American Single Locomotives 

and the **Piomeer93 
=fc 

Locomotive 385, Philadelphia and Reading high-wheel single, pulling the Royal Limited 

at high speed in 1896. (Smithsonian Chaney negative 21,525.) 
SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY j NUMBER 25 

American 

Single Locomotives 

and the ^Pioneer" 

John H. White. Jr< 

SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION PRESS / CITY OF WASH INGTON / 1973 
SERIA L PUBLICATION S OF TH E SMITHSONIA N INSTITUTIO N 

The emphasis upon publications as a means of diffusing knowledge was expressed 

by the first Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution. In his formal plan for the Institution, Joseph Henry articulated a program that included the following statement: 

"It is proposed to publish a scries of reports, giving an account of the new discoveries 

in science, and of the changes made from year to year in all branches of knowledge." 

This keynote of basic research has been adhered to over the years in the issuance 

of thousands of titles in serial publications under the Smithsonian imprint, commencing with Smithsonian Contributions to Knowledge in 1848 and continuing 

with the following active series: 

Smithsonian Annals of Flight 

Smithsonian Contributions to Anthropology 

Smithsonian Contributions to Astrophysics 

Smithsonian Contributions to Botany 

Smithsonian Contributions to the Earth Sciences 

Smithsonian Contributions to Paleobiology 

Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology 

Smithsonian Studies in History and Technology 

In these series, the Institution publishes original articles and monographs dealing 

with the research and collections of its several museums and offices and of professional colleagues at other institutions of learning. These papers report newly acquired 

facts, synoptic interpretations of data, or original theory in specialized fields. These 

publications are distributed by mailing lists to libraries, laboratories, and other interested institutions and specialists throughout the world. Individual copies may be 

obtained from the Smithsonian Institution Press as long as stocks are available. 

S. DILLON RIPLEY 

Secretary 

Smithsonian Institution 

OFFICIAL PUBLICATION DATE is handstamped in a limited number of initial copies and is 

recorded in the Institution's annual report, Smithsonian Year. SI PRESS NUMBER 4794. 

Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data 

White, John H., Jr. 

American single locomotives and the Pioneer. 

(Smithsonian studies in history and technology, no. 25) 

1. Locomotives—United States—History. I. Title. II. Series: Smithsonian studies in 

history and technology, no. 25. 

TJ603.2.W48 625.2'61'0973 73-1062 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office 

Washington, D.C. 20402 - Price: 95 cents, domestic postpaid; 70 cents, GPO Bookstore 

Stock Number 4700-00256 

iv 
Contents 

Page 

The American Single Locomotive 1 

The Pioneer 21 

The Cumberland Valley Railroad 23 

Service History 27 

Mechanical Description 27 

Boiler 27 

Boiler Fittings 37 

Frame 41 

Running Gear 44 

Valve Gear 45 

Miscellaneous Notes 47 

Notes 48 
American 

Single Locomotives 

and the ^Pioneer93 

John H. White. Jr. 

In the mid-nineteenth century there was a renewed interest in the 

light, single-axle locomotives which were proving so very successful for 

passenger traffic. These engines were built in limited number by nearly 

every well-known maker, and among the few remaining is the six-wheel 

Pioneer, on display in the Smithsonian Institution's National Museum of 

History and Technology. This locomotive is a true representation of a light 

passenger locomotive of 1851 and a historic relic of the mid-nineteenth 

century. 

The Author: John H. White, Jr., is the curator of transportation in the 

Smithsonian Institution's National Museum of History and Technology. 

The American Single Locomotive 

Until the early or even the mid-1840s locomotives with a single pair of driving wheels were 

considered suitable for ordinary service on 

American railroads. After that time, however, 

engines of greater tractive power were deemed 

necessary to economically propel trains on our 

curving, hilly lines. Many single-driving axle 

machines were remodeled with an additional 

pair of drivers, while others were retired at an 

early date. The six-wheel, truck or Jervis type 

of locomotive (4-2-0) that seemed destined to 

become the standard American locomotive prevailed for less than a decade and was thought 

obsolete by 1845.x After that time, the "single" 

became something of a freak on North American railroads. Those that were produced later in 

the nineteenth century were either for very light 

passenger service, such as the Pioneer, or extraordinary high wheelers meant for the fastest 

express trains. 

The eight wheel (4-4-0) or American type 

was a logical enlargement of the 4-2-0. The 

modest cost and trouble in adding a second pair 

of driving wheels and only a small enlargement 

of boiler and cylinders, resulted in a remarkable 

improvement in pulling power, often over sixty 
VflliUA 

SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY 

a 

FIGURE 1. At first, the single-driver Jervis type seemed destined to dominate the 

American railroad scene, but its reign (about 1835-1842) was cut short by the more 

powerful American type. Shown here is a Norris, Jervis type of about 1837. 

percent.2 The stability and good riding qualities 

of the 4-4-0 over the 4-2-0 were also notable. 

Hence, it is little wonder that the six-wheel 

truck engine was displaced. Its early defeat was 

to forever condemn the single-axle locomotive 

to the most remote marches of American locomotive practice. 

In Great Britain and continental Europe, 

however, the single enjoyed a continued popularity as the standard passenger locomotive, and 

this form of railway engine was widely used in 

that area of the world until the early years of 

the present century when it suffered a sudden 

decline. To explain these widely differing preferences in this short study is not possible, but 

it can be suggested that contrasting operating 

conditions (level and straight versus rolling and 

crooked lines) and the engineering prejudices of 

the overseas mechanical managers were in large 

part accountable for the acceptance or rejection 

of the single. Yankee engineers thought singles 

were slippery and underpowered, while their 

European counterparts held them to be swift and 

elegant, the perfect form of express power. 

The imaginative plan of a British engineer 

named Thomas R. Crampton for a high-speed, 

single-axle locomotive rekindled interest in such 

machines in North America. Crampton felt that 

a low-slung boiler with the driving wheel behind 

the firebox was an essential reform for passenger locomotive design. He claimed that engines 

on his plan would lower the center of gravity, 

permit a wider firebox and steady the engine's 

running by avoiding overhanging masses at 

either end. A patent was issued in 1842, but most 

British lines were singularly disinterested. Four 

years later, a Crampton was built for a Belgian 

line and a few machines were later produced 

for several British railways. One of the first of 

these is illustrated in Figure 3. German and 
NUMBER 25 

c g — 

FIGURE 2. Successor to the single and longtime champion of the American railway for 

freight and passenger service was the eight wheel, 4—4-0. Baldwin built the example 

shown here in about 1845. 

FIGURE 3. The Kinnaird was 

a high-wheeled (84 inches) 

Crampton locomotive built in 

1848 by Tulk & Ley for the 

Dundee and Perth Railway. 

(Photograph courtesy of 

R. E. Bleasdale.) 

494-500 O - 73 - 2 
SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY 

French mechanics, however, developed a marked 

passion for the Crampton and some three hundred were built for continental service before 

1865. 

In the mid-1840s Robert L. Stevens, president 

of the Camden and Amboy Railroad and something of a mechanic himself, visited England 

and recognized the potential of the high-wheeled 

single for his level New Jersey railroad.3 Talk 

of Crampton's design was very much in the 

press, if not in the drawing office, at the time of 

Stevens' visit and so the plan was adopted, with 

some modifications, by the Camden and Amboy. 

The first locomotive was completed by Norris 

Brothers of Philadelphia in April 1849. Six sister machines followed during the next four 

years (Figure 4). All except the first were distinguished by giant 96-inch wheels. They had a 

wonderful capacity for speed, but were woefully deficient in tractive force and had great 

difficulty in starting even the light trains of that 

period. All but one had been remodeled as a 

4-4-0 by 1857. 

That they were a success or failure had nothing to do with it. The very existence of these 

startling machines prompted the production of 

several other American high-wheel singles. 

Baldwin hurriedly built an Americanized 

FIGURE 4. An American Crampton was the Camden and Amboy's extraordinary No. 30, 

built by Norris Brothers in 1850. This photograph was made sometime before the engine 

was remodeled in 1856 and is one of the earliest surviving camera views of an American 

locomotive known to exist. (Smithsonian Chaney negative 2455.) 
NUMBER 25 

Crampton named the Mifflin for the Pennsylvania Railroad in July 1849. It was followed by 

two near duplicates which, like the Mifflin, only 

served to prove the folly of a single pair of driving wheels for a mountainous railway. 

A more congenial proving ground for the 

single express was present in the nearly level 

Hudson River Railroad that followed the gentle 

curves of that mighty stream along its eastern 

bank. Thomas Rogers of Paterson, New Jersey, 

built a single for the line in 1849, the Baldwin 

Locomotive Works followed with a second machine the next year. The wheels were only moderately high (72 inches), but again a lack of 

adhesion proved their undoing. The Baldwin engine was reportedly returned to its maker. Rogers' pet was rebuilt as a 4-4-0. 

Ross Winans, machinist and locomotive 

builder of Baltimore, was certain he had a solution for the slippery single. An undoubted mechanical genius, Winans' career was illuminated 

by a series of engineering anomalies, not all of 

which can fairly be credited as being successful. 

Independent, cranky, and filled with the zeal of 

the true believer, Winans was willing to pay the 

price for his views. He was jailed briefly at the 

beginning of the Civil War and would have been 

hanged by General Benjamin Franklin Butler 

for his overt southern sympathies had not the 

War Department intervened. His entanglements 

with experimental locomotives were perhaps 

less dramatic, but they did manage to consume a 

portion of his fortune. One of the biggest losers 

surely was the ill-fated Carroll of Carrollton.4 

It all began innocently enough. The Boston 

and Worcester Railroad wanted to experiment 

with coal-burning passenger locomotives and 

knowing of Winans' prominence in the area of 

coal-burning freight locomotives, turned to him 

in 1847 for a design. The result of that inquiry 

was an astonishingly large and ungainly camelback locomotive with a single pair of 84-inch 

driving wheels (Figure 5) which Winans chose 

to name for a famous old Baltimore resident, 

Charles Carroll of Carrollton, renowned before 

his death in 1832 as the last surviving signer 

of the Declaration of Independence. 

