Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Downtown
Where did you get that idea? Railroads in the 19th century were as cutthroat and uncoöperative as it's possible to imagine. But railroads were initially ways to link busy waterways overland to distant ports, or to bring commodities from agricultural and mining hinterlands to ports. Decades before a transcontinental railroad was even thought possible, no one gathered in a room and decided to make Chicago a chokepoint. And a dozen railroads built routes that completely bypassed Chicago in one way or another.
|
Sometimes I think you just like making shit up. The first railway in Chicago didn't even go to the East. In fact, the first railroad in Chicago went West to Galena in
direct competition with the major waterway you claim the railroads were built to supplement. The Galena & Chicago Union Railway was built between Chicago and Galena with the intent of competing with the Illinois and Michigan Canal - Hennepin Canal water route for bringing the lead from Galena back to Chicago.
The railroads didn't begin elsewhere with the intention of connecting to Chicago's waterways, they began in Chicago with the intention of connecting everyone else to Chicago. However, even that was a brief period that only lasted less than 20 years before Chicago had full connections to the East coast at which point Chicago's business leaders (many of whom built or owned railroads crucial to their businesses) embarked on a plan of intentionally forcing all freight to be sorted in Chicago.
To further point out how absurd your statements are, the Galena & Chicago Union began construction in 1848. The Transcontinental Railway was authorized in 1862 and began construction in 1863. So you are making the absurd claim that no one could possibly have imagined a transcontinental railway a mere
15 years (at most) before the transcontinental railway began construction? That's absolutely absurd considering construction had already began on lines to St Louis and even Kansas City in that time pretty obviously indicating a westward expansion. Why didn't lines get built between St Louis and Indianapolis or Ohio? Because Chicago's business leaders (and State politicians) choked off any possibility of the railways going anywhere but to Chicago where they would stop, the freight would be sorted, and then distributed elsewhere.
I've heard this pseudo cabal of railways, business interests, and politicians mentioned in several places and I can't believe you are denying that it didn't have a major role in making Chicago not just a big station on the railways, but the the "nations freight handler"...