M&U No. 7, Mr. T. E. Knox Was Proven Right
by Peter Brill
From M&NJRHS newsletter “The Unionville Flyer” Vol. 5 #2
Figure 1. The #7 is seen here at Washington St. crossing coming back from a run down to M&U Jct. as evidenced by the empty coal hoppers. The 4 Erie milk cars were picked up from the Bordens Creamery in Johnson and will be delivered to the Erie in Middletown. These were the last vestiges of a once thriving milk business.
The End of No. 6
M&U No.6 was former O&W No. 24 and had been purchased by the M&U in 1935. Its 4-4-0 wheel arrangement and relatively low tractive effort of 20,100 lbs had been suitable for the M&U's light traffic and No.6 was reportedly the M&U's best running steam locomotive to ever appear on the roster. However, by the spring of 1940, the M&U's traffic situation had changed drastically as it now participated in a heavy coal movement from the O&W to the NYS&W. (See Unionville Flyer Vol. III # 1 & 2, "The New York,Susquehanna & Ontario") On April 8, 1940, M&U Vice President and General Manager, W. R. Durland, wrote to the Trustees and Directors of the railroad:
"We were successful in obtaining an extension for removal of flues and jagging on our Engine 6 until October 1st of this year, but within the last month the firebox of this engine has gone bad. We have found this engine entirely too light for our service this past winter and with the prospects of still better business ahead it has outlived its usefulness to us. The result is that we will either have to purchase another engine or negotiate for the permanent use of an engine from another line."
The Search for a Replacement
Durland had already begun to look for a replacement locomotive. He had drafted a short letter, dated March 27, 1940, to a half-dozen equipment dealers plus a host of railroads including the L&HR, L&NE, B&O, RDG, PRR, Erie, C&0, NYC and LV. The M&U's specifications were simply stated;
"Kindly advise if you have for sale any locomotives of approximately 30,000 pounds tractive effort with short driving wheel base, for freight service. An engine that has had recent flue removal, etc."
Most railroads responded that they could offer nothing suitable and this included the L&HR, RDG/CNJ, Erie, LV, PRR, NYC, B&0 and D&H. The Port Huron & Detroit Railroad offered 0-6-0 switchers at $2,500 each while the C&O offered 4-6-0 No. 382 with a tractive effort of 23,150 lbs. and 2-6-0 No. 428 with a tractive effort of 25,650 lbs. None of these were deemed suitable. The L&NE had two E-6 class and one E-8 class camelbacks available for inspection at Pen Argyl shops, where they had been stored since recent machinery repairs and flue renewals. On April 12, 1940, Durland inspected L&NE No. 25, 37 and 45 and requested prices on No. 25 and 37. L&NE No. 25 was a 2-8-0 camelback, class E-8, with a tractive effort of 35,000 lbs. and a weight of 72 tons. Its price was $11,500 while the L&&E asked $13,500 for No. 37, a 2-8-0 camelback, class E-6, with a tractive effort of 32,000 lbs. and a weight of 73 tons. Perhaps the prices were more than the M&U was willing to pay. In any case, the M&U continued to look elsewhere and both locomotives were sold eventually to the L&NE's "sister" company, Lehigh Navigation & Coal Company, Tamagua, Pennsylvania.
There is no record of correspondence with the NYO&W but it is assumed the M&U investigated the availability of suitable O&W power. American Locomotive Company offered to build a new engine as they had no suitable second hand engines available. Baldwin Locomotive Works offered two 80 ton switchers with a tractive effort of 37,500 lbs.
Hyman-Michaels Company offered a Baldwin 2-6-0 with a tractive effort of 28,000 lbs for $2,500 plus $927 to put it into running condition.