The Carroll was delivered to Boston in the fall 

of 1849. The initial road tests were gratifying; 

she easily attained 60 mph though the speed 

could be maintained only for a short distance 

FIGURE 5. The patent model for Ross Winans' steam 

spring (Patent No. 8571, December 2, 1851) is in the 

Smithsonian's collection. A full-size locomotive, the 

Carroll of Carrollton, which incorporated the main 

features of the patent was completed two years before 

the patent was issued. (Smithsonian negative 65463.) 

because the roadbed was not adequate for such 

fast running. 

The poor starting qualities of the single were 

said to be overcome by Winans' ingenious 

"steam spring" mounted over the driving-axle 

boxes. They could transfer as much as 12!/2 

tons to the drivers for greater adhesion. Actually, the steam spring was an old idea, but no 

matter, Winans did use it to good advantage 

and claimed to have thus solved the single's 

great failing. In truth, the steam spring proved 

the Carroll's undoing; after only two months of 

service both drivers were broken because of the 

undue weight thrust upon them. It was also reported that the drivers slipped, even when under 

the utmost pressure the springs could exert. 

New wheels were sent to Boston. Winans alternately cajoled and threatened the Boston and 

Worcester to accept the engine, but they successfully resisted his entreaties; the Carroll, 

thoroughly humiliated, was sent home aboard a 

coastal vessel. She was tucked away in a back 

corner of Winans' shop awaiting a buyer who 

was never to appear. 

The high-wheeled singles failed to win more 

than the passing interest of American railroad 
SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY 

managers in the first two or three decades of the 

industry's history. Several other experimental 

engines were built before the middle 1850s, but 

no practical railroader would accept them for 

regular service. A new generation was coming 

into power, however, and some of these younger 

men were undoubtedly impressed by the good 

service of singles on foreign lines (Figure 6). 

Old ideas thus find new champions and the discredited schemes of the past are reborn, but in 

this instance only to be discredited once again. 

It started again in the late 1870s when the 

Philadelphia and Reading decided it needed an 

express engine for its newly leased Bound Brook 

Line which ran from Philadelphia to Jersey 

City. The road's dynamic president, Franklin 

B. Gowan, knew the value of publicity and indicated that something flashy and unusual 

should be used to capture public attention. The 

details of the design were left to the Baldwin's 

mechanical superintendent William P. Henszey. 

Henszey revived the Winans steam-spring idea, 

but modified the old plan so that the steam cylinder acted on the equalizing levers between the 

driving- and trailing-wheel axles so that more 

or less weight could be thrown on the drivers 

as desired. The design was the subject of Patent 

No. 227,778 of May 18, 1880. The Baldwin factory was so pleased with the prospects of the 

new 42.5 ton engine that even a construction 

number—the 5000—was assigned to it. The 

Reading gave her the road number 507. On 

May 14, 1880, a test run was made between 

Philadelphia and Jersey City (89 miles) with 

a four-car train weighing 84 tons. She performed admirably averaging 54.7 mph and on 

occasions sailed along at over 80 mph. A great 

future for high-wheeled singles was envisioned, 

express trains were beginning to make an appearance on American railways, and the need 

for faster motive power was obvious. Champions of the single argued that it was not only 

FIGURE 6. British railways remained loyal to high-speed singles long after America 

had abandoned them. Shown here is the Bristol and Exeter Railway's 2002, a 7-foot-gauge 

engine of noble proportions. Three sister engines were produced in 1868; all were 

retired by 1890. (Photograph courtesy of R. E. Bleasdale.) 

. 4* 

vi 
NUMBER 25 

faster and cheaper, but safer than ordinary 

coupled locomotives because the side rods and 

"auxiliary" wheels were eliminated. At high 

speeds the danger of breaking side rods was a 

hazard, but a far less likely eventuality than the 

single advocates would care to admit. Yet, it was 

another justification for overthrowing the standard eight wheeler. A better argument was the 

more perfect balance that was made possible by 

eliminating the side rods; this was an important 

consideration at high speeds. 

An unexpected turn of events, however, 

abruptly ended the 5000's career on the Bound 

Brook Line. Within days of the trial run, Gowan's empire collapsed. The failure of the Reading was as unexpected and catastrophic as the 

bankruptcy of the Penn Central in recent years. 

Creditors appeared from all sides taking away 

whatever property was not encumbered. Among 

these parties was the Baldwin Locomotive 

Works which withdrew three new locomotives 

that had not been formally delivered. One of 

these was the 5000. Buyers were quickly found 

for two conventional freight locomotives, but 

the 5000 proved less salable and seemed destined 

to follow the sad example of the Carroll of Carrollton. Much to the relief of the Baldwin, Frederick W. Eames, patentee of a vacuum brake, 

took a liking to the orphaned high wheeler. He 

needed a demonstrator to show off his brake in 

England. The 5000 was perfect, she would be 

well received by British railway men who already favored singles and would like to see a 

Yankee version of their standard form of express engine. It is also likely that the Baldwin 

Locomotive Works was ready to let her go 

cheaply. Eames not only had her outfitted with 

his brake, but had her smartly refinished. She 

was named in honor of his father: Lovett 

Eames.5 His portrait was attached to the center 

panel of the cab, while a scenic view of Black 

River Falls and the nearby vacuum-brake plant 

FIGURE 7. The Lovett Eames, the five-thousandth locomotive produced by the Baldwin 

Locomotive Works, was originally built in 1880 for the Philadelphia and Reading 

Railroad. She was repossessed by the builder and sold to the Eames Vacuum Brake 

Company to demonstrate that firm's apparatus. (Smithsonian negative 26802-B.) 
8 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY 

at Watertown, New York, was painted in a 

medallion on the tender's side (Figure 7). 

Reports of the English brake trials appeared 

in the October 14, 1881, issue of Engineer. The 

following August, the Eames was reported on 

display at the Alexandria Palace, near London, 

as part of the Exhibition of Life Saving Appliances. Sometime during her English running 

days, it was found necessary to lower her overall profile to suit the small loading gauges typical 

of the British lines. The cab roof was lowered 

and the sides given a rakish curve; the stack was 

cut down, and the headlight and its mounting 

bracket were dropped (Figure 8). 

Eames failed to market his brake beyond a 

few token installations and appears to have 

abandoned the engine. In April 1884, advertisements appeared in the British trade press announcing a court-ordered sale of the Lovett 

Eames. The only interested bidder was a scrap 

merchant who for $900 took her away to Wood 

Green where she was broken up as so much old 

iron. Here ends the story of this vagabond 

among locomotives except for one detail. The bell 

was salvaged for use at an engine house of the 

Great Northern Railway. In 1938 it passed into 

the hands of an American locomotive enthusiast 

named Richard E. Pennoyer, and in recent years 

it was presented to the Science Museum in London. It may be seen today in the Railway Gallery 

of that renowned institution. 

Fifteen years after the 5000's fiasco, the Philadelphia and Reading was ready again to try a 

high-speed single, and again William Henszey 

was to have a hand in its design.6 By this time, 

1895, the high-wheel bicycle craze was at its 

peak and the new engine's resemblance 

prompted the term "bicycle locomotive"; but 

the engine was anything but a featherweight bicycle. She was a giantess among singles and at 

57!/2 tons was probably the largest locomotive 

of her type ever built. The 84*4-inch-diameter 

drivers were driven by compound cylinders on 

the Vauclain plan (Figure 9). 

Two engines were built on this design by 

Baldwin. The first, No. 385, was delivered in 

FIGURE 8. The Lovett Eames as remodeled for service in Great Britain. The engine 

was scrapped in 1884. (Photograph courtesy of R. E. Bleasdale.) 
NUMBER 25 

1895; the second, No. 378, was completed the 

following year. The editor of Locomotive Engineering (1895) was invited to ride the 385 soon 

after she entered service, and a portion of Angus 

Sinclair's colorful report in the journal is quoted 

below. 

When I was invited by Mr. S. M. Vauclain to take a 

ride on the new Philadelphia & Reading single-driver 

engine, I very readily accepted the offer for the "days of 

auld lang syne." On getting to Jersey City, where I 

found the engine already attached to a six-car train of 

the heavy Blue Line, I looked at the load and examined 

the engine, and felt, from past experience, that there 

would be some difficulty in getting the train into speed. 

The old-time single-driver engines would run, once they 

got the train going, but they were very slow on the start. 

The engine attracted great attention. Crowds of people stood round watching the latest curiosity, and from 

the remarks heard on the platform, the belief prevailed 

that she was a hybrid between a locomotive and an 

electric motor. 

The cars weighed at the least estimate about 120 tons. 

When the starting time came I climbed up into the cab 

on the top of the boiler. The engineer had everything 

ready, and when the signal was given, pulled out without slip or jerk. This is made possible by use of the air 

sanding device. There is a long yard to be traversed 

in the start, and the presumption is that the maximum 

speed was not attempted there; but the engine covered 

the first six miles in seven and a half minutes. That 

settled in my mind the question about single-driver 

engines being slow in starting. 

After I had ceased watching the mile posts to make 

sure of the speed, I settled down to watch the working 

of the engine. The first impression received was: "How 

splendidly she rides!" A train of six heavy parlor cars 

is not kept moving at a speed of 60 miles an hour without 

great expenditure of power. The easy maintenance of 

speed with this engine was due in a great measure to 

the fine steaming qualities. All throughout the run of 92 

miles, the steam gage showed a constant pressure close 

on the popping point of 200 pounds to the square inch. 

