Utah Central Railroad of 1897, and its antecedents
Salt Lake & Ft. Douglas Rwy., 1884
Salt Lake & Eastern Rwy., 1888
Utah Western Railway, 1889
Utah Central Railway, 1890-1897
Utah Central Railroad (under R. G. W.), December 1897; through end of Narrow Gauge in 1900.
By George E. Pitchard
This page was last updated on March 3, 2005.
(Return to George Pitchard Archive index page)
Receivership, Reorganization and R.G.W. Lease - 1893 through End of Narrow-Gauge in 1900
The "Silver Panic" of 1893 resulted in bankruptcy and receivership of many railroad companies across the country, including the Utah Central Railway Company, which had notable financial problems of its own well before the Panic. This combination of causes resulted in the U. C. passing its mortgage bond interest, which in turn resulted in the mortgage holders, the Central Trust Company of New York, bringing suit for foreclosure against the Utah Central Railway Co. in the 3rd District Court, Territory of Utah, entered as docket number 12650, filed November 27, 1893.
Receivers were appointed as of that date, being James McGregor, then General Manager of the U. C. Ry., as well as having been for some years the manager of the Crescent Mining Co., of Park City, and Clarence Cary, a New York lawyer, who does not appear to have looked upon his new job in Utah very favorably - and, indeed, he seldom came to Utah during his tenure as co-Receiver.
It was standard procedure, at the beginning of a receivership such as this one, for the Receiver to make a full and complete inventory of all property of the company, as it existed at the date of the commencement of the receivership. It was so ordered in this case, and the Inventory of the Receivers was filed in the Court on January 22, 1894. Most unfortunately, this Inventory is not presently known to exist (neither any other part of the case file), as the entire file was turned over to the R.G.W. in June of 1901, for 'storage'. No part of said case file, apparently, is to be found at this time in any existing D&RGW collection.
The nearest thing to the aforesaid Inventory that is currently available is the U. C. Ry.'s "Return" to the Territorial Board of Equalization "for the year 1894," which shows the taxable valuation of the entire property, land, track, buildings, rolling stock and so forth, as it stood around the first Monday in March, 1894. The rolling stock inventory was by no means as detailed as that in the Receiver's Inventory likely was - but it is all that there is, at the present time.
The U.C.'s 1894 Return to the Board of Equalization has been pretty well gone over, at the end of Part II, above. It does not need to be repeated here, since the reader hereof can undoubtedly turn back a page or two without much difficulty. That fact notwithstanding, the Board of Equalization reports, returns and records of assessment provide a very useful basic outline for the changes in the U.C.'s motive power, year by year, for 1894 through 1900, inclusive.
Therefore, it seems a good idea to provide the outline, and then flesh it out, as best it can be done. The following is a compilation, combining the information from the returns of companies and the Board's records of assessment, as available, and some from the published Reports of the Board:
"for the year"
|1892||9||$8,200||unknown; published report only.|
|1893||9||$8,200||unknown; published report only.|
|1894||9||$7,500||1 good, at $3,000
1 fair, at $1,000
7 2nd-hand, damaged, at $500 each
|1895||8||$6,200||2 good, at $2,000 each
4 2nd-hand, old & out of date, at $500 each
2 dismantled & in scrap heap, at $100 each
|1896||8||$7,000||2 good, at $2,000 each
1 fair, at $1,000
4 2nd-hand, old & out of date, at $500 each
1 dismantled, worthless, at no value
|1897||7||$8,500||2 good, at $3,000 each
1 fair, at $1,000
2 very old, not much use, at $500 each
1 old, no good, unserviceable, at $500
1 worthless, at no value
|1898||5||$7,300||2 fair, at $3,000 each
1 poor, at $1,000
2 for scrap only, at $150 each good
|1899||4||$7,150||2 at $3,000 each
1 at $1,000
1 at $150
|1900||5||$15,000||5, at $3,000 each|
|1901||none narrow gauge|
Clearly, the decipherment of the 1894 return is the key piece of this puzzle, it being the bedrock upon which the others stand (or fall); so, the 1894 lot of nine engines is summarized here:
1 good loco, at $3,000
U.C. #3, 2-8-0, Baldwin 1890, x-ARy&CCo #3
1 fair loco, at $1,000
U.C. #2, 2-8-0, Baldwin 1881, x-C.V. #13
7 2nd-hand, damaged locos, at $500 each
U.C. #(?), 2-6-0, Baldwin 1879, x-U&N #17
U.C. #(?), 2-6-0, Baldwin 1879, x-U&N #16
U.C. #6, 2-6-0, Baldwin, 1879, x-U&N #13
U.C. #8, 2-6-0, Baldwin, 1880, x-U&N 24 or 25
U.C. #9, 2-6-0, Baldwin, 1880, x-U&N 25 or 24
U.C. #7, 2-trk Shay, Lima 1888, bought new
U.C. #(?), 4-4-0, Porter 1881-82, x-C.V. 11 or 15
A detailed look at how this list was arrived at will be found at the end of Part II, earlier in this paper.