Hyman-Michaels also offered a Baldwin 4-6-0 with a tractive effort of 25,670 lbs and a weight of 70 tons for $3,000. The M&U evaluated these proposals as "a little short of what we need." Hyman-Michaels responded with two 4-6-2's with a tractive effort of 30,000 lbs and a weight of 237,516 at $3,000 and $2,750 but the M&U found them too heavy and wanted a locomotive with smaller wheels. Hyman-Michaels then offered a 60 ton 4-6-2 with a tractive effort of only 18,300 lbs for $4,000 which was much smaller than other locomotives already rejected by the M&U as too small. The M&U ended this series of correspondence on May 28, 1940 by stating they had bought a locomotive.
Georgia Car and Locomotive Company offered two 4-6-2's whose drivers could be reduced to yield a tractive effort of 36,500 lbs at a price of $5,000. They also offered two 2-8-2's weighing 112 tons and generating 45,100 lbs of tractive effort. F. H. Wilson had nothing to offer while Birmingham Rail & Locomotive Company referred the request to its New York associates, Thomas F. Carey, Inc., T. F. Knox, President. Carey offered a 4-6-0 with a tractive effort of 21,000 lbs and a weight of 56 tons for $5,500. Later offers included a Baldwin 2-6-0 with a tractive effort of 27,000 lbs and a weight of 64 tons for $9,250,a 70 ton 0-6-0 with a tractive effort of 31,000 lbs and a 4-6-0 with a tractive effort of 21,000 lbs for $6,000 offered by Knox while visiting the M&U offices.
A Replacement is Found
On April 18, 1940, A. A. Morrison of A. A. Morrison Company, Buffalo, New York, wrote to Durland and referred to the two Detroit, Toledo & Ironton (DT&I) locomotives they had talked about and the photographs he had left at the office. He advised that no.15 was sold yesterday to the Coudersport & Port Allegany Railroad. No. 16 and 17 were still available and he suggested Durland arrange to inspect them as soon as possible if he was interested. In a letter dated April 19, Morrison sent Durland a specification sheet that had been referred to in a telephone conversation earlier that day. The specification sheet showed Bellefonte Central, ex DT&I, No. 16 and 17 of identical characteristics with consecutive builder's construction numbers 26868 and 26869. The locomotives were built by Rhode Island Locomotive Works and were 2-8-0's with just 26,593 lbs of tractive effort but someone had handwritten 31,000 and checked off this figure as well. A photograph showed Bellefonte Central No. 17 and a notation on the back of the photo indicated a total weight, engine and tender, of 264,300 and a tractive effort of 31,000 lbs.
Figure 2. This is the specification sheet sent by A. A. Morrison to Durland on April 19, 1940. It shows all three Bellefonte Central locomotives for sale. Note the tractive power of No. 16 is shown as 26,593 with a handwritten figure of 31,000 below it. Also note that No. 15 had a substantially greater tractive power than either No. 16 or No. 17 and yet weighed significantly less and had less weight on drivers. This might be due to the greater steam pressure of No. 15 which developed 200 lbs of steam pressure versus only 175 lbs for No. 16 and 17. which apparently were saturated steam engines, not superheated. The M&U crews were used to superheated locomotives such as M&U No. 6 and indeed, all prior M&U locomotives had boiler pressures of 200 lbs except first No. 2 which had 175 lbs the same as M&U No. 7.
Several weeks later, Durland received a letter dated May 2 from a Mr. McGann at Galeton, Pennsylvania. Apparently, Morrison told McGann of Durland's interest in the Bellefonte Central (BC) locomotives. McGann stated that on April 10 he and the General Superintendent of the Coudersport & Port Allegany Railroad inspected BC 15, 16 and 17 and C&PA purchased No. 15. McGann had also inspected No. 16 and 17 at Ironton, Ohio, on the DT&I in August of 1925 in the company of an Interstate Commerce Commission inspector and found the engines "maintained in first class condition." Thus, McGann was able to compare their current equipment and condition to their equipment and condition on the DT&I and he concluded "the engine has been maintained in a high standard of condition. The interior of the firebox is in first-class condition." In McGann's opinion, No. 16 and 17 "were in first-class condition and should not cost more than 2¢ per mile for repairs. . . . this is an excellent opportunity for a railroad to secure a locomotive of this type and in this condition for around a figure of approximately $5000." McGann claimed to have interviewed three BC engineers and two firemen and "all the men interviewed spoke very highly of these locomotives stating that in their opinion the locomotives were in first-class condition, and further that they had never experienced any difficulty in handling their train and that the locomotives were excellent steamers and rode exceptionally good."
