrow Gauge Railroads," page 112); indeed, there is no known sale of a U & N locomotive for anything less than $2,000.00).
6 - From subsequent events, it is clear that Utah & Northern No. 11 (construction number 4429) was sold (or in some manner transferred) to the Utah & Nevada line at some time prior to June 1, 1889; and from data in the roster of June 1, 1889, and the Annual Reports, it can be determined that Utah & Northern No. 11 left the Utah & Northern sometime in the year prior to May 31, 1888. An item in the Salt Lake Tribune of May 12, 1888 indicates the possibility that this transfer occurred just prior to the date of the item.
Such evidence as there is at hand indicates that the No. 11 became Utah & Nevada No. 4 (see Salt Lake Tribune, March 10, 1889), and in the merged OSL&UN scheme, regained its old number, 11, sometime in or after August 1889. In March 1897, No. 11 is one of three (3) former Utah & Northern narrow-gauge engines carried over from the OSL&UN into the new O.S.L.'s roster, where it becomes No. 2, and remains on the roster through the end of O.S.L. narrow gauge operations in mid-November of 1902.
In April of 1903, No. 2 is one of two former Utah & Northern engines (narrow gauge) then on the O.S.L. roster to be sold to the Sumpter Valley Railway, where it initially becomes Sumpter Valley No. 11 (yet again!), renumbered to No. 12 in about 1906, and out of service and retired by June 30, 1916, but not scrapped, as in 1936 or so the engine is donated to the Pocatello campus of Idaho State University, where it is displayed, as No. 11, for about six years. In 1942, at the pointed request of the Union Pacific, it is given over to the war-time scrap drive and cut up, in about November of 1942, the next-to-last surviving Utah & Northern Baldwin Mogul.
7 - Engines 13 and 16 are known from journal entry (and other documents) to have been sold to the Salt Lake & Ft. Douglas railroad, where they (eventually) became Nos. 6 and 3, respectively. Since No. 3 was by 1893 in use on a 2-8-0 locomotive, the Mogul had either been retired or renumbered, but probably retired account worn out and set aside, but 100 percent certain information is not presently available. SL&FD No. 6 just disappears sometime in the 1890s.
8 - A journal entry in September 1888 reads:
For Difference between value of U & N Locos & Cars sold, and amount received for the same:
|Loco #17||value, 6,600.00|
|Locos #24 & #25||value, 13,700.00|
|amount received||4 000.00||9,700.00|
(Cars omitted here, as not relevant.)
Since this entry is for the purpose of charging to the 'Equipment Suspense' account the difference between book value and amount of cash received, no mention of the purchaser was necessary, most regrettably; however, elsewhere we see an exchange of telegrams in mid-September of 1888, in which the Salt Lake & Ft. Douglas RR quite insistently demands that "our engine No. 17" (then in use on the Utah & Nevada line) be turned over to them (i.e., the SL&FtD), which apparently was done, as it, the No. 17, appears in a report of the condition of SL&FtD motive power dated September 17, 1888.
And that the other two engines in this journal entry, U&N Nos. 24 and 25, also went to the SL&FtD seems clear from a number of things - 1) that they are in the same entry; 2) at a price John W. Young is known to have paid for some of his locomotives; 3) there has to be at least four of these Baldwin Moguls going to the SL&FtD, and there are simply none others available - John W. himself states he bought 'half-a-dozen' of them, but actually just five. Yes, clear-cut, exact data would be better here, but given the very poor nature of surviving SL&FtD records, and the disappearance of the U.P. journal of 'Construction and Equipment' for this period, nothing better seems to be available at present.
Numbering of these three engines on the SL&FtD is not a matter of absolute certainty, but it appears that, from numerous reports of work being done on the engines, and similar incidental mentionings of engine numbers, the 24 and 25 became SL&FtD 8 and 9 (but which to which is unknown), and the 17 eventually became SL&FtD No. 2. A photo of what is clearly an ex-U&N Baldwin Mogul, taken by Crockwell at Park City in mid-1891, shows on the sandbox the number 8, but is at such an angle that the builder's plate is indecipherable.
As to the disposition of these three engines - again, definite information is not at hand, so far as the Nos. 8 and 9 are concerned, but such info that is available indicates that Nos. 8 and 9 were retired and set aside sometime in the mid-1890s, and eventually scrapped, possibly not until 1898-99, after the R.G.W. took over the Utah Central, successor to the S.L.& Ft. D. As for the No. 2, formerly Utah & Northern No. 17, a much greater degree of certainty is possible, since the engine still exists. In late 1898 to early 1899, the engine formerly known as U&N No. 17 was acquired by the Glasgow & Western Exploration Co., for their Golconda & Adelaide Ry., as "Pearl"; in about 1914 it became Nevada Short Line RR No. 1, and in 1924 passed to the Nevada Central RR as that road's No. 6, from which road it was bought in 1938 'for preservation,' and after many years of occasional usage and frequent storage, ended up in the hands of the California State Railroad Museum, where it is now on display, restored to its Nevada Short Line appearance.
9 - U&N No. 18 was the first locomotive sold, in apparent anticipation of the surplus of narrow gauge motive power to be brought about by the widening of the most important (and busiest) part of the Utah & Northern line in July of 1887; this engine also was the highest-priced sale, being some $1,000 more than the next highest sale price.
After about a half-dozen years on the Coeur d'Alene Ry & Nav Co, this engine was sold in February 1893 to a dealer in Philadelphia, James Richardson, who in turn sold it to the Houston, East & West Texas Ry (as No. 18?), after which it was owned by a variety of lumber companies, and was one of the first locomotives to pass through the hands of the Southern Iron & Equipment Co., in 1903 (see Colorado Rail Annual, No. 15, page 68).
10 - U&N No. 22 is one of five engines shown in the roster of June 1, 1889 as having been sold in the previous year (i.e., since June 1, 1888), and is probably the engine referred to in an item in the Salt Lake Tribune of April 30, 1889, noting the receipt by the Utah & Nevada of a 20-ton Baldwin 'passenger' engine from the Utah & Northern the night before (the other four 'sold' in the year ended June 1, 1889 are known sales).
The anomaly is that No. 22, which may have briefly been numbered 5 on the Utah & Nevada, appears to have become No. 21 on the OSL&UN, instead of reverting to its previous number, as apparently was the case with No. 11. Why? No idea, but whatever the facts, the OSL&UN is reported as having a No. 21, and this must be it.
In March of 1897, OSL&UN No. 21 becomes O.S.L. No. 1, one of the three (3) old Utah & Northern engines to pass to the O.S.L. It is retired, account worn out, in May of 1902, and presumed scrapped, since it is not known to have been sold with the other three O.S.L. engines to the Sumpter Valley Ry. in April 1903.
11 - After its relatively brief use as Portland & Willamette Valley No. 1, the old No. 23 sat idle for several years before being sold in 1906 to the Ilwaco Railway & Navigation Co., as their No. 4, later N-2 and finally 2. It was the last locomotive in service on the Ilwaco line, and was scrapped in April 1931, the boiler going to Astoria, Oregon.
12 - Summit County Railroad No. 2 was turned over to the Utah & Northern on March 26, 1878 - while the U & N was, in fact, still the Utah Northern Railroad. Eventually Summit County No. 2 became Utah & Northern 2nd No. 1 - but WHEN is the question, since U&N's first No. 1, the Grant 2-4-0, is on the property through September of 1881. It is known that Summit County No. 2 operated on the Utah & Northern for some time as SCRR No. 2, and was not officially transferred, apparently, to the U&N until September of 1880. It may be the case that the U&N's original No. 1, being after all a very light 2-4-0 with huge drivers, was out of service and 'retired' for some time prior to its actual sale in September of 1881, perhaps early enough to allow the renumbering of SCRR No. 2 to U&N 2nd No. 1 by September of 1880. Perhaps.
A precedent exists, on a U.P.-controlled narrow gauge line, for the denumbering of an old, light engine to make way for better power - on the Colorado Central Railroad, where the ancient and underpowered Souther 0-4-0 engines lost their numbers in 1874 and 1875, two of them remaining on the line as late as 1879, identified only by names applied when un-numbered. It's easy to see a similar occurrence on the Utah & Northern in 1880.