Now, going year by year, from report to report, an analysis of the annual changes in U. C. Ry. motive power will be attempted.
The report 'for the year 1895' shows eight locomotives, as of about the beginning of March, 1895, so that there has been one of 1894's nine engines dropped in the year between these reports. The two 'good' engines in 1895 were Nos. 2 and 3, the two 2-8-0 engines, the No. 2 having been upgraded as a result of a major overhaul in 1894 (see Salt Lake Tribune, August 18, 1894). However, the seven engines '2nd-hand, damaged' in 1894 have became just six engines in 1895 - four '2nd-hand, old & out of date' and two 'dismantled and in scrap heap.' From that, one suspects that perhaps the missing engine was sold, not scrapped, or there would be three engines listed as in scrap heap, not just two. Assuming that to be so, then one is of course immediately curious as to which engine is sold - and it would seem that it must be the Shay, U.C. #7, Lima c/n 226, as it cannot be reasonably fit into any of the reports subsequent to 1895, and has got to be on hand in the 1894 report.
The purchaser of the Shay is elsewhere said to be the Oregon Lumber Company, which was also building the Sumpter Valley Ry. at this time, and may well have had a good use for a narrow-gauge Shay, rather than the standard gauge one that they did have, up until it was sold to the Salt Lake & Mercur Railroad in October of 1894, a point in time right in the middle of the year between the 1894 and 1895 reports, and it is very tempting to think that the Oregon Lumber Company sold its somewhat useless standard gauge Shay, and promptly bought a narrow-gauge Shay, more useful on a narrow-gauge track (Oregon Lumber Co. does not appear to have had a standard-gauge operation until some years after 1894).
Of the other engines, which two are in 1895 shown as 'dismantled and in scrap heap,' there seems no way of knowing for certain, but clearly one of these two will have to be a former Utah & Northern mogul, if not both, although one is tempted to believe that the Porter 4-4-0 is among the earliest scrappings, it being an oddity of no small proportions on a railroad with grades in excess of six per cent, and it would have been of very limited usefulness as a source of spare parts for the flock of Baldwin engines otherwise making up the roster of the U.C. at this time. Again, it is sort of a case of 'pay your money, take your choice.'
The 1896 report shows eight locomotives, as did 1895's, but at an increased valuation, since in November of 1895, the U.C. had received its brand-new Baldwin 2-8-0, No. 1, largely a duplicate of U.C. No. 3. The arrival of the new No. 1 in the listings means that another old engine has been dropped, and apparently the engine dropped by the time of the 1896 report was one of the two shown in 1895 as dismantled and in scrap heap, and again, is either a former U&N Baldwin mogul, or the Porter 4-4-0 - there is no way of telling for certain, merely a guess as to when the odd-ball engine would be gotten rid of; and so it is concluded that the odd-ball would be the next engine actually gone, and therefore 'it is believed' that the Porter engine is gone by March 1896. Therefore, the eight engines on the 1896 report are three 2-8-0 engines, as two 'good' locos, Nos. 1 and 3, and one 'fair' loco, No. 2; and five former U&N moguls, four as '2nd-hand, old and out of date,' and one as 'dismantled, worthless.'
The engine bought in 1895 was a Baldwin 2-8-0, class 10/26E-236, c/n 14487, 10/16/1895, having 16x20" cylinders, 37" drivers and an engine weight of 'about' 70,000 lbs., as built, per the specification sheet (Baldwin's) for this engine.