This was the more surprising, considering the character 

of the coal. I examined it carefully on the tender, and 

found it to be anthracite slack—not the clean, grainlooking coal known as pea, but a mixture of pea and 

dust. The Wootten firebox, with its large grate area, 

makes the burning of such coal a possibility on a highspeed locomotive. With the ordinary firebox and sharp 

exhaust, this coal would pass through the tubes almost 

as fast as it could be thrown in; but with this large 

firebox and the soft exhaust characteristic of a compound locomotive, the finest particles of carbon are 

utilized to their fullest extent. 

The run of 92 miles in two hours and six minutes, 

with seven stops, ought not to involve exceptionally fast 

running, since the engineers are instructed to make the 

speed as nearly uniform as possible. But as we go along 

through the crowded towns and villages on the route, 

we soon realize how stretches of speed of about 70 miles 

an hour or over are necessary to make the time. There 

is a constant call to slow up at stations where crowds 

FIGURE 9. America's final effort to test the single for express service is represented 

by the Philadelphia and Reading's 385. She was produced by Baldwin in 1895. (Photograph courtesy of Thomas Norrell.) 

- : (.'^: • 
10 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY 

of passengers are loading upon local trains. A system of 

overhead bridges for passengers to cross the track on, 

and fences to prevent them from crossing on the level, 

would aid greatly in maintaining high speed for through 

trains. The Jersey Central and Philadelphia & Reading 

have excellent track in the line between New York & 

Philadelphia, but the facilities for keeping people off the 

track might be greatly improved. The Pennsylvania 

Railroad is much better provided in this respect. 

We left Jersey City at 6:12 P.M., and had only got 

over about half the distance when it became dark. Then 

we could see in its strongest aspect the safety and comfort that comes from the use of block signals. As stations 

were approached the novice was struck with the confusion of head lights, tail lights, electric lights and all 

varieties of lights, many of them colored; but the engineer looked for a particular spot, and if the light there 

did not indicate danger, he kept the train going without 

hesitation. Rushing along in the front of a train of 

this kind gives a most impressive lesson of the need for 

the very best of signals—signals which can make no 

mistake of indicating safety when the track is blocked 

by any obstruction. 

The train has darted through many junction points, 

through alleys of cars and through myriads of signals; 

it has twisted round sharp curves, and screamed through 

crowded stations. Cuttings and embankments and tunnels have been traversed at the speed of a hurricane, 

and I realize that the engineer carries a burden of responsibilities that I had never dreamed of, although 

I had spent twelve years on the footboard. We roll into 

Philadelphia on time, and I reflect upon making the trip 

on that engine as the man did who made a meal of crow. 

It can be done, but one does not hanker after it as a 

regular thing. 

A. S. 

They were intended to pull eight-car trains, 

but the 1.8 percent grade at Fern Rock, Pennsylvania, made it hard going even with a five- or 

six-car train. Both engines were soon relegated 

to secondary trains. In 1904 they were rebuilt as 

eight wheelers and proved serviceable enough 

in this form to continue in use until the 1930s. 

The single was repeatedly discredited in its 

bid for acceptance as an express locomotive 

in America. In the early years this was true, 

mainly because our railways did not attempt 

to operate high-speed trains. Most lines were 

cheaply built roads capable of minimal service 

and entirely unsuited to fast running. Those few 

American lines that could sustain fast trains 

preferred high-wheeled eight wheelers which 

offered superior tractive power in addition to 

fast running. The later efforts to revive the highwheeled single in the 1880s and 1890s were at 

best illusionary and predestined for failure. The 

heavier wooden cars then in service and the 

prospect of the steel car insured a not very serious acceptance of any form of locomotive lacking in starting power. 

There was, however, another area of railroad 

operations that the single seemed well suited to 

serve. Economy-minded railroad managers recognized a need for a very light style of locomotive for accommodation or branch-line passenger trains. What they wanted was a compact 

model to replace larger motive-power units on 

secondary trains. One obvious solution was a 

small, single-driver, tank locomotive. The plentiful supply of surplus 4-2-0s at first met this 

need nicely. Some were remodeled to more efficiently accomplish their new work. One example of such an ancient rebuilding is shown by 

the Apponaug (Figure 10). It was built in 1836 

by the Locks and Canals machine shop in Lowell, 

Massachusetts, and is illustrated here after having been remodeled in 1844 with an elongated 

boiler, the addition of leading and trailing 

wheels, and other modifications. 

Nevertheless, in time, new engines were required. The first of the new breed for which a 

record can be found was the Vermont Central's 

Abigail Adams which was completed in June 

1847 by the Baldwin Locomotive Works. She 

was a tiny three-ton tank engine with 42-inch 

drivers. Unfortunately, no illustrations exist of 

this machine. It was reported by Zerah Colburn 

that the managers of the road were disappointed 

that she couldn't do the work of an ordinary road 

engine. Their hopes had been raised to such an 

expectation by reports of very small British locomotives accomplishing such wonders. But as 

Colburn pointed out, they were of very light construction and had the added ginger of 120-pound 

steam pressure which was high for the period.7 

Baldwin also built three very light engines for 

the Georgia Railroad in 1846 and 1847, but there 

is some question as to whether or not they were 

singles. Again, no pictorial documentation is 

available. 

As an early railroad commuter center, Boston seemed a ripe proving ground for the economy single. Records indicate that George S. 

Griggs, master mechanic of the Boston and 

Providence Railroad, was the first to take up 

the challenge. Two small 2-2-2 tank engines 

were fabricated at the B&P's Roxbury shops.8 

For many years, the suburban trains on its Dedham branch had been economically propelled by 

a handful of aging lightweights dating from the 

mid 1830s. As these engines came due for major 
NUMBER 25 11 

FIGURE 10. The New York, Providence and Boston Railroad's Apponaug started life 

as a "Planet"-type single, 2-2-0, and was remodeled in 1844 as shown in this view at 

Stonington, Connecticut, about 1875. (Photograph courtesy of Thomas Norrell.) 

FIGURE 11. The Boston and Providence Railroad built the Dedham at its Roxbury 

shops in 1851 for light passenger service. It is shown here after being renamed the 

Uncle Tom. (Photograph courtesy of the Society for the Preservation of New England 

Antiquities.) 

494-500 O - 73 - 3 
12 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY 

kttfeftei -- - • 

FIGURE 12. The Uncle Tom in its last years, as remodeled and in service on the New 

York and Flushing Railroad. It is assumed that the photo dates from the 1870s. (Smithsonian negative 22707-L.) 

repairs, however, it was considered wise to sell 

them and, let others invest their hard cash in 

these obsolete products of Robert Stephenson, 

Edward Bury, and their contemporaries. Griggs 

proposed to replace these well-worn engines 

with two light single tankers. Griggs had already constructed several new locomotives at 

the Roxbury repair shops, all of which showed 

no lack of invention. The Dedham and Roxbury 

completed in the spring of 1851 followed in the 

same tradition (Figure 11). While Griggs can 

never fairly be accused of being a mere imitator, 

he did follow the English preference for cylinders inside of the frames. Most other New England mechanics favored this design—at least before the late 1850s—and both the Dedham and 

Roxbury were accordingly made. An unusual 

feature of these engines was the placement of a 

single large spring across the top of the boiler 

for the driving axle in place of the usual pair of 

springs mounted on the frame (Figure 11). Of 

greater consequence, was Griggs' scheme to improve traction. The rear coupler was attached to 

a pair of rods which were in turn connected to 

two L-shaped levers. The levers bore down upon 

the driving boxes. Thus, the draft of the train 

was transferred through the aforementioned arrangement to the driving wheels and the harder 

the engine pulled and the heavier the train, the 

greater was the pressure exerted on the drivers. 

This design was the subject of a patent issued 

to Griggs in June 1851 (Patent No. 8,166). 

In October of 1851, the Dedham was put 

through public trials at the New England Association of Railway Superintendents convention 

in Lowell, Massachusetts. She performed superbly and attracted much favorable comment 

after hauling an 18-ton train of two 8-wheel cars 

with 81 passengers aboard over a 9-mile course 

at a speed averaging 42 mph. The judges 

awarded Griggs a silver medal. More talk was 

likely generated on the positive merits of the 

single when combined with Griggs' traction increaser, but it soon became clear that the little 

tankers were another "splendid failure" that 

simply could not deliver what was expected of 

them. Both engines were sold. The Roxbury went 

to the Rome, Watertown and Ogdensburg Railroad, and an uncertain history. The Dedham, renamed Uncle Tom, was sent to the Fitchburg and 
NUMBER 25 13 

Worcester Railroad where after ten years she 

was sold to the New York and Flushing. By the 

time she reached Long Island, the Uncle Tom 

had undergone a number of changes as is evident 

in Figure 12.9 Whether she retained Griggs' 

traction rig is not distinguishable from the 

photograph. 

It is very likely that Griggs' engines inspired 

Wilmarth to produce two similar locomotives 

for the local market, but—as will be explained—when no Boston line would have 

them, a buyer was found in the Cumberland Valley Railroad. The performance of the first two 

engines was satisfactory enough to prompt a repeat order for two more machines. 

Another advocate of the single for light service was Danf orth, Cooke and Company of Paterson, New Jersey. In about 1855, just a few years 

after entering locomotive manufacture, the firm 

produced two single tankers for the Macon and 

Western Railroad.10 Then began the production 

of similar engines for the Troy and Greenbush, 

the Central Railroad of New Jersey, the Central 

Pacific, and other lines in the West and Midwest 

(Figures 13 and 14). The Cooke locomotive 

works were so convinced of the single's potential 

for secondary lines that efforts were reportedly 

made to patent the design, though it seems unlikely that a secure patent could have been obtained for the general design. In all, Cooke built 

some twenty singles. Four of these saw service 

on the West Coast, with the Central Pacific Railroad and Oregon Steam Navigation Company 

employing two each. Fortunately, one of these 

machines has survived to the present. The C. P. 

Huntington (1863) first worked on the Central 

FIGURE 13. Danforth, Cooke & Company produced a number of single-drivered tank 

engines for suburban and branch-line service in the 1850s and 1860s. The engine shown 

here is thought to be the Central Railroad of New Jersey's Wren or Pewit of 1864. 

