Paul, I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. Your analysis doesn't factor into ICC proceedings the impact of the competing railroads. The ICC didn't write all those pages, chapters and volumes of testimony -- the allies and competitors, supporters and protesters did. Everybody was permitted to say something -- and did. The net effect was that the PRR and the NYC would never have allowed the EL west of the Mississippi River without some countervailing advantage for themselves. As long as GN, NP, MILW, CB&Q, AT&SF, UP and SP faced only EL, NYC, PRR and B&O to the northeast, there would be no true transcon. And, even without the ICC, there still isn't. Many very bright and knowledgeable people spent many years trying to figure out how to get the railroads on an equal footing with regard to the governmental (read "our") support of the motor, water and air carriers. The Rock Island failure was mainly the result of the inability of the western railroads to agree on who got what. Any early ICC decision would have gone to court and worked its way up to the Supreme Court. And you think the ICC delayed things . . .? This thread has used way too much space on an historical list. I will recuse myself. Randy Brown - -------------------------------------------------------------- Paul, Thank you for the [long <g>] and thoughtful post regarding the ICC. . . Cheers, Jim The Erie Lackawanna Mailing List http://EL-List.railfan.net/ To Unsubscribe: http://Lists.Railfan.net/erielackunsub.html ------------------------------
This HTML page is © 2000-2009 Blue Moon Online System and The Railfan Network
This page and the data contained therein may not be reproduced
for any form of commercial use without the explicit permission
of J. Henry Priebe Jr. or his duly authorized agent.