13 - Nos. 80 and 94, first of the Brooks Moguls to be sold off (all 21, Nos. 80-100, were still on the roster at June 1, 1889), went to the Oregon Improvement Company in September and November 1889, respectively, to become Columbia & Puget Sound Railroad 2nd No. 3 and 2nd No. 4, respectively. After their C&PS service, both of these engines were sold in 1898, becoming White Pass & Yukon Route Nos. 1 and 2 (but which became which is not entirely certain), and in 1899 were renumbered 51 and 52. Both were rebuilt extensively in 1900, with larger boilers and so forth, and, amazingly, both still exist, in varying states of decay, more or less on display, one at Skaguay, the other up the line somewhere (info at hand does not say where), but the 1900 rebuilding so largely altered their appearance that they do not much resemble the U&N Brooks Moguls except for being the same wheel arrangement.
14 - Journal entry, under date of December 31, 1891, reads:
For The following locomotives declared vacant and scrapped prior to January 1, 1891, and not heretofore charged out, chargeable to the following accounts:
Oregon Short Line & Utah Northern Ry. Co.:
1 OSL&UN Narrow Gauge locomotive, No. 83, $7,310.00
Note that even though this locomotive was in fact scrapped prior to January 1, 1891 (i.e., in 1890), because it had not then been struck from the accounts (that's what this entry does), it was still considered to be a locomotive 'on hand' at December 31, 1890, still carried in 'Equipment' at that date.
15 - There are four (4) of the Brooks Moguls for which no reliable disposition data have as yet been found; they are Nos. 84, 88, 96 and 99. Of this lot, it can be determined that one was dropped from equipment in 1891, and the other three dropped in 1892. Information at hand does not admit of a determination any more exact than that. (Possible disposition from Pitchard: Of this four, however, one goes to the Sumpter Valley Railway, almost certainly as that road's No. 3, around about January 1892 - possibly the No. 88, but nothing in the way of authentic documentation (so far) supports that guess. Another of these four engines may possibly be the origin of the Brooks Mogul on the Dolly Varden Mines operation, up in British Columbia; of the remaining two - not a clue, probably scrapped off the OSL&UN.)
16 - Nos. 86 and 97 were two of the six Moguls vacated by the OSL&UN in 1891 (three of the four others were OSL&UN Nos. 4, 5 and 83; sixth uncertain, see note 15, above). (Possible disposition from Pitchard: Based upon the nature of the entry vacating Nos. 86 and 97, the nature of the deal between the U.P. and the Oregon Lumber Company that created the Sumpter Valley Railway, and the lack of any other rationally viable options, that these two locomotives, Nos. 86 and 97, became Sumpter Valley Ry. Nos. 1 and 2, respectively, at some time in the period from April through July, 1891.)
17 - Utah & Northern Ry. No. 45 began life as a sort of 'demonstrator,' the first locomotive built by Mason on the single-boiler Fairlie design now so well-known as the 'Mason-Bogie' locomotive, built in late 1871 to early 1872 with no specific purchaser in mind, simply to demonstrate the principles involved. In April of 1872, it was sold (with an order for a twin) to the American Fork Railroad, to which it was shipped on July 1, 1872, being assigned shop number 461 at that time. It was numbered AFRR No. 1, and named "American Fork" as well. This locomotive being rather light, it was not exactly a stunning success on a railroad having grades of 296 feet per mile (nearly 6%), and was offered for sale before the commencement of the second season of operations on the American Fork RR; there were no immediate takers, and the locomotive was not sold until late in 1873, probably December, to the organizers of the Eureka & Palisade RR, in Nevada. After passing through the Central Pacific's shops at Carlin for what appears to have been a refurbishing and repainting, this engine appears on the Eureka & Palisade RR in early 1874 as that road's No. 1, named "Eureka." In 1875, upon the arrival of a new Baldwin 4-4-0 named 'Eureka' (which still exists), the Mason appears to have been renamed "Onward," possibly as a result of someone having seen one or another of the large number of pictures of a 'similar' engine so named, or perhaps as a result of having discovered that name under several layers of paint on the engine.
E. & P. No. 1, by whatever name, was sold in October 1879 to the then being built Nevada Central Ry., as its No. 2, named "Austin," which in mid-1881 is renumbered to 2nd No. 3, on account of the arrival of a new Mogul No. 2 from Baldwin; while it may have retained its name "Austin" as the new No. 3, it seems most frequently to be referred to as the "Dinkey" in this period. In December 1882, the "Dinkey" (No. 3) is transferred to the Utah & Northern, to be used 'temporarily' on that road, likely as a switcher; the freight charge of $132.93 is charged to the Utah & Northern's equipment account in December 1882, and the temporary transfer ends up as a permanent thing, and the engine is assigned No. 45 on the U&N. Renumbered in 1885 to number 296, it was vacated in May 1886, and scrapped.
Published reports to the contrary notwithstanding, this locomotive was NEVER rebuilt from its 0-4-4T 'bogie' configuration into anything else, never mind some sort of bizarre 0-4-2T, as is alleged in at least one place that comes to mind; it simply never happened. This engine was classed as a 4-Wheel on the U.P. in 1885 - just as the South Park 2-6-6T engines were classed as Mogul engines, the rear (or tank) truck not being considered in determining classification. The labeling of this engine as a 6-Wheel in the June 1, 1885 roster is simply a typographical error, as an examination of the roster, in connection with the Classes of Engines table in the Annual Report for 1885, will show.
(Ed. Note: Research by Garrie Tufford received on February 25, 2005 shows that engine 296 was in the "Odd" class, not "4 wheel" as stated above by Mr. Pitchard. Also, that the DSP&P 2-6-6T engines were Class D Mogul, while the 2-8-6T engines were Class E Consolidation.)
18 - The May 1886 journal entry for the purchase of these locomotives (Nos. 260-265) is, at first glance, rather odd, since it is for only one locomotive - for which the likely explanation is that with six new locomotives being added, five old ones (Nos. 101, 285, 286, 296 and 297) were struck off, leaving a net of one new locomotive to be entered in the accounts. If the paperwork behind the May 1886 journal entry were ever to come to light, it would show that six new locomotives added, at $6,850.00 each, less five old locomotives vacated, at $6,850.00 each, leaves one new locomotive, at $6,850.00, to be charged in May of 1886.
These locomotives, by far the largest on the Utah & Northern narrow gauge, were acquired primarily for the Butte-Anaconda ore trains,. but also with the haul over Monida Pass in mind; however, with the widening of the line from Butte to Garrison in July of 1886 (and its transfer to the Montana Union), the primary use of these engines became the Monida Pass work. Then, with the widening of the line north of Pocatello in July of 1887, little use for these engines remained on the bit of line still narrow gauge, and most (if not all) of these engines soon found their way to the South Park line in Colorado, to which road the entire class, all six of them, were transferred officially in July 1890.
Utah Western Railway (1874-1881)
|1||Oquirrh||2-6-0||Brooks||167||24 Jun 1873||11x16"||36"||36,000||1||4|
|2||Edward Hunter||2-6-0||Brooks||227||1 Apr 1875||11x16"||36"||36,000||2||5|
|3||Jonathan||4-4-0||Baldwin||4982||27 Feb 1880||12x16"||44"||36,000||3||285|
Notes and Remarks:
No. 1: built for Salt Lake, Sevier Valley & Pioche Railroad No. 2, 'Kate Connor,' at a cost of $8,500.00; received in Salt Lake City on July 7, 1873. SLSV&P project failed, engine not paid for (nor much else!), assets, few that there were, and certain liabilities assumed by Utah Western Ry. in mid-June 1874 - the engine settled for at $6,000 in cash and $4,000 in stock of the Utah Western Railway. Slight alterations made to the original ornate paint scheme, i.e., change of initials on ribbons on tender, name on cab, and number on front plate and sand box. First operation of the locomotive (it never having been run by the SLSV&P) appears to have been on November 18, 1874.
No. 2: built new for the Utah Western Ry., received in Salt Lake City on May 6, 1875. Cost unknown, freight charges of $1,187.05 paid by John W. Young on May 20, 1875. Dimensionally the same as No. 1, but much plainer in appearance.