(Photograph courtesy of Thomas Norrell.) 
14 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY 

FIGURE 14. A late-model Cooke single driver was the Middleburgh and Schoharie 

Railroad's Middleburgh, a product of 1868. (Photograph courtesy of Thomas Norrell.) 

FIGURE 15. Several singles saw service on the West Coast, and a few were even 

constructed in that region. The San Gabriel was built in 1864 by the Vulcan Iron Works 

of San Francisco, reportedly for the San Francisco & Alameda Railroad. (Photograph 

courtesy of the Los Angeles County Museum of Science.) 
NUMBER 25 15 

Pacific.11 After the line's completion in 1869, she 

was sold to a small southern California railroad 

that was to become the mighty Southern Pacific 

Railroad. The Huntington worked local passenger trains until the late 1890s when it was converted into a weed burner. In the summer of 

1900 she was condemned and ordered scrapped, 

but several employees at the road's Sacramento 

shops held a sentimental affection for the road's 

first locomotive and hid the little relic away 

from official view. In 1906 it was thought safe 

to remove her from hiding, and she was painted 

and put on exhibit outside of the shops. All 

was safe for another eight years when a second 

scrap order came through from the no-nonsense 

management. Just before the breakers started 

their dismal proceedings, the management had 

a change of heart and ordered the relic restored for display at the Panama-Pacific International Exposition in San Francisco in 1915. 

From this time forward, her existence as a 

historical object was relatively secure. Today, 

she is scheduled for display at a new transportation museum in California which is to be part of 

the projected Old Sacramento redevelopment. 

Cooke was not alone in its willingness to produce singles for secondary service, and most 

other builders built a few machines of this type. 

By the end of the 1860s, however, few buyers 

showed much interest in this style of locomotive 

even for suburban or branch-line service. Light 

tank engines did continue to be favored, but they 

were outfitted with two or more pairs of driving wheels. 

Perhaps the last, new, small-driver single built 

in the United States was the Onward which was 

produced in 1887 for the Swinerton Locomotive 

Driving Wheel Company by the Hinkley Locomotive Works of Boston (Figure 16). The engine was built to demonstrate C. E. Swinerton's 

polygonal driving-wheel tire.12 Instead of the 

usual smooth surface, the tire had many-sided 

prisms where "flats" were milled to increase the 

rail-area contact and hence increase traction. 

How better to prove the effectiveness of the invention than to try it on a notoriously slippery 

single ? The Onward was tried on several northeastern lines, but failed to convince practical 

railway mechanics that it possessed any special 

attributes. The engine was sold to the Portland 

and Rochester Railroad who, after a few years, 

sent the Onward to the Manchester Locomotive 

Works for reconstruction as an ordinary eight 

wheeler. She was cut up in 1905. 

The final gasp of the suburban single appears 

to have taken place on the Flint and Pere Marquette Railway in the middle 1890s.13

 Several 

aging 4-4-0s were remodeled as 4-2-4Ts by the 

railroad's mechanical chief, T. J. Hatswell 

(Figure 17). 

The single's final holdout in North America 

was the inspection locomotive. Such locomotives 

FIGURE 16. Swinerton Locomotive Driving Wheel Company's Onward was produced 

in 1887 to demonstrate the inventor's polygonal driving-wheel tire. (Photograph 

courtesy of Stevens Institute of Technology, Smith Collection, negative 223.) 

494-500 O - 73 - 4 
16 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY 

FIGURE 17. The Flint and Pere Marquette Railroad remodeled several aging 4-4-0s 

into single-driver tank engines for light passenger service in the middle 1890s. (From 

the American Engineer and Railroad Journal, June 1894, p. 264.) 

carried parties of railway officials to inspect the 

line itself or bridges, coal properties, or other 

facilities along the way. They were selfcontained vehicles generally meant for one-day 

excursions, although some of the heavier models 

could pull a business car if a longer journey was 

envisioned. Being self-propelled, they could stop 

anywhere along the line and were not bound 

FIGURE 18. Philadelphia and Reading's inspection locomotive Ariel was built at the Reading Shops in 1872. 

(Photograph courtesy of George M. Hart.) 

*~ 

by the schedule of regular trains as was the business car. Because inspection locomotives were 

generally meant to run light, there was little 

need for great tractive power; hence, the single 

was nicely suited for this class of engine. 

An early and large user of inspection locomotives was the Philadelphia and Reading 

Railroad. Its coal-land properties were frequently visited by officials of the road, and special steam cars proved most convenient for such 

jaunts. The first of these machines was built in 

1851. Six similar engines were eventually placed 

in service; one of these dating from 1872 is pictured in Figure 18.14

 A better idea of the general 

arrangement will be found in Figure 19. The 

final Reading inspection engine on this plan was 

the famous Black Diamond. By some good fortune, it was not scrapped and may be seen today 

at the National Museum of Transport in Saint 

Louis. 

Some inspection locomotives were rebuilt 

from existing engines. Earlier, reference was 

made to the several Cooke 4-2-4Ts that saw 

service on the Hudson River Railroad. Two of 

these machines were remodeled in 1876 and 

1877 by the successor line, the New York Central and Hudson River Railroad, for inspection 

service. The Monitor, later renamed Chemung, 

continued hauling officials for another quarter 

century (Figure 20). 
NUMBER 25 17 

FIGURE 19. This series of diagram drawings of a Reading 

inspection engine is from plate 26 in Travaux Publics EtatsUnis D'Amerique En 1870 by Emile Malezieux, Paris, 1873. 

FIGURE 20. The New York Central and Hudson River Railroad's inspection engine 

Monitor was rebuilt in 1877 from a Cooke 4-2-4 similar to those shown in Figures 13 

and 14. (Photograph courtesy of C. E. Fisher.) 
18 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY 

|£Y^ ___=^sgSS£^S§fe ^ JY. 

FIGURE 21. The inspection engine Nydia was produced for Irving A. Stearns, manager 

of the Pennsylvania Railroad's coal lands in 1889. (From Engineering News, August 31, 

1889, p. 195.) 

FIGURE 22. The steam car Economy shows yet another application for the single-driver 

locomotive. It was built at the shops of the Columbus, Piqua, and Indianapolis Railroad 

in 1861. (Smithsonian Chaney negative 10803.) 
NUMBER 25 19 

Yet another side to the single-driver locomotive was a fully enclosed variety of railcar 

used for inspection or light passenger service. 

The Reading engines and later specialties such 

as the Nydia were specifically meant for inspection service (Figure 21). As late as 1908 the 

Lackawanna purchased a steel-body steam inspection car of the same general style. But 

larger and less luxurious steam cars were built 

at an earlier date for thinly patronized passenger runs. A pioneer advocate of such accommodation cars was William Romans, master 

mechanic of the Columbus, Piqua and Indianapolis Railroad. In 1861 he built at 16-ton steam 

car that measured nearly 70 feet long overall.15 

The 2-2-0 locomotive was built into the front 

end of the car as shown in Figure 22. Romans 

built two more cars on this plan, one of which 

operated on the Minnesota Valley Railroad. 

It can be seen that the single had many 

careers on American railways. It raced with the 

rapid express and plodded along with the 

humble accommodation train; however, for all 

its variety and style, it would be an exaggeration 

to claim that the single was an important class 

of engine in this country. It was not, but it was 

an intriguing and unusual machine and that in 

itself makes its history worthy of study. 

TABLE 1. American single-wheel locomotives, 181^5-1896' 

Year 

1845 

1845 

1845 

1845 

1845 

1845 

1845 

1845 

1846 

1848 

1848 

1848 ca. 

1849 

1849 

1849 

1849 

1849 

1849 

1849 

1849 

1849 

1849 

1850 

1850 

1850 

1850 

1851 

1851 

1851 

1851 

1851 

1851 

1851 

1851 

Name or number 

Antelope 

Gov. Bradford 

Mt. Hope 

Mayflower 

Gov. Carver 

Miles Standish 

Fall River 

Niagara 

Quincy 

Adams 

Camella 

1 

No. 28 

Mifflin 

Blair 

Indiana 

Gov. Paine 

Pacific 

Lightning 

Carroll of Carrollton 

Mohawk 

Erie 

No. 29 

No. 30 

Susquehanna 

Essex 

Dedham 

Roxbury 

No. 87 

No. 112 

Pioneer 

Jenny Lind 

No. 31 

No. 32 

Builder 

Hinkley 

Hinkley 

Hinkley 

Hinkley 

Hinkley 

Hinkley 

Hinkley 

Hinkley 

Hinkley 

Baldwin 

Hinkley 

A. & S. Shops 

Norris 

Baldwin 

Baldwin 

Baldwin 

Baldwin 

Rogers 

Norris-Schenectady 

Ross Winans 

Matteawan 

Springfield 

Norris 

Norris 

Baldwin 

Lawrence Machine Shop 

Griggs 

Griggs 

Hinkley 

Hinkley 

Wilmarth 

Wilmarth 

Norris 

Norris 

Type 

4-2-2? 

4-2-2 

2-2-0? 

4-2-2 

4-2-2? 

6-2-0 

4-2-2 

4-2-2 

4-2-2 

4-2-2 

4-2-0? 

4-2-2 

4-2-4 

4-2-2 

4-2-2? 

6-2-0 

6-2-0 

4-2-2 

4-2-0? 

2-2-2 

2-2-2 

4-2-2 

4-2-2 

2-2-2 

2-2-2 

6-2-0 

6-2-0 

Railroad 

Boston & Maine 

Old Colony 

Old Colony 

Old Colony 

Old Colony 

Old Colony 

Fall River 

Buffalo & Niagara Falls 

Old Colony 

Vermont Central 

Boston & Maine 

Albany & Schenectady 

Camden & Amboy 

Pennsylvania 

Pennsylvania 

Pennsylvania 

Vermont Central 

Hudson River 

Utica & Schenectady 

Boston & Worcester 

Hudson River 

Hudson River 

Camden & Amboy 

Camden & Amboy 

Hudson River 

Boston & Lowell 

Boston & Providence 

Boston & Providence 

New York & Erie 

New York & Erie 

Cumberland Valley 

Cumberland Valley 

Camden & Amboy 

Camden & Amboy 

494-500 O - 73 
20 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY 

TABLE 1. American single-wheel locomotives, 18U5-1896—Continued 

Year Name or number Builder Type Railroad 

1851 

1853 

1853 

1854-55 

1854-55 

1855c. 

