Why is the St. Louis and San Francisco (Frisco) called this when it does not run near San Francisco or does it run by a place called San Francisco that I am not aware of at the present time.
Because in its articles of incorporation, SLSF stated that was where they were heading to. Time, markets , finance and business trends tend to be “funny ducks” and sometimes you do not get where you’re going. (CRIP, MP, T&P and others come to mind)…SLSF helped finance ATSF’s original westward expansion, so in a way they did get to the pacific…
Mudchicken
(If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck…)
The story I always heard was that it wanted to link those cities; but Jay Gould and Collis P. Huntington, in their efforts to thwart the Santa Fe, got in the way…
work safe
…it’s in season so shoot it and eat it[:D]
I am not wanting to start a war just looking to shed some light on this subject. Frisco had intentions of reaching the west coast. The government granted to Frisco land grants. Frisco had every intention of using these land grants to reach the west coast. Many of you know that railroad “change hands” so to speak. Frisco at one time had control of different railroads but when it went into receivership lost some. At one time Frisco was under the control of Santa Fe. Santa Fe, (trying to find a nice term here) USED Frisco’s land grants to build Santa Fe trackage. When Frisco was seperated from the Santa Fe, well Santa Fe keep the trackage borrowed from Frisco’s land grants. I don’t know if Frisco received any compensation from that or not. But once again Frisco did had plans to reach the coast under its own name.
Jim:
The line in question was incorporated as the Atlantic & Pacific Railway Co. (50% SLSF and 50% ATSF)…“used” is a little too strong at term (and yes, historians disagree on how things shook-out in the boardrooms)…Oddly the issue becomes moot after SP and ATSF “swapped” transcons after ATSF showed it was serious in heading west.
MC
cmt