No. 3: built new for the U.W.Ry, a sort of hybrid, as a normal 8/16C locomotive (this engine being Baldwin class 8/16C-31) should have 11" cylinders. Engine received in Salt Lake City on April 5, 1880; it had been ordered on December 6, 1879, and cost $6,100.00, plus freight and so forth. This engine was of somewhat unusual appearance, as steam dome was just behind the stack, sand box about in the middle, and the bell just ahead of the cab.
The names of the engines:
"Oquirrh" - an Indian word, meaning something like 'tree-covered' and by the Indians used as the name of the ridge of mountains running south from the lower end of the Great Salt Lake - and still known as the Oquirrh Mountains.
"Edward Hunter" - at that time (1875), the Presiding Bishop of the Mormon Church, and a friend and associate of John W. Young in several enterprises in and around Salt Lake City.
"Jonathan" - per item in the Salt Lake Tribune of April 20, 1880, an engineer on the Utah Western at that time; last name not given.
Utah & Nevada Railway (1881-1889)
The above three locomotives became Utah & Nevada Nos. 1 to 3 upon the reorganization of the Utah Western Ry. as the Utah & Nevada Ry. in 1881; while they retained their U.W. numbers, it is not clear that they retained the names shown above - or any others.
To these three, the Utah & Nevada eventually added two locomotives from the Utah & Northern, both Baldwin Moguls, formerly Utah & Northern No. 11, added to the Utah & Nevada roster as No. 4 in 1888, and Utah & Northern No. 22, to Utah & Nevada No. 5 in 1889. The U.P. system roster of June 1, 1889 shows this class of engine as having 12" x 18" cylinders, 42" drivers, and an engine weight of 39,000 pounds.
The former Utah & Northern No. 11, which became Utah & Nevada No. 4, was Baldwin construction number 4429, 12 Sep 1878, whereas the former No. 22, now No. 5, was construction number 4967, 16 Feb 1880.
The reason for the Utah & Nevada adding these engines was the significant increase in summer passenger traffic as a result of the opening of the Garfield Beach resort by the Union Pacific in June of 1887, which was the largest and most popular resort on the lake until the opening of the Saltair resort a few years later.
Upon passing to the OSL&UN in 1889, Utah & Nevada engines 4 and 5 became OSL&UN numbers 11 and 21, respectively. No explanation is at hand for the apparent anomaly evident in the fact that while former Utah & Northern No. 11, lately Utah & Nevada No. 4, returns to No. 11 on the OSL&UN, the former Utah & Northern No. 22, lately Utah & Nevada No. 5, does not return to No. 22 on the OSL&UN, but instead becomes No. 21, as is well attested in several newspaper items of the time.
Oregon Short Line & Utah Northern Railway (1889 - 1897)
With the creation of the OSL&UN, effective August 1, 1889, the rosters of the Utah & Nevada and of the Utah & Northern railways, narrow gauge, are merged into one 'unified' whole, comprised of the five locomotives of the Utah & Nevada Ry., and the 35 locomotives of the Utah & Northern actually 'on hand' at that date, and as shown in the U.P. system roster of June 1, 1889. The 35 former Utah & Northern engines all retain their U&N numbers as OSL&UN engines, but the five Utah & Nevada engines are renumbered (eventually) from Utah & Nevada Ry. Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 to OSL&UN Ry Nos. 4, 5, 285, 11 and 21, respectively. We say 'eventually,' because of this item in the Salt Lake Tribune of May 15, 1890: "The Utah & Nevada engines are also being given Union Pacific numbers." If, as this item indicates, the five engines of the Utah & Nevada line were not actually renumbered until mid-1890, then this may offer an explanation for the apparent problem of Utah & Northern No. 21 still being in official existence at date of merger, but apparently gone by December 31, 1889, and which would interfere with renumbering the Utah & Nevada engine to No. 21 - if the Utah and Northern No. 21 were still in official existence at the time that the Utah & Nevada engine were to be renumbered 21.
Part of the problem is that quite a number of locomotives were dropped from the equipment in 1889, which are not identified in any journal entry at that time - from the Annual Report at December 31, 1889, we see that the OSL&UN had 31 narrow-gauge engines at that date, and, that had the OSL&UN existed at December 31, 1888, it would have had at that date some 44 narrow gauge locomotives, a decline therefore of 13 locomotives in the year 1889. These 13 are all former Utah & Northern engines, since the five former Utah & Nevada engines can all be accounted for into 1891, and, incidentally, these 13 engines would all be Moguls, since all the non-Mogul power will survive into 1890, at least.
The Annual Report at December 31, 1888 shows that at that date the Utah & Northern Ry. had 40 narrow-gauge engines; which, subtracted from the 44 engines the OSL&UN would have had, had it existed at that date, leaves one with the inescapable conclusion that the Utah & Nevada Ry. had four locomotives - at date of December 31, 1888, which is in agreement with the above, the former Utah & Northern No. 22 being added as No. 5 in 1889 (probably in April of that year). The 40 Utah & Northern locomotives officially 'on hand' at December 31, 1888 will be the same as the 40 locomotives shown in the U.P. system roster of June 1, 1889, which shows 35 locomotives as officially in existence, and another five (5) as "Sold, but carried in Equipment" (i.e., gone, but not yet struck from the accounts). The 35 engines were: two former Summit County RR engines, U&N Nos. 2 and 290; six Baldwin Moguls, U&N Nos. 10, 12, 14, 15, 20 and 21; the entire class of Brooks Moguls, 21 in all, Nos. 80 through 100, inclusive; and the six 'Consolidated' (2-8-0) engines, Nos. 260-265. The five engines "Sold, but carried in Equipment" were all Baldwin Moguls, Nos. 17, 19, 22, 24 and 25.
By December 31, 1889, the five shown at June 1, 1889 as "Sold, but carried in Equipment" were finally struck from accounts, as well as nine other locomotives, two of which were Brooks Moguls 80 and 94, sold in later-1889 to the Oregon Improvement Company and appearing in late 1889 and early 1890 on the Columbia & Puget Sound RR. (Remember that one of the five shown as "Sold" at June 1, 1889 was transferred to the Utah and Nevada, so the numbers above are correct, 14 gone plus one 're-acquired' equals 13 gone for good by December 31, 1889.) Of the other seven removed in 1889; a journal entry does exist - at the end of 1891, and includes engines dropped from the equipment and scrapped in 1890 as well as 1889, without differentiation, making it quite difficult to determine exactly what engines were dropped in 1889, and what engines remain as the 'on-hand' roster at December 31, 1889.
However, the Annual Report at December 31, 1890 shows that the OSL&UN had at that date 13 narrow gauge locomotives as officially on hand, and that roster can be identified and reconstructed. From the indicated 44 locomotives on hand (officially) had the OSL&UN existed at December 31, 1888, through the 31 locomotives at December 31, 1889, to the 13 locomotives at December 31, 1890, the OSL&UN lost some 31 narrow-gauge locomotives, all of which were former Utah & Northern engines, as again we will note that the former Utah & Nevada engines are all accounted for into 1891. The 31 locomotives dropped from equipment in 1889-1890 were as follows:
|1||No. 19 Baldwin Mogul, sold to Ilwaco Steam Navigation Co./Ilwaco Railway & Navigation Co. No. 1, June 1888|
|3||Nos. 17, 24 and 25, sold in about September 1888, believed to Salt Lake & Ft. Douglas RR|
|2||Nos. 80 and 94, sold to Oregon Improvement Co, September and November 1889, to C&PS RR|
|6||Nos. 260-265, sold to Denver, Leadville & Gunnison, July 1890|
|19||Numbers as follows, all dropped from equipment and scrapped prior to January 1st, 1891 (i.e., in 1889 and 1890):|
|2||Nos. 2 and 290, the former Summit County engines|
|6||Nos. 10, 12, 14, 15, 20 and 21, Baldwin Moguls|
|11||Nos. 81, 82, 85, 87, 89, 90, 92, 93, 95, 98 and 100, Brooks Moguls|
Which left 13 locomotives on the roster, 12 Moguls and one 8-Wheel, or 4-4-0 type, Nos. 4, 5, 11, 21, 83, 84, 86, 88, 91, 96, 97, 99, and 285, which last was the 4-4-0, formerly Utah Western/Utah & Nevada No. 3; OSL&UN Nos. 4 and 5 had been Utah Western/Utah & Nevada Nos. 1 and 2; OSL&UN Nos. 11 and 21 had been Utah & Nevada Nos. 4 and 5; the remaining eight engines had all been Utah & Northern, with the same numbers.