1855c. 

1856 

1859 

1859 

1860 

1860 

1860 ca. 

1860 ca. 

1861 

1861 

1861 

1861 

1862 

1862 

1862 

1862 

1862 

1862 

1862 

1862 

1863 

1863 

1864 

1864 

1864 

1864 

1864 

1867 

1868 

1868 

1868 

1870 

1880 

1887 

1894 ca. 

1894 ca. 

1894 ca. 

1894 ca. 

1895 

1896 

Addison Gilmore 

No. 37 

No. 38 

Boston 

Enterprise 

— 

— 

S. M. Craver 

Reindeer 

E. K. Scranton 

Hackensack 

Lodi 

— 

— 

Vixen 

Vampire 

D. T. Vail 

Monitor 

Rockville 

Gazelle 

Lilliput 

J. C. Ainsworth 

D. F. Bradford 

J. D. Wolfe 

M. H. Grinnell 

W. Scott 

C. P. Huntington 

W. B. Kelly 

Pewit 

Wren 

T. D. Judah 

No. 7 

San Gabriel 

Calistoga 

Rockporl 

Bessie 

Middleburgh 

Cricket 

No. 507 {Lovett Eames) 

Onward 

No. 11 

No. ? 

No. ? 

No. 1 

No. 385 

No. 378 

Wilson Eddy 

Norris 

Norris 

Wilmarth 

Wilmarth 

Cooke 

Cooke 

Schenectady 

Cooke 

Norris 

Rogers 

Rogers 

Cooke 

Cooke 

Mason 

Mason 

Cooke 

Cooke 

Mason 

Cooke 

Mason 

Cooke 

Cooke 

Cooke 

Cooke 

Cooke 

Cooke 

Cooke 

Cooke 

Cooke 

Cooke 

Baldwin 

Vulcan Iron Works 

Vulcan Iron Works 

Baldwin 

Grant 

Cooke 

L. V. R. R 

Baldwin 

Hinkley 

F. & P. M. 

F. & P. M. 

F. & P. M. 

F. & P. M. 

Baldwin 

Baldwin 

. Shops 

Shops 

Shops 

Shops 

Shops 

4-2-2 

6-2-0 

6-2-0 

4-2-4 

4-2-4 

2-2-4? 

2-2-4? 

4-2-4 

4-2-4 

2-2-2 

4-2-0 

4-2-0 

2-2-0 

2-2-0 

4-2-4T 

4-2-4T 

2-2-0 

4-2-4 

2-2-0 

4-2-4 

4-2-4 

4-2-4T 

4-2-4T 

4-2-4T 

4-2-4 

4-2-4T 

2-2-4 

2-2-4 

4-2-4 

4-2-0 

2-2-0 

2-2-0 

2-2-0 

4-2-0 

4-2-4 

2-2-2T 

4-2-2 

4-2-2 

4-2-4T 

4-2-4T 

4-2-4T 

4-2-4T 

4-2-2 

4-2-2 

Western (Mass.) 

Camden & Amboy 

Camden & Amboy 

Cumberland Valley 

Cumberland Valley 

Macon & Western 

Macon & Western 

Renssalaer & Saratoga 

Cleveland, Painsville & 

Ashtabula (L.S. & M.S. 190) 

Brooklyn & Jamaica Central 

Hackensack & New York 

Hackensack & New York 

Troy & Greenbush 

Troy & Greenbush 

Dubuque & Sioux City 

Dubuque & Sioux City 

Hudson River 

Hudson River 

Rockville Branch 

Lake Shore & Michigan Southern 

Lehigh Valley 

Oregon Steam Navigation Co. 

Oregon Steam Navigation Co. 

Hudson River 

Hudson River 

Hudson River 

Central Pacific 

Hudson River 

Central Railroad of New Jersey 

Central Railroad of New Jersey 

Central Pacific 

West Chester & Philadelphia 

Los Angeles & San Pedro 

Napa Valley 

Rocky River 

St. Louis & Iron Mountain 

Middleburgh & Schoharie 

Lehigh Valley 

Philadelphia & Reading 

Portland & Rochester 

Flint & Pere Marquette 

Flint & Pere Marquette 

Flint & Pere Marquette 

Flint & Pere Marquette 

Philadelphia & Reading 

Philadelphia & Reading 

:This list does not include steam cars or inspection cars. 
The

 f?Pioneer" 

The Pioneer is an unusual locomotive and on 

first inspection would seem to be imperfect for 

service on an American railroad of the 1850s. 

This locomotive has only one pair of driving 

wheels and no truck, an arrangement which 

marks it as very different from the highly successful standard eight-wheel engine of this period. All six wheels of the Pioneer are rigidly 

attached to the frame. It is only half the size of 

an eight-wheel engine of 1851 and about the 

same size of the 4-2-0 so common in this country 

some twenty years earlier. Its general arrangement is that of the rigid English locomotive 

which had, years earlier, proven unsuitable for 

use on railroads in the United States. 

These objections are more apparent than real, 

for the Pioneer, and other engines of the same 

design, proved eminently successful when used 

in the service for which they were built—that 

of light passenger traffic. The Pioneer's rigid 

wheelbase is no problem, for when it is compared to that of an eight-wheel engine it is found 

to be about 4 feet less; and its small size is no 

problem when we realize it was not intended for 

FIGURE 23. The Pioneer, built in 1851, shown here as renovated and exhibited in the 

Museum of History and Technology, 1964. In 1960 the locomotive was given to the Smithsonian Institution by the Pennsylvania Railroad through John S. Fair, Jr. (Smithsonian 

negative 63344B.) 
22 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY 

11 rrn i 

• ' » ' » * * 

FIGURE 24. Diagram comparing the Pioneer (shaded drawing) with the Columbia, 

standard 8-wheel engine of 1851. (Drawing by J. H. White.) 

Columbia 

Hudson River Railroad 

Lowell Machine Shop, 1852 

Wt. 27% tons (engine only) 

Cyl. 16% x 22 inches 

Wheel diam. 84 inches 

Pioneer 

Cumberland Valley Railroad 

Seth Wilmarth, 1851 

12% tons 

8% x 14 inches 

54 inches 

FIGURE 25. Pioneer, about 1901, showing the sandbox and large headlamp. Note the 

lamp on the cab roof, later used as the headlight. (Smithsonian negative 49272.) 
NUMBER 25 23 

heavy service. Figure 24, a diagram, is a comparison of the Pioneer and a standard eightwheel locomotive. 

Since the service life of the Pioneer was spent 

on the Cumberland Valley Railroad, a brief account of that line is necessary to an understanding of the service history of this locomotive. 

The Cumberland Valley Railroad 

The Cumberland Valley Railroad (C.V.R.R.) 

was chartered on April 2, 1831, to connect the 

Susquehanna and Potomac rivers by a railroad 

through the Cumberland Valley in south-central 

Pennsylvania. The Cumberland Valley, with its 

rich farmland and iron-ore deposits, was a 

natural north-south route long used as a portage 

between these two rivers. Construction began in 

1836, and because of the level valley some 52 

miles of line were completed between Harrisburg and Chambersburg by November 16,1837. 

In 1860, by way of the Franklin Railroad, the 

line extended to Hagerstown, Maryland. It was 

not until 1871 that the Cumberland Valley Railroad reached its projected southern terminus, 

the Potomac River, by extending to Powells 

Bend, Maryland. Winchester, Virginia, was entered in 1890 giving the Cumberland Valley 

Railroad about 165 miles of line. This railroad 

which had become associated with the Pennsylvania Railroad in 1859, was merged with that 

company in 1919. 

By 1849 the Cumberland Valley Railroad was 

in poor condition; the strap-rail track was worn 

out, and new locomotives were needed. Captain 

Daniel Tyler was hired to supervise rebuilding 

the line with T-rail, and easy grades and curves. 

Tyler recommended that a young friend of his, 

Alba F. Smith, be put in charge of modernizing 

and acquiring new equipment. Smith recommended to the railroad's Board of Managers on 

June 25, 1851, that "much lighter engines than 

those now in use may be substituted for the passenger transportation and thereby effect a great 

saving both in point of fuel and road repairs . . . ."16

 Smith may well have gone on to 

explain that the road was operating three- and 

four-car passenger trains with a locomotive 

weighing about 20 tons; the total weight was 

about 75 tons, equaling the uneconomical deadFIGURE 26. Map of the Cumberland Valley Railroad 

as it appeared in 1919. 

weight of 1,200 pounds per passenger. Since 

speed was not an important consideration (30 

mph being a good average), the use of lighter 

engines would improve the deadweight-to-passenger ratio and would not result in a slower 

schedule. 

The Board of Managers agreed with Smith's 

recommendations and instructed him "to examine the two locomotives lately built by Mr. 

Wilmarth and now in the [protection?] of Captain Tyler at Norwich and if in his judgment 

they are adequate to our wants . . . have them 

forwarded to the road."

 1;

 Smith inspected the 

locomotives not long after this resolution was 

passed, for they were on the road by the time he 

made the following report1S to the Board on 

September 24, 1851: 
24 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY 

In accordance with a resolution passed at the last 

meeting of your body relative to the small engines built 

by Mr. Wilmarth I proceeded to Norwich to make trial 

of their capacity—fitness or suitability to the Passenger 

transportation of our Road—and after as thorough a 

trial as circumstances would admit (being on another 

Road than our own) I became satisfied that with some 

necessary improvements which would not be expensive 

(and are now being made at our shop) the engines 

would do the business of our Road not only in a manner 

satisfactory in point of speed and certainty but with 

greater ultimate economy in Expenses than has before 

been practised in this Country. 