On May 6, Durland sent a Western Union telegram to the Bellefonte Central offices to arrange his inspection visit on the eighth of that month. The next letter in our file is from A. A. Morrison to Durland on May 10 and it refers to Durland's recent inspection of No. 16. Morrison offers No. 16 at $5,000 "as is at the shops of the Bellefonte Central Railroad, Coleville, PA." Morrison was willing to accept M&U No. 6 as a scrap credit against the $5,000 sale price and figured No. 6 at about 100 tons of scrap at $10 per gross ton yielding an approximate credit of $1,000. The balance of about $4,000 was to be paid in 10 equal monthly installments with 6% interest.
At the M&U Board of Directors meeting on May 21, 1940, Durland reported that he had found BC No.16 to be suitable for purchase. In response, the Board passed a multi-part resolution:
1) The M&U would purchase Bellefonte Central No. 16 from the A. A. Morrison Company, Inc., of Buffalo for $5,150 including repairs and extra parts.
2) M&U No. 6 would be delivered to A. A. Morrison as part of the deal for its scrap value of approximately $1,000 to be applied against the purchase of Bellefonte Central No. 16.
3) The balance of the purchase price, approximately $4,000, would be paid by giving A. A. Morrison M&U notes of 6% annual interest payable monthly. The first four notes would be for $200 each and the remaining notes would be for $400 each until the purchase was fully paid.
In a letter dated June 7, 1940, Morrison listed the various locomotive parts being provided at a cost of $120.30; four driver springs, four tank springs, arch brick, two drop grates, four shaker grates, two end grates, a water bottle and gaskets. (On June 23, 1942, Morrison offered to buy the M&U for the purpose of scrapping it. A copy of the proposal is on the cover of the Unionville Flyer, vol. I No. 1).
Figure 3. On May 29 at 3 PM, G. E. McClellan, Vice President and General Manager of the Bellefonte Central, wired Durland "Locomotive left 1:45AM today. Should arrive Northumberland Thursday AM. No definite schedule account speed restriction. The locomotive was routed via the PRR from Bellefonte to the D&H at Wilkes Barre. On May 31, the PRR agent at Northumberland responded to Durland's inquiry on the location of the engine "yours date engine seven left four nineteen AM now about Wilkes Barre Penn." Evidently the engine had been marked as M&U No 7 for the trip. The route to Middletown from the D&H at Wilkes Barre is unknown but it is possible the D&H interchanged her to the O&W at Jermyn Transfer.
No. 7 on the M&U
In a letter dated June 7, 1940 to Durland, Morrison asked to be advised as soon as possible Of "the results of the scorching of the cylinders on locomotive # 16." If repairs were needed, he wanted a letter from the NYO&W roundhouse foreman "to substantiate the claim, so that I can forward same to Mr. McClellan of the Bellefonte Central Railroad." Further developments in this matter are unknown.
On arrival at the M&U, "Bellefonte Central" was visible under "M&U RR" on No 7's tender. Even the DT&I logo was discernible. M&U No. 6 had made her last run on March 26, 1940 and the M&U relied on leased O&W locomotives until No. 7's first run on June 9.