This new locomotive was, of course, U.C. No. 1, ordered on August 29, 1895. It was shipped on November 1, 1895, and arrived in Salt Lake City on November 13, 1895. Cost, new, was $6,850 (plus freight, set-up, et cetera), and it was to have pilots fore and aft, two 28" sand boxes, LeChatelier water brake on the engine, in addition to Westinghouse air brakes on tender and train, with 8" air pump on engine, tender to hold 1,800 gallons of water; engine and tender to be painted black, with 'large plain gold' lettering, "UTAH CENTRAL RAILWAY" on tender tank collar, "U. C. Ry." on cab panel, "1" large on sides of tender tank, and on rear, and on the front number plate and the front sand box. The engine was guaranteed to haul 40 to 50 gross tons of cars and lading up a straight 6 percent grade.
Baldwin's price for this engine was $6,850, everything included, which was to be paid one-quarter in cash ($1,712.50), the balance in 18 monthly payments; the Receiver's quarterly report for the three months ended September 30, 1895 (in Salt Lake Herald, October 20, 1895) shows $1,712.50 as "Part Payment of New Locomotive."
The Baldwin spec sheet for this engine, class 10/26E-236, notes at the top that "This Co. now has 10/26E-156," which consultation with the Baldwin registers shows was built as Alberta Ry. & Coal Co. No. 3.
"For the year 1897" shows the U.C. with seven locomotives, so yet another old locomotive has gone away. Engines 1 and 3 are shown as 'good,' at $3,000 each, while Engine No. 2 appears as 'fair' at $1,000. The old engines, as two very old, not much use, one old, no good, unserviceable, and one as worthless, a total of four, are by this time all but certain to be all old Baldwin moguls, formerly Utah & Northern, of course, and the one old engine gone in the year between the 1896 and 1897 also most likely was one of the U&N engines - but which we cannot determine.
For 1898, the Nos. 1 and 3 are now 'fair' but still at $3,000 each; the No. 2 is 'poor' but still $1,000; and two of the four old engines are gone. 1897's two 'very old, not much use' have became 1898's two 'good for scrap only,' and drop in value from $500 each to $150 each; while 1897's one 'old, no good, unserviceable' and one 'worthless' are both gone by the time of the 1898 report.
1898, it should be noted, shows that the Rio Grande Western is making the report for the Utah Central Railroad. The several companies making up the U. C. Ry. had been sold in 1897, in the wind-up of the receivership, and the new company, created in late December of 1897, was largely an R.G.W. 'front' in any case. Early in 1898, the R.G.W. leased the U.C.RR. for a period of 49 years, from January 1, 1898, though they did not take operational control until February 1, 1898. We will also note that the returns for 1898 were to show the property as of the first Monday in February, which in 1898 was the 7th of February.
The next official R.G.W. roster after February 1st was #32, dated July 1, 1898, and includes the 'Utah Central branch' and its equipment - at least, part of it, the engines listed being only the 2-8-0 engines, Nos. 1, 2 and 3, as follows:
|#||Class||Cyldrs Drvr||Wt on Dr||Eng Wt||Tank Capy||Tndr Wt||Eng-Tdr Wt|
|1||16||16x20" 36"||60,000||72,000||1,800 gal||88,000||160,000|
|2||15||15x18" 36"||46,000||56,000||1,550 gal||36,000||92,000|
|3||16||16x20" 36"||60,000||72,000||1,500 gal||48,000||120,000|
The Salt Lake Tribune of July 10, 1898, notes that "All the old Utah Central equipment will soon be relettered 'R.G.W.' and renumbered," and the same paper, issue of July 16th, has an item headed "Branch Line Improvement," which says "Regarding the equipment of the narrow gauge line, Mr. Welby states that it is now being overhauled and all the old or unserviceable equipment will go to the scrap heap, while the serviceable engines and cars will be gradually put through the shops for repairs, new paint and lettering." The engines were renumbered by adding a zero, making them 01, 02 and 03, as is shown in the next RGW official roster, #33, dated February 1, 1899, which repeats exactly, the information in roster #32, except for the change in numbers; #33 also notes that engines 01, 02 and 03 have six-inch air pump.
"For the year 1899" shows two changes since 1898 - the engines are no longer labeled as good, fair or poor, although the values on the 2-8-0 engines remain the same; and one of the two engines valued at $150 goes away sometime in the year preceding the 1899 report, the other remaining at $150 in the 1899 report.