After making the above trial of the Engines—I stated 

to your Hon. President the result of the trial—with my 

opinion of their Capacity to carry our passenger trains 

at the speed required which was decidedly in favor of 

the ability of the Engines. He accordingly agreed that 

the Engines should at once be forwarded to the Road 

in compliance with the Resolution of your Board. I immediately ordered the Engines shipped at the most 

favorable rates. They came to our Road safely in the 

Condition in which they were shipped. One of the Engines has been placed on the Road and I believe performed in such a manner as to convince all who are able 

to judge of this ability to perform—although the maximum duty of the Engines was not performed on account 

of some original defects which are now being remedied 

as I before stated. 

Within ten days the Engine will be able to run regularly with a train on the Road where in shall be enabled to judge correctly of their merits. 

An accident occurred during the trial of the Small 

Engine at Norwich which caused a damage of about 

$300 in which condition the Engine came here and is 

now being repaired—the cost of which will be presented 

to your Board hereafter. As to the fault or blame of 

parties connected with the accident as also the question 

of responsibility for Repairs are questions for your 

disposal. I therefore leave the matter until further 

called upon. 

The Expenses necessarily incurred by the trial of the 

Engines and also the Expenses of transporting the same 

are not included in the Statement herewith presented, 

the whole amount of which will not probably exceed 

$400.00. 

These two locomotives became the Cumberland Valley Railroad's Pioneer (No. 13) and 

Jenny Lind (No. 14). While Smith notes that 

one of the engines was damaged during the inspection trials, Joseph Winters, an employee of 

the Cumberland Valley who claimed he was accompanying the engine en route to Chambersburg at the time of their delivery, later recalled 

that both engines were damaged in transit.10 

FIGURE 27. The Utility as rebuilt into an 8-wheel tank engine subsequent to an 1862 

collision with a Northern Central locomotive while pulling a hospital train loaded with 

Civil War wounded. It was purchased by the Carlisle Mfg. Co. in 1882 and was last used 

in 1896. (Smithsonian negative 36,716-F.) 
NUMBER 25 25 

According to Winters a train ran into the rear 

of the Jenny Lind, damaging both it and the 

Pioneer, the accident occurring near Middletown, Pennsylvania. The Jenny Lind was repaired at Harrisburg; the Pioneer, less seriously 

damaged, was taken for repairs to the main 

shops of the Cumberland Valley road at 

Chambersburg. 

While there seems little question that these 

locomotives were not built as a direct order for 

the Cumberland Valley Railroad, an article appearing in the Railroad Advocate in 1855 credits 

their design to Smith. The article speaks of a 

2-2-4 built for the Macon and Western Railroad 

and says in part: 

This engine is designed and built very generally upon 

the ideas, embodied in some small tank engines designed 

by A. F. Smith, Esq., for the Cumberland Valley road. 

Mr. Smith is a strong advocate of light engines, and his 

novel style and proportions of engines, as built for him 

a few years since, by Seth Wilmarth, at Boston, are 

known to some of our readers. Without knowing all the 

circumstances under which these engines are worked 

on the Cumberland Valley road, we should not venture 

to repeat all that we have heard of their performances, 

it is enough to say that they are said to do more, in 

proportion to their weight, than any other engines now 

in use." 

The author believes that the Railroad Advocate's claim of Smith's design of the Pioneer 

has been confused with his design of the Utility 

(Figures 27 and 28). Smith designed this compensating-lever engine to haul trains over the 

C.V.R.R. bridge at Harrisburg. It was built by 

Wilmarth in 1854. 

According to statements of Smith and the 

Board of Managers quoted on page 24, the 

Pioneer and the Jenny Lind were not new when 

purchased from their maker, Seth Wilmarth. 

Although of recent manufacture, previous to 

June 1851, they were apparently doing service 

on a road in Norwich, Connecticut. It should be 

mentioned that both Smith and Tyler were formerly associated with the Norwich and 

Worcester Railroad, and they probably learned 

of these two engines through this former assoFIGURE 28. The Utility, designed by A. F. Smith and constructed by Seth Wilmarth in 

1854, was built to haul trains across the bridge at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. 
26 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY 

ciation. It is possible that the engines were purchased from Wilmarth by the Cumberland 

Valley road, which had bought several other 

locomotives from Wilmarth in previous years. 

It was the practice of at least one other New 

England engine builder, the Taunton Locomotive Works, to manufacture engines on the 

speculation that a buyer would be found; if no 

immediate buyers appeared, the engine was 

leased to a local road until a sale was made.21 

Regarding the Jenny Lind and Pioneer, Smith 

reported

 22

 to the Board of Managers at their 

meeting of March 17,1852: 

The small tank engines which were purchased last 

year . . . and which I spoke in a former report as undergoing at that time some necessary improvements have 

since that time been fairly tested as to their capacity to 

run our passenger trains and proved to be equal to the 

duty. 

The improvements proposed to be made have been 

completed only on one engine [Jenny Lind] which is now 

running regularly with passenger trains—the cost of 

repairs and improvements on this engine (this being the 

one accidentally broken on the trial) amounted to 

$476.51. The other engine is now in the shop, not yet 

ready for service but will be at an early day. 

The Pioneer and Jenny Lind achieved such 

success in action that the president of the road, 

Frederick Watts, commented on their performance in the annual report of the Cumberland 

Valley Railroad for 1851. Watts stated that 

since their passenger trains were rarely more 

than a baggage car and two coaches, the light 

locomotives ". . . have been found to be admirably adapted to our business." The Cumberland 

Valley Railroad, therefore, added two more locomotives of similar design in the next few 

years. These engines were the Boston and the 

Enterprise, also built by Wilmarth in 1854-

1855. 

Watts reported the Pioneer and Jenny Lind 

cost $7,642. A standard eight-wheel engine cost 

about $6,500 to $8,000 each during this period. 

TABLE 2. Yearly mileage of the Pioneer 

(From Annual Reports, Cumberland Valley Railroad) 

Year Miles 

1852 *3,182 

1853 »>20, 722 

1854 18,087 

1855 14,151 

1856 20,998 

1857 22,779 

1858 29,094 

1859 29,571 

1860 4,824 

1861 4,346 

1862 («) 

1863 5,339 

1864 224 

1865 2,215 

1866 20,546 

1867 5,709 

Year Miles 

1868 13,626 

1869 1,372 

1870 

1871 2,102 

1872 4,002 

1873 3,721 

1874 3,466 

1875 636 

1876 870 

1877 406 

1878 4,433 

1879 

1880 8,306 

1881 (d) 

Total

 e 244, 727 

" Mileage 1852 for January to September (no record of 

mileage recorded in Annual Reports C.V.R.R. previous to 

1852). 

D

 15,000 to 20,000 miles per year was considered very 

high mileage for a locomotive of the 1850s. 

- No mileage reported for any engines due to fire. 

d

 Not listed on roster. 

e

 The Pennsylvania Railroad claims a total mileage of 

255,675. This may be accounted for by records of mileages 

for 1862, 1870, and 1879. 

Exhibits of the Pioneer 

The Pioneer has been a historic relic since 

1901. In the fall of that year, minor repairs 

were made to the locomotive so that it might 

be used in the sesquicentennial celebration at 

Carlisle, Pennsylvania. On October 22, 1901, 

the engine was ready for service, but as it 

neared Carlisle a copper flue burst. The fire 

was extinguished and the Pioneer was pushed 

into town by another engine. In the twentieth 

century, the Pioneer was displayed at the 

Louisiana Purchase Exposition, Saint Louis, 

Missouri, in 1904, and at the Wheeling, West 

Virginia, semicentennial in 1913. In 1927 it 

joined many other historic locomotives at the 

Baltimore and Ohio Railroad's "Fair of the 

Iron Horse" which commemorated the first 

one hundred years of that company. From 

about 1913 to 1925 the Pioneer also appeared 

a number of times at the Appleblossom Festival at Winchester, Virginia. In 1933-1934 

it was displayed at the world's fair in Chicago, and in 1948-1949 at the Railroad Fair 

in the same city. Between 1934 and March 

1947, it was exhibited at the Franklin Institute, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 
NUMBER 25 

In recent years, the Pennsylvania Railroad has 

stated the Pioneer cost $6,200 in gold, but is unable to give the source for this information. The 

author discounts this statement, for it does not 

seem reasonable that a light, cheap engine of the 

pattern of the Pioneer could cost as much as a 

machine nearly twice its size. 

Service History 

After being put in service, the Pioneer continued to perform well and was credited as able 

to move a four-car passenger train along 

smartly at 40 mph.23 This tranquility was shattered in October 1862 by a raiding party led by 

Confederate General J. E. B. Stuart which 

burned the Chambersburg shops of the Cumberland Valley Railroad. The Pioneer, Jenny Lind, 

and Utility were partially destroyed. The Cumberland Valley Railroad in its report for 1862 

stated: 

The Wood-shop, Machine-shop, Black-smith-shop, 

Engine-house, Wood-sheds, and Passenger Depot were 

totally consumed, and with the Engine-house three 

second-class Engines were much injured by the fire, but 

not so destroyed but that they may be restored to 

usefulness. 

No record can be found, however, of the extent or exact nature of the damage. The shops 

and a number of cars were burned, so it is reasonable to assume that the cab and other wooden 

parts of the locomotive were damaged. One unverified report in the files of the Pennsylvania 

Railroad states that part of the roof and brick 

wall fell on the Pioneer during the fire causing 

considerable damage. In June 1864 the Chambersburg shops were again burned by the Confederates, but on this occasion the railroad managed to remove all of its locomotives before the 

raid. During the Civil War, the Cumberland VaL. 

ley Railroad was obliged to operate longer passenger trains to satisfy the enlarged traffic. The 

Pioneer and its sister single-axle engines were 

found too light for these trains and were 

used only on work and special trains. Reference 

to Table 1 will show that the mileage of the 

Pioneer fell off sharply for the years 1860-1865. 