(ed. note: The number 21 appears on both of the above lists; either it was scrapped before 1891, or it remained operational to become OSL 1 in 1897 and scrapped in 1902. If scrapped before 1891, that leaves the question as to where OSL 1 came from in 1897, but newspaper accounts from 1897 show that a number 21 became OSL number 1. More research is needed...)
In 1891, another six locomotives are dropped from the equipment; and in 1892, four more locomotives are dropped, leaving, at December 31, 1892, three (3) narrow-gauge locomotives on the OSL&UN, which (from later information) are assumed to be Moguls 11 and 21, Baldwin, and Mogul 91, Brooks. Journal entries in December of 1891 identify five of the six vacated in 1891 as numbers 4, 5, 83, 86 and 97; the sixth clearly must come from the remaining four Brooks Moguls, Nos. 84, 88, 96 and 99, and the other three (3) being vacated in 1892, together with the lone 4-4-0, which from an analysis of the 'classes of locomotives' tables, can be shown to have been dropped from equipment in 1892.
The OSL&UN shows a total of three (3) narrow-gauge locomotives in four consecutive Annual Reports, those for the years ending December 31, 1892 through December 31, 1895; that for December 31, 1896 shows the OSL&UN with but two narrow-gauge locomotives, with the note that they had sold one in the year 1896, but of course it does not say to whom the engine was sold. Of this anomaly, more in a moment or two.
First, we wish to take up the dispositions of some of the engines dropped from the equipment in 1889 through 1892. While it is not possible, with the information at hand to exactly identify all the engines dropped in 1889, some educated guessing is possible, using what information is at hand. Having previously shown that 14 engines left the Utah & Northern in 1889, with one returning via the Utah & Nevada, and that six of the 13 entirely gone were Brooks Moguls 80 and 94, and Baldwin Moguls 17, 19, 24 and 25, it remains to take a stab at the identity of the remaining seven engines vacated in 1889. Obviously, these seven must be included in the 31 engines dropped in 1889-1890, and just as clearly, these seven must be included in the 19 engines dropped from equipment and scrapped prior to January 1, 1891. So far, so good.
Another journal entry, prior to that one for the 19 engines dropped from equipment and scrapped, notes three engines, Nos. 2, 14 and 15, as 'ready to be scrapped' at date of consolidation of the OSL&UN, which was of course August 1, 1889; so one might well suppose that these were part of the lot vacated by the end of 1889.
Further, it will be remembered that the last sale of any of the Baldwin Moguls was of No. 22, some time prior to June 1, 1889 (probably April), and that all of the Baldwin Moguls still on the roster at June 1, 1889 will eventually be scrapped in any case, so that one gets the idea that the seven other engines dropped in 1889 are No. 2, one of the former Summit County engines, and the six remaining Baldwin Moguls, Nos. 10, 12, 14, 15 20 and 21. To further support this speculation, one notes, at June 1, 1889, the presence of all 21 of the Brooks Moguls, Nos. 80 through 100, none as yet having been sold, or scrapped (so far as is known). Evidently, the Brooks Moguls were held in higher esteem than the Baldwin Moguls; certainly, the Brooks engines were somewhat heavier and more powerful, with slightly greater water capacity in the tender. And, we note that of the 16 Baldwin Moguls, 10 were sold off, and the final six scrapped, apparently before any of the Brooks engines were sold or otherwise disposed of. It may be that the selling off of locomotives had some connection with the widening of the line, too, as it will be noted that the selling of the Baldwin engines began essentially concurrent with the widening of the larger part of the Utah & Northern (the line north of Pocatello), leaving the Brooks engines to be used on the remnant of line between Ogden and Pocatello - which was widened in mid- to late-1890, leaving only the Garfield Beach line in narrow gauge, which for most of the year could do quite well with a couple of engines.
In any event, the guess is that the 13 engines gone by the end of 1889 were the six for which we have some sort of proof - Nos. 17, 19, 24, 25,80 and 94 - and seven presumed gone by the end of the year - Nos. 2, 10, 12, 14, 15, 20 and 21. If that is the correct arrangement, then the balance of 12 engines in the journal entry for the 19 engines scrapped prior to January 1, 1891 - Nos. 81, 82, 85, 87, 89, 90, 92, 93, 95, 98 and 100, all Brooks Moguls, and No. 290, the other former Summit County engine - were dropped from equipment in 1890, part of the 18 locomotives dropped that year, the other six being the 2-8-0 engines, Nos. 260-265, transferred to the Denver, Leadville and Gunnison Ry., a.k.a. the South Park line, in July of 1890.
Which brings us to 1891, and the six engines dropped from equipment in that year. Five of these six are known, from journal entries, to be OSL&UN Nos. 4, 5, 83, 86 and 97; the sixth engine is not identified by journal entry, and remains, at this writing, uncertain. That it would have to be one of a group of four not otherwise accounted for, Nos. 84, 88, 96 and 99, is noted elsewhere. The other three of this group of four were dropped from equipment in 1892 (as was the lone 4-4-0, No. 285). Of the five known dropped engines in 1891, one, No. 83, is certain to have been scrapped, the journal entry stating that it was scrapped prior to January 1, 1891, but not removed from the accounts until the date of the entry, in December 1891. The other four known locomotives dropped from equipment, Nos. 4, 5, 86 and 97, occur in the same entry, in December 1891, and are for the vacating of the engines, without specifically saying they were scrapped; Nos. 4 and 5 are declared vacant at a value of $1,500 each, and Nos. 86 and 97 are declared vacant at a value of $6,700 each, which for these last two is rather close to original cost of $6,738.40 (not including freight and set-up). No journal entries have as yet come to light for the vacating of any of the four engines dropped in 1892.
Since 1891 and 1892 cannot at this time be considered entirely separately, they will be considered together. The 10 locomotives dropped in this two-year period, six in 1891 and four in 1892, were Nos. 4, 5, 83, 84, 86, 88, 96, 97, 99 and 285 - two ancient, small Brooks Moguls, originally Utah Western Nos. 1 and 2; seven former Utah & Northern Brooks Moguls, and the lone 4-4-0, No. 285, formerly Utah Western and Utah & Nevada No. 3. Of these 10 locomotives, four went to the Sumpter Valley Ry., three of the Brooks Moguls, as Sumpter Valley Nos. 1, 2 and 3, and the 4-4-0, as Sumpter Valley No. 4; three others, ancient Moguls 4 and 5 and newer No. 83, were certainly scrapped; and as to the remaining three former Utah & Northern Brooks Moguls - it is uncertain if they were sold or scrapped. The Dolley Varden Mines operation, in British Columbia, had a Brooks Mogul that appears to have been essentially identical to the type on the Utah & Northern - but there is one engine identical to the Utah & Northern Brooks Moguls dropped from equipment on the Kansas Central (No. 104) in 1891, whose disposition remains unknown.