The one 'good for scrap only' engine disposed of in the approximate year intervening between the first Mondays of February, 1898 and 1899, at this point in time unavoidably U. C. Ry. #2, a former Utah & Northern Baldwin mogul, was not scrapped, the label notwithstanding, but was sold, probably in October or November of 1898, to the Glasgow & Western Exploration Company, for use on their Golconda & Adelaide Railroad in Nevada. Such is the firm belief of this writer, who will now provide the reasons for so thinking.
Apparently, the Golconda & Adelaide RR, wholly owned by the Glasgow & Western Exploration Co., had only the one locomotive; and apparently, despite plans otherwise, the Glasgow & Western Exploration Co. built only the one railroad, the Golconda & Adelaide. The identity of the one locomotive owned by the G&W Expl. Co./G&A RR is commonly held to be Baldwin c/n 4562, March, 1879, built as Utah & Northern Ry. No. 13, renumbered in 1885 to U&N No. 17, a mogul (2-6-0) having 12x18" cylinders, 42" drivers, and an engine weight of 39,000 lbs. (per 1885 U.P. roster).
This identity is confirmed by the Baldwin Register of Engines Made, which on c/n 4562 very clearly has written in, many years ago, Glasgow & Western Expl. Co. as a later owner of the engine which started as Utah & Northern #13, and in the same hand as the change of owner notation, is the name "Pearl" written in.
So far, so good; onward. The Salt Lake Tribune, February 27, 1899, reports that "...the Glasgow & Western company has purchased from the Rio Grande Western railroad rails, locomotives and other plant formerly used on the narrow gauge, for the railroad from Wells to Cherry Creek." While not wholly accurate, this item at least does show that the G&W E Co did have a connection with the Rio Grande Western so far as buying old narrow gauge equipment was concerned - not especially surprising, since the G&W's main office was not only in Salt Lake City (as was of course the RGW's), but actually in the very same building as the RGW's offices.
So, since the G&W bought only the one locomotive, and since the G&W bought their one locomotive from the RGW, and since the RGW had only the former Utah Central narrow gauge stuff available at this date, and since we know the one loco the G&W acquired was Baldwin c/n 4562, how can one avoid the conclusion that the G&W got Baldwin c/n 4562 from the RGW, who had to have gotten it from the Utah Central?
This engine still exists; after its several years on the Golconda & Adelaide, it spent a few years as Nevada Short Line No. 1 before going on to Nevada Central Railroad #6 in 1920-21. The Nevada Central was abandoned in 1938, and their #6 passed into the hands of the Pacific Coast Chapter, R&LHS, who held it in various places over the next 40 years or so, until it was restored, ca. 1977-78, to its Nevada Short Line No. 1 appearance and held pending the opening of the California State Railroad Museum, which occurred in 1981, and where this engine is now on display.
So much for the 1899 report. The 1900 report shows five locomotives as Utah Central narrow gauge, each at $3,000, all 2-8-0 type engines. The RGW found business on the line greater than initially expected, with preparations for widening the line taking longer than expected, so in September of 1899 the RGW bought from the RGS an engine the RGW had sold to the RGS in 1892! A 2-8-0, Baldwin c/n 5164, 6/25/1880, class 10/24E-78, built as D&RG #74, transferred in July 1886 to the D & R G Western Ry, in Utah, as #74, in 1889 to R.G.W. #74, sold 1892 to Rio Grande Southern #30. After a run through the shops, it emerged in early November of 1899 as No. 04 for the Utah Central branch. And, in October of 1899, the RGW took one of their former narrow gauge engines, No. 8, re-narrowed it, and put it on the U.C. branch as No. 08. This engine, Baldwin c/n 6145, 4/13/1882, class 10/242E-64, started life as D&RG 294, transferred in July 1886 to D&RG Western Ry, Utah, renumbered to 109, to RGW 109 in 1889, widened in September 1890, to RGW #8 in 1892.
RGW roster #34, January 1, 1900, effectively concurrent with the 1900 Equalization report, lists the five engines on the U.C. branch as follows:
|#:||Class||Cyldr||Drvr||Wt on Drvr||Eng Wt||Tank Capy||Eng-Tndr wt|
Gone from the Board of Equalization's 1900 report was the one last old locomotive, certainly the last of the former Utah & Northern Baldwin moguls, and which had been shown in the 1899 report at a value of $150; its U.C. number is unknown, and presumably it was scrapped, as nothing to even hint at a sale has came to light.