In 1871 the Pioneer was remodeled by A. S. 

Hull, master mechanic of the railroad. The exact 

nature of the alterations cannot be determined, 

as no drawings or photographs of the engine 

previous to this time are known to exist. In fact, 

27 

the drawing (Figure 29) prepared by Hull in 

1876 to show the engine as remodeled in 1871 is 

the oldest known illustration of the Pioneer. 

Paul Westhaeffer, a lifelong student of Cumberland Valley Railroad history, states that according to an interview with one of Hull's descendants the only alteration made to the Pioneer 

during the 1871 "remodeling" was the addition 

of a handbrake. The road's annual report of 

1853 describes the Pioneer as a six-wheel tank 

engine. The report of 1854 mentions that the 

Pioneer used link motion. These statements are 

enough to give substance to the idea that the basic arrangement has survived unaltered and that 

it has not been extensively rebuilt, as was the 

Jenny Lind in 1878. 

By the 1870s the Pioneer was too light for the 

heavier cars then in use, and by 1880 it had 

reached the end of its usefulness for regular 

service. After nearly thirty years on the road, 

it had run 255,675 miles. Two new passenger 

locomotives were purchased in 1880 to handle 

the heavier trains. In 1881 the Pioneer was 

dropped from the roster, but was used until 

about 1890 for work trains. After this time it 

was stored in a shed at Falling Spring, Pennsylvania, near the Chambersburg yards of the 

C.V.R.R. 

Mechanical Description 

The following paragraphs describe the mechanical details of the Pioneer as it appears on 

exhibition in the Smithsonian Institution's National Museum of History and Technology. 

Boiler 

The boiler is the most important and costly 

part of a steam locomotive, representing onefourth to one-third of the total cost. A poorly 

built or designed boiler will produce a poor locomotive no matter how well made the remainder 

of the mechanism. The boiler of the Pioneer is of 

the wagon-top, crownbar, fire-tube style and is 

made of a 5/

16-inch thick, wrought-iron plate. 

The barrel is very small, in keeping with the size 

of the engine, being only 27 inches in diameter. 

While some readers may believe this to be an 

extremely early example of a wagon-top boiler, it 

should be remembered that most New England 

builders produced few locomotives with the 
:*3a5K0C5:>. ir^x^rsfeascss 

;•' .

 :

- -

X * 
i 

- *. 

..,•-• • » • 

b 

«? \ , u i M $> « v ' ,» > i d ti 

H 

,* -

I ft I V 

•5

 r V MO|j 

-'*i»;a$Yt& 

FIGURE 29. The earliest known illustration of the Pioneer, drawn by A. S. Hull, master 

mechanic of the Cumberland Valley Railroad in 1876. It depicts the engine as it 

appeared in 1871. (Photograph courtesy of Paul Westhaeffer.) 
30 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY 

OBMBUABB filll T BAHMAB--SI 

FOR THE GOVERNMENT AND INFORMATION OF EMPLOYEES ONLY 

Takes effect on Monday, November 18th, 1878, at 4.30 A. 

North'n Central Trains. Up Trains— Westwai 

JJa-Con.luclori, Enginee 

Dispatchers, using ihe Ir 

H.i.iJ.'iri «nd Brldgepo 

«ide themselves .nth Join 

oftlic I umljerland Valley una Nortl 

Cenlml RmU-ny., nnd will bfl gover 

whilnonlhis Irsck hy the Hulei 

Regulations printed (hereon. 

Tnti 

Dillsburg Branch. 

SOITHU'JMIILes.e ! A 

Mechamciburg 1 8 1 

9 

Ddlsburg Junction . 0. 

.6 . | 

Trindle Spring | 96 I ... 

.v.. Ill 

Dilltburg 

No. 17 

Dillsburg 

Accom. 

P. M. 

12 45 

1 20 

| 1 35 

! 140 

|2.0 » 

2 13 

No 15. 

Wtlliams MM 

It i. P.'June 

DiL'sburg . 

135. 

112 

2 25 

230 

235 

Southern Penn'a 

Rsil Rosd. 

~33 JV"o Mill Tr'n 

1'. M 

3 23 

4(111 

I.e. 

4.f> 

4 35 

4 47 

453 

5 05 

5 2". 

5 iT 

• 41 

5 49 

coo 

6 15 

P M 

Mont Alto 

Ha.I Rosd. 

KfSTUJIi l 

9.00 

910 

59.1 

62 C 

65 0 

66 3 

68 9 

7iM 

72 7 

70 4 

71 1 

72 8 

75 0 

78 2 

South Perm Jc. 

. .Stone liralge. 

... Williamson 

.... /lochia!' . . 

... Lehmn\let'i 

Mcrrrrsburg Jane 

2 ^i AlercmhuTii . 

Met ctn&ui a Jane 

.. n,Ckrt/'S . 

. flutter's . 

.Lauilon .. 

. Richmond 

No. 11 

Freight. 

P. M. 

1201 

12 20 

12 35 

12.40 

1245 

1.02 

1 17 

[ ia 

1.45 

II*. I * 

2.34 

2 39 

H9.SH, 

3 04 

3 30 

3 40 

4 03 

4 03 

4 25 

4 40 

lia.oo 

5 22 

5 37 

5 44 

6 0 0 

r M 

Amve 

1 No. 9 

1 F.st 

Fr.ighl. 

A. M. 

0 30 

6 50 

7 0 5 

7 20 

7 25 

7 43 

8 0 0 

8 20 

1».S5 

9.1 0 

9 29 

9 34 

9 42 

10 05 

1110.24 

10 49 

10 54 

11.10 

li.aa 

1145 

12 05 

1217 

12 23 

12 40 

140 

2 10 

2 15 

2 40 

o 10 

3 40 

113.4!. 

4 15 

P M 

.1 l.y lull l*€.d llr 

A . TL.. (iARnNEU , l.. 

FIGURE 30. Timetable of the Cumberland Valley Railroad for 1878. 

Bury (dome) boiler and that the chief advocates 

of this later style were the Philadelphia builders. 

By the early 1850s the Bury boiler passed out of 

favor entirely, and the wagon top became the 

standard type of boiler with all builders in this 

country. 

Sixty-three iron tubes, 1% by 85 inches long 

are used. The original tubes may have been 

copper or brass, since these were easier to keep 

tight than the less malleable iron tubes. The 

present tube sheet is of iron, but was originally 

copper. Its thickness cannot be conveniently 

measured, but it is greater than tha t of the boiler 

shell, probably about i/2 to % inch. While copper tubes and tube sheets were not much used 

in this country after about 1870, copper was em-
NUMBER 25 31 

FIGURE 31. The Pioneer in Carlisle, Pennsylvania, 1901. (Photograph courtesy of 

Thomas Norrell.) 

FIGURE 32. A rare in-service photograph of the Pioneer taken presumably during the 

last years of its career. (Smithsonian negative 72-5999.) 
32 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY 

ployed as recently as 1950 by Robert Stephenson 

& Hawthorns, Ltd., on some small industrial 

locomotives. 

The boiler shell is lagged with wooden tongueand-groove strips about 21/2 inches wide (felt 

also was used for insulation during this period). 

The wooden lagging is covered with Russia sheet 

iron which is held in place, and the joints are 

covered by polished brass bands. Russia sheet 

iron is a planish iron having a lustrous, metallicgray finish. 

The steam dome (Figure 39) is located directly over the firebox, inside the cab. It is 

lagged and jacketed in an identical manner to 

the boiler. The shell of the dome is of Y16-inchthick wrought iron, the top cap is a cast-iron 

plate which also serves as a manhole cover offering access to the boiler's interior for inspection 

and repair. 

A round plate, 20 inches in diameter, riveted 

on the forward end of the boiler, just behind the 

bell stand, was found when the old jacket was 

removed in May 1963. The size and shape of the 

hole, which the plate covers, indicate that a steam 

dome or manhole was located at this point. It 

is possible that this was the original location of 

the steam dome, since many builders in the early 

1850s preferred to mount the dome forward of 

the firebox. This was done in the belief that 

there was less danger of priming, because the 

water was less agitated forward of the firebox. 

The firebox is as narrow as the boiler shell 

and fits easily between the frame. It is a deep 

and narrow box, measuring 27 inches by 28 

inches by about 40 inches deep, and is well suited 

to burning wood. A deep firebox was necessary 

because a wide, shallow box suitable for coal 

burning allowed the fuel to burn so quickly that 

it was difficult to fire the engine effectively. With 

the deep, narrow firebox, wood was filled up to 

the level of the fire door. In this way, the fire did 

not burn so furiously and did not keep ahead of 

the fireman; at the same time, since it burned so 

freely, a good fire was always on hand. The 

Pioneer burned oak and hickory.29 For the firebox %6-inch-thick sheet was used, for heavier 

sheet would have blistered and flaked off because of the intense heat of the fire and the 

fibrous quality of wrought-iron sheet of the period. Sheet iron was fabricated from many small 

strips of iron rolled together while hot. These 

strips were ideally welded into a homogeneous 

FIGURE 33. The Pioneer in Carlisle, Pennsylvania, 1901. 

Thomas Norrell.) 

(Photograph courtesy of 
NUMBER 25 33 

£S 193 

SOUTH BOSTON, 

®IWB W11SA&TB . proprietor, 

STATIONARY STEAM ENGINES AND STEAM BOILERS, 

OF THE VARIOUS SIZES REQUIRED, 

Paris connected with Railroads, including Frogs, Switches, Chairs and Hand Cars. 

MACHINISTS' TOOLS, of all descriptions, including TURNING LATHES, of sizes varying from 6 

feet to 50 feet in length, and weighing from 500 pounds to 40 tons each ; the latter 

capable of turning a wheel or pulley, thirty feet in diameter. 