There is nothing known which specifies, exactly, the three Brooks Moguls, formerly Utah & Northern, which became Sumpter Valley Ry. Nos. 1, 2 and 3, so a process of elimination must be used, starting with the field of seven known to have been dropped in 1891-92, i.e., Nos. 83, 84, 86, 88, 96, 97 and 99. This field can be reduced to six at once, since No. 83 is certain to have been scrapped. To further reduce the field, it is necessary to know when the Sumpter Valley Ry. got its locomotives - at least on paper - and it is useful to know the arrangement whereby the Sumpter Valley acquired these engines (and almost everything else) from the Union Pacific, owners of the OSL&UN. Put briefly, the Sumpter Valley Ry. was created by the owners of the Oregon Lumber Company to build a railroad to tap its lumber properties in the Sumpter Valley, and deliver logs to its mill at Baker City, Oregon. To get the necessary materials with which to actually build the railroad, the proposition was put to the Union Pacific that the U.P. turn over to the Sumpter Valley Ry. some 25 miles of rail, two locomotives, and a number of cars, in exchange for some thousands of dollars in Sumpter Valley bonds; as security, of a sort, U.P. was also to contract with the Oregon Lumber Company for a rather large number of ties to be delivered to the U.P. annually for some five years (renewable for an additional five years), payment for which was to be made in coupons of the Sumpter Valley Ry. bonds. Sometime in 1890, the deal was agreed to, and the Union Pacific turned over to the Sumpter Valley Ry. some 25 miles of rail recently taken up from the Utah & Northern widening, two Brooks Moguls from the Utah & Northern, one coach and one baggage and mail car, as well as an initial lot of five box and 10 flat cars, also all from the Utah & Northern's old (and surplus) equipment. As shown in the U.P.'s 'Register of Bills Collectible';, in April, May and June, 1891, some $59,475.13 in bills against the Sumpter Valley Ry. are registered, against which the Union Pacific in July 1891 receives $50,000 in Sumpter Valley bonds, of $1,000 each, numbered one through 50. Of the Bills, by far the largest is bill No. A-14752, registered in April, for $41,455.98; the second largest, No. A-14469, for $8,774.33, registered in May; and the third largest, for $4,100.00, was registered in June of 1891 (the several other bills shown were, obviously, for rather trivial amounts, none over a mere thousand dollars or so). Other bills, again for relatively trivial amounts, show up through the balance of 1891, and in November 1891 an additional $8,000 in bonds is turned over to the Union Pacific, and sometime in 1892 (apparently), a final $6,000 in S.V. bonds are turned over to the U.P., making some $64,000 total.
However, it seems clear that the locomotives and rolling stock were billed in the only one of the bills large enough to contain such an expense, which was the first one, in April of 1891. The bills have not come to light, nor any correspondence showing the 'fair cash valuation' at which the U.P. traded locos and cars for ties, but using the prices paid for other sales elsewhere of old Utah & Northern locos and cars, the trade price to the S.V. of two locomotives, one coach, one baggage and mail car, five box cars and 10 flat cars would have to be something like $9,500 - probably more, since it was a trade.
So, we have a probable date of April, 1891, for the transfer (at least on paper) of two locomotives, etc., to the Sumpter Valley Railway - April of 1891 as the earliest date, let's say, and mid-July as the latest possible date, as by that time several miles of the track had been laid, and trains (for construction) were being run (log trains began running about the end of July). With the determination of when the engines were traded to the S.V., it is possible to further narrow the field of possibilities by removing the No. 96, known to have been in a minor wreck in Salt Lake City in August of 1891, leaving five possibilities for S.V. Nos. 1 and 2: Nos. 84, 86, 88, 97 and 99. No. 84 had its own minor wreck in April of 1891, and so is probably not in the running for Sumpter Valley Nos. 1 or 2, but as it is right on the edge, it is not ruled out absolutely - yet.
At this point, it is necessary to turn to another consideration - the vacating of locomotives and how it was done. It is reasonable to assume that if one engine for the Sumpter Valley were dropped from the equipment in 1891, the other would be also; and that it has to have been done in 1891 is evident from the numbers dropped in 1891 and 1892, numbers that will not work out correctly otherwise. Since there is but one unknown engine dropped in 1891, it can be assumed that it is not the source of either Sumpter Valley Nos. 1 or 2; of the five known dropped in 1891 (Nos. 4, 5, 83, 86 and 97), Nos. 4 and 5 can be eliminated at once, as being entirely the wrong sort of engine, and No. 83 can be dropped from consideration, too, since it is known to have been scrapped in 1890. Therefore, of the five possibilities for the 1891 origin of S.V. Nos. 1 and 2, being old Utah & Northern Nos. 84, 86, 88, 97 and 99, which two constitute the only possible pair of engines vacated (and not scrapped) in 1891? Obviously, Nos. 86 and 97, the two declared vacant in a December 1891 journal entry, at a value of $6,700 each; this same journal entry just happens to include one coach, vacated at a value of $5,517.95, one baggage and express car, vacated at a value of $1,700, and more than enough box and flat cars to cover the initial lot traded to the Sumpter Valley Ry. From photographs, it is evident that the one coach with which the S.V. began operations (and its only coach for some years), was one of the four such cars on the Utah & Northern that had been built by the Union Pacific in 1883 and 1884; the system roster of June 1, 1885 shows that the two such cars built in 1884 cost $5,517.97 each, which seems quite close enough to the abovementioned $5,517.95 from the journal entry to declare a 'match.' Originally U&N cars 20 and 21, they were renumbered in 1885 to 142 and 143.
If the equipment traded to the Sumpter Valley Ry. was billed at anything like the values at which it was written off and declared vacant in the referenced journal entry, as above, with box cars vacated at $396.45 and flat cars at $398.13, each, average, then the 'value' of the stuff traded to the Sumpter Valley Ry. would be somewhere around $26,000; but it is worth noting that at June 30, 1893, the Sumpter Valley Ry. shows its cost of equipment as $23,050.00 - $12,000 for four locomotives, $2000 for one passenger car, $1,600 for one baggage, express and postal car, $5,200 for 52 flat cars, $1,500 for 10 box cars, and $250 for one caboose (all these figures remain the same through June 30, 1896).
So much for 1891, so far as it can presently be done. If it seems that an inordinate amount of space has been given over to discussing the origins of Sumpter Valley Ry. Nos. 1 and 2, perhaps you are right; but, from this side of the typewriter, it is thought to be important, primarily to get as correct a roster of the Utah & Northern as possible, and because of the rather large amount of misinformation regarding early Sumpter Valley Ry. motive power that seems to be in circulation at the present time.
In 1892, four locomotives were dropped from the equipment, being three of the Brooks Moguls, from the group of four, Nos. 84, 88, 96 and 99 (the one not dropped in 1892 having been dropped in 1891, of course), as well as the odd 4-4-0, No. 285. As it happens, both 84 and 96 suffered minor wrecks in 1891, but whether these events were of such a nature as to bring about the scrapping of the engines is not known. One of this group of four (not, however, the one dropped in 1891) went to the Sumpter Valley Ry. in early 1892; a letter of January 24, 1892, from Charles W. Nibley, then vice-president of the S. V. Ry., to the board of the Oregon Lumber Co. (and, by the by, also effectively the board of the S. V.), includes this:;" ...I suggest that when the U. P. is settled with in bonds for its account, and also, the payment of the additional Engine we have ordered, that whatever bonds are remaining be paid over to me." At that date, then, it appears that the 'additional Engine' has not been received, just ordered, and that it is to be paid for in bonds, as were the first two. Nothing whatever in the way of 'official' information, has so far come to light to indicate which of the four Brooks Moguls, 84, 88, 96 or 99, is the origin of S. V. No. 3, but at least two quite secondary sources (Myrick, 'Railroads of Nevada and Eastern California,' Vol. II, pg. 889; Ferrell, 'Rails, Sagebrush and Pine,' pg. 104-105) state that No. 88 went to the Sumpter Valley Ry., the last-named 'source' stating that it went to the S.V. in 1892 - but neither, of course, provides a verifiable reference for their statements. That being the case, and since it is unknown whether the other three were sold or scrapped, we regard it as necessary to say that possibly No. 88 is the origin of S.V.Ry. No. 3, and the disposition of the other three, so far as the OSL&UN is concerned, is unknown - they were on hand at December 31, 1890, but are gone by December 31, 1892.