Rio Grande Western's roster #35, dated June 1, 1990 (and which is immediately prior to the widening of the Utah Central branch), lists the same five locomotives, and in the same way, as does roster #34; the notes show that engines 01, 02 and 03 have 6" air pumps, whereas engines 04 and 08 have 8" air pumps; and engines 02, 04 and 08 have the Sams Automatic coupler on pilot only, whereas engine 03 has the Sams coupler on pilot and tender.
The task of widening the Utah Central branch was largely completed by the end of July, 1900, which obviously meant that narrow-gauge locomotives were no longer needed.The R.G.W. chose to widen the two biggest (and best) engines, the 01 being widened by the end of August and emerging from the shops as R.G.W. No. 1 - its first use on the Park City passenger job was on September 1, 1900 - and the 03's widening was completed by mid-October, and came out as R.G.W. No. 13, and had replaced the No. 1 on the Park City run by October 16th.
Engine No. 08 was yet again rebuilt to standard gauge, although the date of this operation seems to be unknown. It returned to its spot as R.G.W. No. 8, and was sold to a dealer, Fitzhugh, Luther & Co., on November 9, 1903.
Engines 02 and 04 were sold in October 1900 to the Sumpter Valley Ry., with No. 04 becoming Sumpter Valley No. 7. RGW No. 02 became Sumpter Valley No. 8. R.G.W. apparently did the repainting and relettering prior to shipping the engines to the Sumpter Valley, which in the case of the erstwhile No. 04, now S.V. 7, was on October 24, 1900. About 1906, S.V. 7 and 8 were renumbered 10 and 11. S. V. No. 10 was not retired until April 24, 1924, with larger parts of it remaining visible through the 1930s - it does not appear to have been completely scrapped until about 1939. The No. 11, however, was gone by the June 30, 1916 valuation date, and may have been scrapped about 1914 or so.
R.G.W. No. 1, the onetime 01, became D&RG #554 on April 1, 1909; rebuilt to narrow gauge in October 1918; renumbered to 306 on January 1, 1924; dismantled in January 1935.
R.G.W. No. 13, formerly the 03, became D&RG #555 on January 31, 1909; rebuilt to narrow-gauge in October 1918; renumbered to 305 on January 3, 1924; dismantled in December 1927.
For the record
(all engines here are, of course, Baldwin 2-8-0 locos)
|#:||C/N, and date:||Class No.:||Cylndr:||Drvr:||Eng Wght:|
|01||14487, 10/16/1895||10/26E-236||16x20"||36"||72,000 lbs.|
|02||5930, 11/30/1881||10/24E-100||15x18"||36"||56,000 lbs.|
|03||11022, 7/5/1890||10/26E-156||16x20"||36"||72,000 lbs.|
|04||5164, 6/25/1880||10/24E-78||15x18"||36"||56,000 lbs.|
|08||6145, 4/13/1882||10/24JE-64||15x20"||36"||64,100 lbs.|
And thus endeth all that we are going to attempt in the way of the story of the motive power of John W. Young's 'second Empire' of narrow-gauge railroads in Utah.
Summary roster of S.L.& Ft.D./S.L.& E./U.W./Utah Central Ry./Utah Central RR.
... , based on returns to Board of Equalization, for the years 1894-1901
Up through March of 1893, this 'system' had acquired a total of 14 locomotives, viz:
- An ancient 0-4-0 of uncertain origin in 1885
- Five former Utah & Northern Baldwin moguls, Nos. 13, 16, 17, 24 and 25, in 1887-88
- A two-truck Shay, c/n 226, in December 1888
- Five former Connotton Valley Ry. engines in 1889-90, including two Baldwin 2-8-0, c/n 5258 and 5930; one Baldwin 0-6-0T, c/n 5989; and two Porter 4-4-0, c/n 396 and either c/n 465 or 473, formerly C.V. numbers 6, 13, 16, 9, and either 11 or 15, respectively
- Another two-truck Shay, c/n 327, in 1891
- Former Alberta Ry. & Coal Co. 2-8-0 #3 in 1893
The ancient 0-4-0 of uncertain origin appears to have been retired in about November 1887, and is known to have been relegated to pumphouse duty by June 1, 1889.