Close behind No. 7's arrival on the M&U came Mr. T. E. Knox, President of Thomas F. Carey Company, Inc., who had unsuccessfully tried to interest M&U management in a variety of locomotives he had for sale. In a "prophetic" letter to Durland on June 20, Knox referred to his recent visit to the M&U offices after which he went over to the NYO&W shops, "and looked over the little engine you got from the Bellefonte Central." Knox went on to remark "When we offered you engines we had in mind your requirement of 30,000 lbs minimum tractive power. Even if you bore out the cylinders on your engine you will still be short of power, unless they allow you to increase the boiler pressure which I doubt very much. Also, while you may get along all right with blind tires, almost all the roads in the country have discontinued the use of locomotives equipped with blind tires." Not one to give up easily, Knox went on to recommend his own "crackerjack engine", an 83 ton 2-8-0 with a tractive effort of 35,600 lbs at a price of $10,000 and he even offered "to work out a trade with you to take your small engine and sell it to some road not in need of so much power."
Two weeks later, on July 5, Knox offered a 2-8-0 with 31,800 lbs tractive effort for $5,000 which he later reduced to $4,500. Durland and the M&U stood fast with their selection but Knox's disparaging remarks about their "little engine" may have haunted them during the tenure of No. 7.
Figure 4. No. 7 made its first run on the M&U on June 9, 1940 on Train No. 6 with 11 loads and 411 tons. The crew consisted of engineer Leo Predmore, fireman R. Martin, conductor Henry Eason and brakemen C. Deyo and S. Whyte. No. 7 ran again on June 10 but stalled at O'Connor's crossing, below Slate Hill, on Train 5 with 4 loads and 41 empties. The crew was forced to double their train. On June 11, No. 7 went up to the O&W shops and was replaced by O&W No. 244 until the late afternoon of June 20 when No. 7 returned and had to double her train at both Pounds and Waterloo. Seventeen cars and 1,162 tons were too much for No. 7 whereas No. 244 had handled 19 cars and 1,280 tons with no problem during No. 7's absence. No. 244 was a class U-1 4-6-0 with a tractive effort of 30,400 lbs, supposedly 600 lbs less than the 31,000 lbs attributed to No. 7.
In her first 100 days on the M&U, No. 7 ran on 71 days while O&W power handled the assignments on 29 days. The O&W locomotives came from the U-1, U (2-6-0), E (4-6-0) and V (2-6-0) classes. (See Unionville Flyer Vol. I #3,"0&W Steam on the Middletown and Unionville"). Stalling on the hill up to Pounds Station was a common occurrence for No. 7. Sometimes the crew had to double the hill; sometimes they backed down the hill and made a second attempt and sometimes they cut off their train and sanded the hill and made another attempt. While the hill at Pounds was the major eastbound obstacle, the grade at Waterloo could also stall No. 7 and cause a doubling of the hill. On March 14, 1941. No. 7 made a notable run on First Extra East with 14 loads and 969 tons under clear weather conditions. She stalled on Pounds and had to back down for a second and successful attempt. Later, she stalled on Waterloo and then she stalled twice on Unionville hill enroute to M&U Jct.. Westbound trains were lighter as they consisted primarily of empties. However, Creeden. Hill and Hoops Crossing occasionally succeeded in stalling Train No. 5. These westbounds could run rather long as exemplified by Train No. 5 on October 1, 1940 which stalled on Creedens Hill on a cloudy day with 4 loads and 40 empties, mainly empties coal hoppers returning to the NYO&W.
Within ten months of its arrival on the M&U, No. 7 was incurring significant maintenance expense. In a letter, dated April 14, 1941, to the Trustees and Directors of the M&U, Durland remarked on the "Increase in Maintenance of Equipment due to repairs necessary account increased mileage of our engine." Indeed, a work order to the O&W shop forces on April 9 of that year detailed work on No. 7 that included repair of leaking flues; repair the left front corner at the mud ring; repair piston packing blowing on the right side; repair steam ram leaking to the right injector and a number of other items. No. 7 entered the O&W shops on October 31, 1940, less than five months after her first run on the M&U, and did not return to the M&U until December 13 of that year. This was her sixth trip to the O&W roundhouse in October! She returned to the O&W ten days later for two days; made three visits in January of 1941, including one of 7 days duration; made two visits in February and three in March.