No. 285, a 4-4-0, or '8-Wheel';, however, is another matter, as we have a rather good photograph (undated, of course) of it, still as the 285, at the South Baker sawmill of the Oregon Lumber Company (see Ferrell, pg. 17, and also appears in Shaw, et al., 'Oil Lamps and Iron Ponies'. The 4-4-0 was still in OSL&UN 'Engine Equipment' at December 31, 1891; it had not yet been acquired by the Sumpter Valley at June 30, 1892; and was not in OSL&UN engine equipment at December 31, 1892 - so we conclude that it was acquired by the S. V. sometime in the last half of 1892; it is, in any event, carried in S. V. equipment by June 30, 1893. Eventually (and we assume sooner rather than later) it became S. V. Ry. No. 4, in about 1906 renumbered as S.V. No. 15, and in June 1912 traded to the Eureka-Nevada Ry., initially as that road's No. 15, later assigned to another S. V., the Surprise Valley RR, a project being promoted by Mr. Sexton, of the E-N Ry. From that, the later history of this engine seems to be uncertain; eventually scrapped, certainly, but when is not clear.
And so, we arrive at December 31, 1892, and the OSL&UN Ry having but three narrow gauge locomotives, from later information thought to be two Baldwin Moguls, OSL&UN Nos. 11 and 21, and one Brooks Mogul, No. 91, all of course former Utah & Northern engines. These three remain through the Annual Report of December 31, 1895; the Annual Report of December 31, 1896 shows the OSL&UN with but two narrow gauge engines, both Moguls of course, and has the note that "...there have occurred two vacancies through the sale of Kansas Central and Oregon Short Line & Utah Northern narrow gauge engines." Which OSL&UN engine was sold is of course not identified, nor is the purchaser; but the O.S.L., successor to the OSL&UN at March 16, 1897, notes in their table of engines in the June 30, 1900 annual report that they began at March 16, 1897 with two narrow gauge Mogul engines having 12x18" cylinders - clearly, two Baldwin Moguls, the 14x18" Brooks not being listed. So, sometime in 1896, it appears that the lone surviving Brooks Mogul was sold - but why, and to whom, is entirely unknown, and the oddity is that it reappears on the O.S.L. almost immediately upon its takeover of the OSL&UN Ry.
Before moving on to the O.S.L. period, there are a few newspaper items, in addition to those already mentioned, during the OSL&UN period that may be of some interest to the reader hereof; we will arrange them chronologically, so please bear with the bit of duplication as regards the earlier-mentioned items.
Beginning with an item in the Salt Lake Tribune of May 15, 1890, which says "The Utah & Nevada engines are also being given Union Pacific numbers," as appears in an item in the Salt Lake Herald of July 31, 1890, noting that "Engine 21 on the Utah & Nevada road..." had suffered a bent or broken piston rod a day or two earlier somewhere out on the line. Several items in the early 1890s relate to the narrow gauge locomotives of the OSL&UN's Utah & Nevada district, as it was sometimes known. And, with the declining need for narrow-gauge equipment on the old Utah & Northern line, it was being sent down to the Garfield Beach line, as is noted in the Salt Lake Herald of April 12, 1890, and the Salt Lake Tribune of April 29 and July 11, 1890. Since it is at this time all OSL&UN stuff anyhow, nothing shows up in the financial records to show what was in use where. Happily, some information does come from the dailies, as in items occurring in both the Salt Lake Herald and the Tribune on the same date, April 2, 1891, showing that 'Utah & Nevada' engine No. 84 succeeded in knocking Utah Central engine No. 2 on its side (the narrow gauge U.C., lately the Salt Lake & Fort Douglas, et cetera); and again later that year, the same two papers have items under date of August 19, 1891, showing that "Engine No. 96, of the Utah & Nevada branch of the Union Pacific, was derailed and thrown on its side just as it was entering the yards yesterday," to quote the Herald, the number 96 appearing in both papers. Another 1891 item, appearing in the Tribune of May 13th, notes that the 'Utah & Nevada' has five engines in service, and will be adding three more - which the paper says will be two 10-wheel and one 8-wheel engines! Seems unlikely.
Parent Union Pacific brought in narrow-gauge equipment from other of its by-then widened subsidiaries, as the Tribune of June 29, 1892 shows us that "Engine 281 on the Garfield line is just from the Kansas Central,..." which road had been made standard gauge in 1890; and when the San Pete Valley road bought Kansas Central No. 106 in January 1894, it was apparently in Salt Lake City at the time, and was 'tested' on the Garfield Beach line on the 15th of that month, before being sent down to the S.P.V., per the Tribune of the 16th; the Herald of February 1st went so far as to refer to the engine sold to the S.P.V. as a 'Utah & Nevada' engine, which would certainly seem to indicate it had been in Salt Lake City for some time.
There is little mention of the Garfield Beach line in the papers in the mid-1890s; one supposes that the line followed its usual pattern in the off-season of one (sometimes two) trains a day over the line, with rather more business in the summer resort season, but even that suffered a decline, not only as a result of the so-called 'silver Panic of 1893' but also as a result of the opening of the Mormon-backed Saltair resort, in 1893 (June 8th, per Herald of that date), which had its own railroad, effectively, the standard-gauge Salt Lake & Los Angeles, also Mormon-backed, and which road and resort the faithful quite naturally patronized - in large numbers!
Regrettably, nothing seems to be in the papers that would assist in clearing up the one real curiosity in 1896--the apparent sale, per the annual reports, of the last of the old Utah & Northern Brooks Mogul engines, thought to be No. 91; whatever the case, wherever it went, it returns at the beginning of the O.S.L., as will be shown momentarily, but it would be interesting to know what went on here!
Which brings us to...
The Oregon Short Line Railroad (1897 - 1903, end of narow gauge operations)
As is apparent from the several annual reports (UP-OSL&UN, December 31, 1896; OSL, June 30, 1900 and June 30, 1901), the Oregon Short Line RR officially had just two narrow-gauge locomotives on its first day, March 16th, 1897, which the OSL reports show as being two Mogul engines having 12 x 18" cylinders - clearly, the two Baldwin Moguls, OSL&UN Nos. 11 and 21.
However, a third engine is apparently on the property, somehow, as this item from the Salt Lake Tribune of March 16, 1897, shows:
At the Salt Lake narrow gauge shops a number of old friends from the Oregon Short Line locomotives are being repaired and overhauled, to be ready for the summer traffic. They are the 21 and 11 of the Utah & Nevada, and the 91, the last of the Utah & Northern big narrow gauge boys. After they come out of the shops they will be 1, 2 and 3, respectively, and lettered 'Oregon Short Line,' which is the title chosen for cars and engines. One of the best engines lying at the Jordan spur will also be rebuilt for the Garfield run. The old K. C. engines have been sent back East.
So, apparently, the engine sold in 1896 didn't go too far away, since it is noted here, on the first day of the new OSL, as being the future No. 3; and, we have the first clue as to the origin of the future No. 4 - an engine then in storage at what is called the Jordan spur, apparently a storage track located where the railroad crossed what is still known as the Jordan River, tho' it is little more than a ditch. What other engines were then 'lying' at the Jordan spur makes for fascinating speculation, but no information on that is presently known.
The above also provides the renumbering from OSL&UN to OSL for these three locomotives, which is confirmed by the following item, from the Salt Lake Tribune of May 14, 1897:
Preparing for Lake Travel.
Garfield Rolling Stock being Repaired.
When the lake season opens this year the Oregon Short Line will have its narrow gauge equipment in excellent shape. All the excursion cars have been brought in and are being overhauled and repainted, with 'Oregon Short Line' in yellow letters across the upper side board. The coach 125 has come out of the shop as No. 15, and yesterday Oregon Short Line locomotive No. 1 was turned out, having been entirely overhauled and looking like a new engine. The old Utah Western No. 12 tank engine is being completely overhauled, and in a few weeks will be transformed into a service engine to be known as No. 4.
No. 3 and No. 11 were both in service yesterday, the latter having been ordered to the shops to be rebuilt and make its reappearance as No. 2. This makes four engines ready for the Garfield service, all of them being nearly as good as new. No. 1 made a trial run to Garfield yesterday, and behaved splendidly on the trip.
A month later, in the Tribune of June 13th, 1897, in an item headed "The Garfield Opening," we read: "Never before has the equipment on the railroad been in such good condition. The coaches, open cars and engines have all been overhauled, repainted and relettered, and the trains will be the first ones to be marked throughout, 'Oregon Short Line.' Engine No. 4 will be out of the shops July 1st. This will give four almost new engines to the Garfield line."