Engines known for certain to be gone by receivership date, November 27, 1893, five in number:
- The ancient No. 1 0-4-0
- Porter 4-4-0, c/n 396, former C.V. #9, sold no later than March 1893 to the Great Salt Lake & Hot Springs Ry., later Salt Lake & Ogden, #15
- Baldwin 2-8-0, c/n 5258, former C.V. #6, lettered for U.W. #11, turned over to OSL&UN Ry. no later than May 1893 to settle unpaid freight charges
- Baldwin 0-6-0T, c/n 5989, former C.V. #16, lettered for U.W. #12, turned over to OSL&UN Ry. no later than May 1893 to settle unpaid freight charges
- Lima Shay, c/n 327, bought new, repossessed by Lima, probably in 1892, made indisputably official by court order on October 26, 1893
So, 14 locomotives acquired, less five locomotives departed, leaves a total of nine (9) locomotives at the end of 1893. The U. C.'s return to the Board of Equalization "for the year 1894" shows the road to have nine (9) locomotives at about the first Monday in March, 1894 (which was the 5th of March), which nine locomotives would be:
- #2, 2-8-0, Baldwin 5930, 11/1881, x-C.V. #13 - "fair" at $1,000 value
- #3, 2-8-0, Baldwin 11022, 7/1890, x-ARy&CCb #3 - "Good" at $3,000 value
- #?, 2-6-0, Baldwin 4562, 3/1879, x-U&N #17 - "2nd-hand, damaged" at $500
- #?, 2-6-0, Baldwin 4561, 3/1879, x-U&N #16 - "2nd-hand, damaged" at $500
- #6, 2-6-0, Baldwin 4555, 3/1879, x-U&N #13 - "2nd-hand, damaged" at $500
- #7, Shay, Lima 226, 11/1888, bought new - "2nd-hand, damaged" at $500
- #8, 2-6-0, Baldwin 5122, 5/1880, x-U&N #24 - "2nd-hand, damaged" at $500
- #9, 2-6-0, Baldwin 5129, 6/1880, x-U&N #25 - "2nd-hand, damaged" at $500
- #?, 4-4-0, Porter 465, 12/1881 or 473, 1/1882, x-C.V. #11 or #15 - "2nd-hand, damaged" at $500
There are only 14 locomotives known to have been acquired prior to the date of this 1894 report, just as there are only five locomotives known to be gone prior to the date of this report. It seems inescapable, therefore, that the remaining nine engines are the nine engines on this 1894 report.
"For the year 1895" shows the U.C. to have eight (8) locomotives, down by one (1) since the 1894 report; 1895 shows:
- Two "Good" at $3,000 each - U.C. #s 2 and 3, the 2 being upgraded on account of a major overhaul in August 1894
- Four "2nd-hand, old & out of date" at $500 each
- Two "dismantled & in scrap heap" at $100 each
The one locomotive gone in the year prior to the 1895 report quite clearly is one of those seven (7) shown as "2nd-hand, damaged" in the 1894 report; and it would seem that it was sold, as otherwise one would expect to find three locomotives as "dismantled & in scrap heap" in the 1895 report. The only locomotive even suspected of being sold in this period is the Shay, U.C. #7, which went to the Oregon Lumber Company; therefore, "it is believed" that U.C. #7, Shay c/n 226, Lima 11/1888, is the engine gone in the year prior to the 1895 report.
"For the Year 1896" again shows the U.C. to have eight (8) locomotives, but there has been a change in the total taxable value, 1895 having been $6,200, while 1896 shows $7,000. The reason for this alteration is that the U. C.'s brand-new Baldwin 2-8-0 #1 arrived in November of 1895 - and, therefore, one old locomotive has to go away in order to keep the total count at eight. So, 1896 shows:
- Two engines as 'good' at $2,000 each, which would be the new #1 and the #3, nearly-identical 2-8-0 Baldwin engines
- One engine as 'fair' at $1,000, being #2, the former Connotton Valley Baldwin 2-8-0
- Four engines as '2nd-hand, old and out of date' at $500 each; this we assume to be the same four that were shown in 1895 as "2nd-hand, old & out of date" at $500 each
- One engine is shown as 'dismantled, worthless' at no stated value. The one engine gone was one of the two shown in 1895 as "dismantled & in scrap heap," leaving one such engine to appear in the 1896 report, now 'worthless' rather than at $100 as was shown in the 1895 report.