Figure 5. On March 22, 1941, life became easier for No. 7 as the NYO&W and NYS&W rerouted their coal traffic via Edgewater. The M&U entered an era of lighter and fewer trains. August 18, 1941 was the last day of milk traffic with a resultant drop in train frequency such that, on some days, Trains No. 6 and 5 were annulled and there were no trains at all. Other days, there were usually just the pair of trains and No. 7 generally had no problem in getting the traffic over the road although there was the occasional problem, such as August 13, 1942 when Train No. 6, 10 loads and 601 tons, stalled on Pounds Hill and again on Unionville Hill on the way to M&U Jct.. Coal traffic returned to the M&U suddenly on December 29, 1942 and train frequency jumped to two or three trains in each direction daily. However, these trains were not nearly as long as in 1940 and 1941. Typical easthounds had ten or eleven loads and 500 to 700 tons and, in general, No. 7 was up to the task of covering the route without incident. In a letter dated April 15, 1944, M&U Trustee Louis F. Zieres instructed brakeman Lindley Predmore "You will kindly arrange to give assistance to the fireman by keeping the coal shoveled ahead on engine No. 7 on days that we make two trips."
No. 7 had a relatively short career on the M&U. She was in service only from June 9, 1940 until retirement on April 23, 1944 because of a cracked flue sheet. Bids were solicited for the purchase of No. 7 for scrap and three bids were received: Coatesville Scrap Iron & Metal Company, Coatesville, PA, bid $5.50 per gross ton on September 1, 1944; Luria Brothers & Company, Inc., Reading, PA, bid $12.00 per gross ton on September 5, 1944 and Bethlehem Steel Company, Bethlehem, PA, successfully bid $11.00 per gross ton (We do not know why Bethlehem's lower bid was accepted unless it had something to do with Bethlehem closer proximity and resultant lower freight cost). Bethlehem Steel purchased No. 7 on October 7, 1944, and she was sent to the NYO&W yard. On October 24, the NYO&W was instructed to prepare No. 7 for shipment and authorization was obtained, per Order M-24, from the War Production Board, Washington, DC, to dispose of No. 7 as scrap. On November 5, 1944, No. 7 departed Middletown via the NYO&W, destined for interchange to the CNJ at Scranton and subsequent transport to the furnaces at Bethlehem.
Between the April 23, 1944 retirement date of No. 7 and July 16, 1945, the M&U leased NYO&W steam locomotives. From July 22, 1945 until April 19, 1946, the M&U leased NYS&W decapods including No. 2435, 2451, 2461 and 2492. The decapods were replaced by M&U GE 44 tonner #1 which arrived on April 19, 1946 to begin the diesel era on the M&U and which, in 1999, is still on the M&NJ roster although out of service since 1980.
Modelers may be attracted to the era of No. 7 on the M&U for a number of reasons. 1940 and 1941 were years of heavy coal traffic with a wide variety of coal hoppers in the train consists. Milk traffic was still present until August 18 of 1941. It was also the period when the NYS&W sent a large part of its locomotive fleet to the O&W Middletown shops for rebuilding. Between April 24, 1940 and January 24, 1943, 15 NYS&W locomotives were hauled dead westbound to the O&W shops and many returned running light eastbound under their own power. This included 9 Class J-2 2-10-0's, 5 Class G-15A 4-6-0's and 1 Class B-S 0-6-0. NYS&W passenger cars were also ferried to the O&W shops for work. (See Unionville Flyer, Vol. III No. 1 &2, "The New York, Susquehanna and Ontario Company"). And on the numerous days that No. 7 was at the O&W shops for repair, the M&U leased replacement power from the O&W that came from at least four Classes, two wheel arrangements and was of both conventional and camelback configuration.