And so... the origins and technical details of numbers 1, 2 and 3 can be derived from the earlier parts of this story, but the No. 4 is a new arrival, so to speak, not having appeared heretofore. Additional information on this engine's past occurs in an item in the Salt Lake Tribune of April 17, 1899, one of several items over a period of time headed "Stories of the Rail," this one being "a trip of an hour along the local sidetracks..." The article under consideration here was actually illustrated, and included a sketch of a saddle-tank, lying on the ground, and quite clearly lettered 'Utah Western.' The paragraph relating to that picture notes that "when the Oregon Short Line terminal yards of the narrow gauge line were visited, the first relic located was an old semi-circular tank. It is the last remnant of the Utah Western, the road (John W.) Young organized in 1889 to build from the Salt Lake & Fort Douglas northwest to the lake. The tank is all that is left of Utah Western engine No. 4 (sic), which was a saddle-tank affair, that is, the tank shown in the picture covered the locomotive boiler, and a coal box was back of the cab. The boiler is now a part of the Oregon Short Line narrow gauge No. 2 (sic) running to Garfield, but passengers to that bathing resort four summers ago will perhaps remember the Utah Western saddle-tank, which, with other curiosities, stood on the side-track half-way between here and Garfield. The engine was an old one, and was bought by the Utah Western from a defunct Eastern narrow gauge road." The errors in numbers beside the point, as we know from the earlier item that the correct Utah Western number is 12, and the OSL number, for the 'boiler' (i.e., the engine minus saddle-tank and coal box, with tender added), is No. 4.
But, what was this saddle-tank affair? From the above, apparently an engine bought by John W. Young for his Utah Western (the second one) from some Eastern narrow gauge railroad, and quite probably the tank engine referred to in an item in the Salt Lake Tribune of April 27, 1890, noting the arrival for the 'new' Utah Central (i.e., the renamed Salt Lake & Ft. Douglas-Salt Lake & Eastern-Utah Western 'system' of J W Young's second narrow-gauge empire) of two passenger engines, one consolidation, and a "tank engine for shunting." The manner in which this engine went from Young's ownership to the O.S.L. is explained in a court case in the Third District Court, Territory of Utah, docket number 11819, filed May 4, 1893, titled Oregon Short Line & Utah Northern Ry. Co. vs. John W. Young, wherein we learn:
"...that heretofore on the fourth day of November, 1891, the said defendant was indebted to the said plaintiff as such carrier for freight money upon railroad iron and other freight hauled and transported by the said plaintiff for the said defendant, in the sum of $8,631.26.
"That being so indebted the said defendant on the fourth day of November, 1891, made and executed his chattel mortgage bearing date of that day, whereby, for the purpose of securing the payment of said indebtedness he conveyed to the plaintiff, its successors and assigns forever, two narrow gauge passenger coaches of the build or manufacture of J. G. Brill & Company of Philadelphia and marked respectively, 'Utah Western No. 16' and Utah Western No. 17' and also two narrow gauge locomotive engines of the Baldwin make or build, one being a consolidated engine marked 'Utah Western No. 11' and builder's number 5258, and the other being a saddle-tank switch engine marked 'Utah Western No. 12' and builder's number 5989.
"That at the time of the execution of said chattel mortgage the said property was, ever since has been, and now is in the possession of the plaintiff, situated upon the tracks of the said plaintiff in Salt Lake County, Utah Territory, and by the terms of said mortgage it was stipulated that the same should remain during the existence of said mortgage in the exclusive possession and control of said plaintiff, its successors and assigns.
"The OSL&UN seeks a judgment in its favor for the said sum of $8,631.26, together with interest thereon at eight per cent per annum from the fourth day of November, 1891, together with its costs and disbursements including two per cent on the total amount due on said indebtedness, as compensation and allowance for its attorneys..."
This complaint had been signed on April 22, 1893, tho' not filed until May 4th; on the back of it, written by hand, dated at Salt Lake City, May 2nd, 1893, appears this:
"I, the undersigned defendant herein, hereby waive the issue and service of summons herein, I also hereby waive time to plead, and to plead, answer or defend, and hereby consent that a decree for the foreclosure of said chattel mortgage be entered and the property therein mentioned be sold as prayed, but it is expressly understood that no personal judgment herein shall be taken against me for any deficiency which may remain after the sale of the said property and due application of the proceeds thereof. John W. Young, by LeGrand Young, agent and attorney in fact."
With which, the two engines named passed into the full and legal possession of the OSL&UN, BUT do not appear ever to have been added to the equipment of that road, just set aside out at the Jordan spur. Whatever happened to the 2-8-0 is not a matter of record, apparently, but the tank engine, of course, ends up as O.S.L. No. 4, the subject presently under discussion. Consultation with the Baldwin 'Register of Engines Made' shows that construction number 5989 was class 6/22D-14, which makes it an 0-6-0T, date of trial 6 Jan 1882, having 14x18" cylinders and 36" drivers, built as Connotton Valley Ry. No. 16, "Wharf Rat." Other information shows that it was one of five locomotives bought by John W. Young, via Benjamin Watson and the New York Equipment Company, for his Salt Lake & Eastern and Utah Western projects, in 1889-1890. As can be seen from the foregoing, two of the five engines did not actually enter service in Johnny W.'s second empire, as a result of neglecting to pay the freight.
As rebuilt, as O.S.L. No. 4, this engine (obviously) lost the saddle-tank, as well as the rear coal bunker, and acquired a pilot truck, making it a 2-6-0, and a tender was added, one apparently from a scrapped Utah & Northern Brooks Mogul.
For the sake of convenience, herewith a roster of the O.S.L.'s four narrow gauge locomotives, all four of which were 2-6-0 'Mogul' engines:
|1||Baldwin||4967||16 Feb 1880||12x18"||42"||41,000||Utah & Northern No. 18, 1885 No. 22|
|2||Baldwin||4429||12 Sep 1878||12x18"||42"||39,000||Utah & Northern No. 7, 1885 No. 11|
|3||Brooks||559||27 Jul 1881||14x18"||42"||45,800||Utah & Northern No. 34, 1885 No. 91|
|4||Baldwin||5989||6 Jan 1882||14x18"||36"||42,300||Connotton Valley No. 16; 1890 Utah Western No. 12|
The engine weights shown above are taken from the roster of O.S.L. narrow gauge locomotives, as of September 1, 1899, appearing in "Oregon Short Line Railroad. List of Officers, Station Agents, Etc. No. 2. January 1, 1900." This very useful document was of course published by the railroad itself, tho' the printing of it was handled by the Salt Lake Tribune's job printing department.
As previously indicated, the O.S.L.'s annual reports of June 30, 1900 and June 30, 1901 show that the railroad began on March 16, 1897 with but two Moguls having 12 x 18" cylinders; the report for June 30, 1900 also shows that at June 30, 1899 the road had two Moguls of the 12x18" size, as well as two of 14x18" size. (There was no report at June 30, 1897, and as yet no useful copy of the June 30, 1898 report has come to hand.)
From here, it's all downhill to the end of narrow gauge operations in mid-November of 1902, the last revenue run apparently having been made on the 15th of that month. Prior to that, engine No. 1 had been retired and dropped from equipment in May of 1902, at a value of $985 and some cents. The remaining three locomotives were set aside after the end of operations, along with the remaining rolling stock, some 30 passenger cars, 152 freight cars and 8 outfit cars, according to the annual report of June 30, 1903, all of which was sold (apparently as yet another trade of wood for equipment) in April of 1903 to the Sumpter Valley Railway, where O.S.L. engines 2, 3 and 4 appear to have initially become S.V. numbers 11, 12 and 10, which in the December 1905 to early 1906 timeframe, were renumbered to 12, something in the Nos. 5 to 9 group, and 14, respectively. All were dropped from equipment by June 30, 1916; the No. 12 being set aside, and in 1936 donated to the Pocatello campus of the state university; the Brooks Mogul probably scrapped; and the old, rebuilt 0-6-0T, now an odd 2-6-0, a part of the June 1912 trade to the Eureka-Nevada Ry., though the engine did not leave Oregon and was sold by the E-N where it sat in May 1915, to an unknown purchaser. The engine donated to the Pocatello campus of Idaho State University went on display, in rather shabby condition, as No. 11, and examination of photographs show that this engine did, in fact, have builder's plates with the construction number of 4429 on them; the tender, as it weathered, showed a variety of numbers, including 11, 17 and 22, apparently, and eventually it weathered to the point of showing portions of the original 'Utah & Northern R. W.' lettering applied at Baldwin when built. Most regrettably, this engine was scrapped in late 1942, when the Union Pacific Railroad rather pointedly suggested it be donated to the war-time scrap drive. It also had on it what was apparently the last surviving original Congdon smokestack.