Of course, one wonders which engine is gone in the year prior to the 1896 report; but the information at hand will not permit a clear statement in that regard. Logic would indicate it to be the least useful of the several possibilities, which we would think would be the 'other' Porter 4-4-0, an engine that even if it were operable would be of very limited usefulness on a railroad with grades in excess of 6 percent almost anywhere they might try to use this engine, plus its limited usefulness as a source of spare parts for the other engines on the roster, now all Baldwin engines. Therefore, we will say "it is believed" that the engine gone in the year prior to the 1896 report was the Porter 4-4-0, either c/n 465 or 473 (hopefully, someday that too will be figured out - which is it?)
"For the Year 1897" shows seven (7) locomotives, at a total taxable value of $8,500, so there has been another old loco dropped in the year prior to the 1897 report. At this point, if we have been correct in our beliefs, the engine gone will have to be one of the former Utah & Northern Baldwin moguls, but it is impossible to say which one, on the present information. As to the other engines:
- Two are 'good' at $3,000 each - which would again be #1 and #3, the large 2-8-0 engines
- One is 'fair' at $1,000, and again, this is the #2, former C.V. 2-8-0
- Two engines are 'very old, not much use' at $500 each
- One is 'old, no good, unserviceable' at $500
- One is 'worthless' at no stated value.
Again, if we have been correct up to this point, these last four old engines are all former Utah & Northern Baldwin moguls.
"For the year 1898", which we will note that by 1898, is as of the first Monday in February, in this case February 7th., shows the U.C. (now under lease to the R.G.W) as having five (5) locomotives, total value (for taxes) of $7,300, and defined as:
- Two 'fair' locomotives at $3,000 each (U.C. #s 1 and 3, of course)
- One 'poor' locomotive at $1,000 (U.C. #2, inescapably)
- Two engines 'good for scrap only,' at $150 each, which two are undoubtedly former Utah & Northern moguls, as were the two engines disposed of in the year prior to the 1898 report.
"For the year 1899" shows four (4) locomotives, total value $7,150, everything being the same as the 1898 report, except that labels (good, fair, poor) are gone, as is one of the two engines described as 'good for scrap only' in 1898, which, as we believe, was not scrapped, but sold to the Glasgow & Western Exploration Co. for use on their Golconda & Adelaide RR in Nevada, and was former Utah & Northern Baldwin mogul #17, c/n 4562, 3/14/1879, of unknown U.C. number since losing #2 to the former Connotton Valley 2-8-0. This mogul appears to have been sold to the Glasgow & Western Exploration Co. in October or November of 1898; it also saw service on the Nevada Short Line and on the Nevada Central, and is still in existence, being on display at the California State Railroad Museum in its Nevada Short Line dress.
"For the year 1900" shows the U.C. as having five (5) locomotives, at $3,000 each. This change comes about by there having been two additional 2-8-0 engines coming in 1899, and the last of the old U&N moguls going out.
To the three existing 2-8-0 engines (which had been renumbered in July 1898 from 1, 2 and 3 to 01, 02 and 03, respectively) was added two more 2-8-0 engines, numbers 04 and 08. The 04 was bought by the RGW from the Rio Grande Southern, #30, in September 1899, and put in service in November 1899 as U.C. engine 04 (the RGS had bought the engine in 1892 from the RGW, #74, and it had previously been D&RGW (Utah) #74, D&RG #74, built by Baldwin, c/n 5164, 6/1880). The other added engine #08, had been RGW #8, previously RGW #109, a narrow gauge engine widened in 1890 and renumbered 8 in 1892, re-narrowed about October 1899 and put in service as U.C. 08 in that month. Previously to being RGW 109, this engine had been D&RGW (Utah) #109, and originally, D&RG #294, built by Baldwin, c/n 6145, 4/1882.
The old U&N mogul dropped in the year prior to the 1900 report was almost certainly scrapped.
"For the year 1901" shows nothing in narrow gauge. However, the U.C. branch is shown as having assigned to it two locomotives, formerly narrow-gauge, 'set-out' to standard gauge, which were former numbers 01 and 03, widened in 1900 and becoming R.G.W. numbers 1 and 13, respectively. As to the other three engines, the 08 had been re-widened and returned to being RGW #8. Numbers 02 and 04 were sold in October 1900 to Sumpter Valley, as their #8 and #7, respectively.