This concludes our discussion of the locomotives of the Utah & Northern Ry., and of the Utah & Nevada Ry., its predecessors and the succeeding Oregon Short Line and Utah Northern Ry., and the Oregon Short Line Railroad, covering the 32 years from 1871 through 1903, inclusive. We hope you, the reader, have found it useful and informative.
Journal entry: Something from the accounting books; here, usually the General Journal kept at the Boston general office, but sometimes from the other set, kept at Omaha.
C/N: Builder construction number, or 'shop number'
Date of trial: On Baldwin locomotives, this is the date given in the 'Register of Engines Made,' and is the date of the trial in steam of the new locomotive, ordinarily about a week or ten days prior to shipment.
Leased and Borrowed Locomotives on the Utah & Northern, et cetera ... a postscript.
A discussion of the abovementioned subject would not be entirely complete without some mention of the borrowed or leased locomotives used at various times on the Utah & Northern, and on the Utah & Nevada line.
It began, so far as is known, with the passing of the Utah Northern to Union Pacific control, not long after which the U.P. sent Summit County RR engine No. 2 over to be used on the Utah & Northern, and so from about March 26, 1878 until it was finally sold to the U&N in September of 1880, it was a borrowed engine, no money ever being paid over to the SCRR for its use, apparently.
During the U&N's construction period, and while that road was still getting their own new engines on a fairly regular basis, there does not seem to have been a great deal of borrowing of locomotives; however, once the U&N was completed, and a considerable traffic developed north from the O.S.L. interchange at Pocatello into the Montana mining regions around Butte, Anaconda and so forth, and with no new U&N power being bought, quite a large number of locomotives were borrowed from the Denver, South Park & Pacific RR. This started not later than, say, mid-1884, as the Salt Lake Tribune of August 19, 1884, notes this: "The Utah & Northern has just received three engines, Nos. 34, 36 and 38, from the Denver, South Park & Pacific. These engines are very large and powerful, and will render valuable service on the U.& N., which is crowded with business." The same paper, in its issue of December 25, 1884, notes that the U&N has gotten, over the preceding three months, some 23 engines and 300 cars from the South Park - and it still wasn't enough to handle the business!
At that date (i.e., December 1884), the Utah & Northern had its own 44 locomotives, as well as the Utah Eastern's 2-8-0 No. 2, leased at $3.00 per day since August 2, 1884, so if the reported 23 South Park locos were also on the line, the U&N had something like 68 locomotives in service!
From a variety of sources, to include railroad records, newspaper reports, and of course photographs, some 17 South Park engines can be identified on the Utah & Northern at one time or another; these engines were: Mason-bogie 2-6-6T Nos. 50, 51, 52, 53, 55, 56, and 57; Brooks Moguls Nos. 156, 158, 161, 163 and 165; Baldwin 2-8-0 engines Nos. 190, 192, 193 and 198; and Cooke 2-8-0 No. 206. Later, although it was officially transferred to DSP&P ownership in May of 1886, U&N Brooks Mogul No. 101 was still in use on the U&N in April of 1887, technically as a borrowed South Park locomotive.
It is worth noting that nothing appears in the equipment accounts of either the Utah & Northern or the South Park line to indicate that any money changed hands for the use of South Park equipment on the U&N; apparently, the U.P. felt that since it owned both roads outright, it could use whatever equipment it wanted, wherever it was most needed - and did so. However, as the Utah Eastern was not wholly-owned but just under the control of the U.P., rental had to be paid for that engine until whole ownership of the U.E. was obtained (in 1887), at a rate of $3.00 per day.
And one wonders what urgency of business led to the renting, in November of 1885, of five locomotives from the Denver & Rio Grande, two of which were apparently D&RG 4-6-0 engines 163 and 164, from November 9, 1885 to January 6, 1886 (see Colorado Railroad Museum's D&RG roster).
Imagine, then, the possibilities - engines of at least four different wheel arrangements - 2-6-0, 2-6-6T, 2-8-0, 4-6-0 - and from four different railroads - U&N, DSP&P, U.E., D&RG - all in the same place at the same time, say late November of 1885, at Pocatello or some such major point, maybe Eagle Rock - and nobody with a camera!
The need for borrowed or leased locomotives declined significantly with the widening of the Butte-to-Garrison portion of the U&N in July of 1886, and its transfer to the Montana Union Ry in August 1886; and the need disappeared altogether once the line north of Pocatello was widened in July of 1887, though it took a few months before all the borrowed South Park engines were returned to Colorado.
And one might think that the Utah & Nevada line, short as it was and not too busy prior to the opening of the Garfield Beach resort in June of 1887, would have had an adequate supply of motive power of its own, but the Salt Lake Tribune of July 13, 1886, notes this: "A Denver & South Park engine seems like a fish out of water in this section, but the Utah & Nevada road has borrowed one for awhile, and it is doing good work." Perhaps one day a photo of a Mason-bogie running along the shore of the Great Salt Lake with a few open excursion cars will turn up!
Other engines were used at busy times on the Utah & Nevada line, too, the Salt Lake Tribune of July 4, 1890, noting that "R. G. W. narrow gauge engines 30 and 31 were secured yesterday afternoon by the Union Pacific for use today on the Garfield Beach line." These two engines were 4-6-0 types, built by the New York Locomotive Works., four of them for the Denver Circle Railroad, which failed to pay the freight charges, so two were bought in December 1885 by the R.G.W.'s preceding company, the Denver & Rio Grande Western Ry.
Later in July of 1890, the Tribune notes, in its issue of 25 July, that engines (it doesn't otherwise indicate how many) from the Kansas Central were in use the day before (the Mormons' "Pioneer Day" hoopla) on the Garfield Beach line; the Kansas Central having been just widened, the U.P. is apparently doing its usual of moving wholly-owned motive power to wherever it is most needed.
The Tribune of June 29, 1892, notes that "Engine 281 on the Garfield line is just from the Kansas Central, where she was repaired and put into first class shape." Evidently, the Kansas Central being widened, the Kansas Central engines, what was left of them, were kept in Salt Lake City; one of them was sold in 1894, from Salt Lake City, to the San Pete Valley Ry., and another, Kansas Central No. 282, appears on the S.P.V. in 1893 or so, and in an item in the Tribune of March 16, 1897 is the note that "The old K. C. engines have been sent back East," fittingly, since the new O.S.L. was technically independent of the Union Pacific. A related item appears in the same paper, April 8, 1897, noting that "All the excursion cars of the K. C. initial used for years on the Garfield Beach run, have been returned to the Union Pacific,...".
Declining business on the Utah & Nevada district, after the opening of the Saltair resort in 1893, and other causes, together with there being at least one old U&N Brooks Mogul available in addition to the Kansas Central engines, seems to have obviated the need for borrowing any R.G.W. or D&RG narrow gauge power.
1899 is the last season in which the Garfield Beach resort is known to have been opened - on the 22nd of June, per an item in the Tribune of that date. The resort was not opened in 1900 - an item in the Salt Lake Tribune of October 16, 1900 shows why: "The Oregon Short Line has under consideration again the broadening.of the gauge of the Garfield branch but nothing has been decided upon as yet. The matter was brought and seriously considered last spring, but when the Saltair people paid the Short Line $4,500 to keep Garfield closed, the latter dropped all plans for bettering the line and resort." Most amusing, to be sure; in any case, the Garfield Beach resort is not known to have been opened up again at any time subsequent to being paid not to open it, and the resort appears to have burned beyond any reasonable repairing in about 1904, by which time, of course, the narrow gauge is long gone. Not much need for any kind of narrow gauge motive power, unhappily.