PLANIN G MACHINES , 

Varying from 2 feet to 60 feet in length, and weighing from 200 lbs. to 70 tons each, and will 

plane up to 55 feet long and 7 feet square. 

Boring Mills, Vertical and Horizontal Drills, Slotting Machines, Punching Presses, Gear and Screw Cutting Machines, &c. &c. Also, 

ittill bearing anb Shafting. 

JOBBING AND REPAIRS, and any kind of work usually done in Ma-

(. < \ chine Shops, executed at short notice. 

FIGURE 34. Advertisement of Seth Wilmarth appearing in Boston city directory for 

1848-1849. 
34 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY 

FIGURE 35. The Pioneer as first exhibited in February 1961 in the Arts and Industries 

building of the Smithsonian Institution prior to restoration of the sandbox. (Smithsonian negative 48069D.) 

sheet, but in practice it was found that the 

thicker the sheet the less sure the weld. 

The fire grates are cast iron and set just a few 

inches above the bottom of the water space so 

that the water below the grates remains less turbulent, and mud or other impurities in the water 

settle here. Four bronze mud plugs and a blowoff cock are fitted to the base of the firebox so 

that the sediment thus collected can be removed 

(Figures 38 and 39). 

The front of the boiler is attached to the 

frame by the smokebox, which is a cylinder, 

bolted on a light, cast-iron saddle (not part of 

the cylinder castings nor attached to them, but 

bolted directly to the top rail of the frame; it 

may be a hastily made repair put on at the shops 

of the Cumberland Valley Railroad). The rear 

of the boiler is attached to the frame by two 

large cast-iron brackets, one on each side of the 

firebox (Figure 39). These are bolted to the top 

rail of the frame but the holes in the brackets 

are undoubtedly slotted, so that they may slide 

since the boiler will expand about 14 i n c n when 

heated. In addition to the crown bars, which 

strengthen the crown sheet, the boiler is further 

strengthened by stay bolts and braces located 

in the wagon top over the firebox where the 

boiler had been weakened by the large hole necessary for the steam dome. This boiler is a remarkedly light, strong, and compact structure. 
NUMBER 25 35 

FIGURE 36. The Neptune, built for the Boston and Worcester Railroad in 1847 by 

Hinkley and Drury. Note the similarity of this engine and the Fury. 

FIGURE 37. The Fury, built for the Boston and Worcester Railroad in 1849 by Wilmarth. 

It was known as a "Shanghai" because of its great height. (Smithsonian Chaney 

negative 6443.) 

-
36 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY 

>, 

bo 

C 
NUMBER 25 

37 

«u CO 

B 

O 

team j 

be she 1) rod Ive, (1 

) blow 

m CO w

' nee bala ho 

C 

u 

t-u 

m 

f M 

*—' ve, val 

£ 

«<H ive. (1) + J omo 

o S* 

a Pio CO 

a 

« 6 

r i . 

1 J J 

G 

o !H •H 0 0 03 - Q 

_ 

O 

& u 

t-oT 

o 

h 

4 2 

-t-> CD 

> 

<3J 

.2 +3 

o 

r C - U I P 

, 

crt 

4-> 

•o P. CM 4 J OJ 

^ o c3 

r-i 

'S 0) >H 

1-1 

1-1 rH 

a 

o 

o 

i - H 

a > a ^ T: 

^ • * -

r CT 

irrt 

> 

u 

<i> 

rfl P, 

e -a i r~ t H 7 ^ 

A 

O 

o 

-P r H 

+-> 

s-> ho U3 

T-H rH 

CO 

P 

S 

rt T3 TH 

M 

M he 

0 

3 

s 

r H CM 

0 

ri-, r ^ 

X 

o CM 

> he 0) 

> 0! rH 

C7> r H 

K 

crj 

- r-1 

bC fc 

c 

T 3 

U S 

<x> > ' X ! W 

a> 4 = 

ffi 

r-S r » hO 

a 

(-1 

G 

crt p . 

rP tn CO CM r * 

o 

u 
38 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY 

Boiler Fittings 

Few boiler fittings are found on the Pioneer, 

and it appears that little was done to update the 

engine with more modern devices during its 

many years of service. With the exception of the 

steam gauge, it has no more boiler fittings than 

when it left the builder's shop in 1851. 

The throttle valve is a simple slide valve and 

must have been primitive for the time, for the 

FIGURE 40. Backhead of the Pioneer. 

photo 48069F.) 

(Smithsonian 

balance-poppet throttle valve was in use in this 

country previous to 1851. It is located directly 

below the steam dome, even though it was common practice to place the throttle valve at the 

front of the boiler in the smokebox. Considering 

the cramped condition inside the smokebox, 

there would seem to be little space for the addition of the throttle valve; hence its present location. The dry pipe projects up into the steam 

dome to gather the hottest, driest steam for the 

cylinders. The inverted, funnel-like cap on the 

top of the dry pipe is to prevent priming, as 

drops of water may travel up the sides of the 

pipe and then to the cylinders, with the possibility of great damage. After the steam enters the 

throttle valve it passes through the front end 

of the valve, through the top of the boiler via 

the dry pipe (Figure 39), through the front tube 

sheet, and then to the cylinders via the petticoat 

pipes. The throttle lever is a simple arrangement readily understood from the drawings. It 

has no latch and the throttle lever is held in any 

desired setting by the wingnut and quadrant 

shown in Figure 39. The water level in the boiler 

is indicated by the three brass cocks located on 

the backhead. No gauge glass is used; they were 

not employed in this country until the 1870s, 

although they were commonly used in England 

at the time the Pioneer was built. 

While two safety valves were commonly required, only one was used on the Pioneer. The 

safety valve is located on top of the steam dome. 

Pressure is exerted on the lever by a spring balance, fixed at the forward end by a knife-blade 

bearing. The pressure can be adjusted by the 

thumbscrew on the balance. The graduated scale 

on the balance gave a general but uncertain indication of the boiler pressure. The valve itself 

is a poppet held against the face of the valve seat 

by a second knife blade attached to the lever. 

The ornamental column forming the stand of 

the safety valve is cast iron and does much to 

decorate the interior of the cab. The pipe carrying the escaping steam projects through the cab 

roof. It is made of copper with a decorative 

brass band. This entire mechanism was replaced 

by a modern safety valve for use at the Chicago 

Railroad Fair (1948-1949). Fortunately, the old 

valve was preserved and has since been replaced 

on the engine. 
NUMBER 25 39 

FIGURE 41. Feedwater pump of the Pioneer. 

sonian negative 63344.) 

(SmithThe steam gauge is a later addition, but could 

have been put on as early as the 1860s, since the 

most recent patent date that it bears is 1859. It 

is an Ashcraft gauge having a handsome 4-4-0 

locomotive engraved on its silver face. 

The steam jet (item 3, Figure 39) is one of 

the simplest yet most notable boiler fittings of 

the Pioneer, being nothing more than a valve 

tapped into the base of the steam dome with a 

line running under the boiler jacket to the 

smokestack. When the valve is opened a jet of 

steam goes up the stack, creating a draft useful 

for starting the fire or enlivening it as necessary. 

This device was the invention of Alba F. Smith 

in 1852, according to the eminent nineteenthcentury technical writer and engineer Zerah 

Colburn.30 

The two feedwater pumps (Figure 41) are 

located beneath the cab deck (1, Figure 39). 

FIGURE 42. Pioneer on exhibit in the Arts and Industries building of the Smithsonian 

Institution. In this view can be seen the bonnet screen of the stack and arrangement 

of the boiler-frame braces and other details not visible from the floor. (Smithsonian 

negative 48069A.) 
40 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY 

They are of cast-iron construction and are 

driven by an eccentric on the driving-wheel axle 

(Figure 48). The airchamber or dome (1, Figure 48) imparts a steadier flow of the water 

to the boiler by equalizing the surges of water 

from the reciprocating pump plunger. A steam 

line (3, Figure 39), which heats the pump and 

prevents freezing in cold weather, is regulated 

by a valve in the cab (Figures 39 and 48). Note 

that the line on the right side of the cab has 

been disconnected and plugged. 

The eccentric drive for the pumps is unusual, 

and the author knows of no other American 

locomotive so equipped. Eastwick and Harrison, 

it is true, favored an eccentric drive for feed 

pumps, but they mounted the eccentric on the 

crankpin of the rear driving wheel and thus 

produced in effect a half-stroke pump. This was 

not an unusual arrangement, though a small 

crank was usually employed in place of the 

eccentric. The full-stroke crosshead pump with 

which the Jenny Lind (Figure 43) is equipped, 

was of course the most common style of feed 

pump used in this country in the nineteenth 

century. 

Of all the mechanisms on a nineteenth-century 

locomotive, the feed pump was the most troublesome. If an engineer could think of nothing else 

to complain about, he could usually call attention to a defective pump and not be found a liar. 

Because of this, injectors were adopted after 

their introduction in 1860. It is surprising that 

the Pioneer, which was in regular service as late 

as 1880 and has been under steam many times 

since for numerous exhibitions, was never fitted 

with one of these devices. Because its stroke is 

short and the plunger is in less rapid motion, the 

present eccentric arrangement would seem to 

have been more prone to disorder than the simpler but faster crosshead pump. 

The check valves are placed slightly below the 

centerline of the boiler (Figure 39). These 

FIGURE 43. Jenny Lind, sister engine of the Pioneer, shown here as rebuilt in 1878 for 

use as an inspection engine. It was scrapped in March 1905. (Photograph courtesy 

of E.P.Alexander.) 
NUMBER 25 41 

valves are an unfinished bronze casting and appear to be of a recent pattern, probably dating 

from the 1901 renovation. At the time the engine 

was built, it was usual to house these valves in an 

ornamental spun-brass casing. The smokestack 

is of the bonnet type commonly used on woodburning locomotives in this country between 

about 1845 and 1870. The exhaust steam from 

the cylinders is directed up the straight stack 

(shown in phantom in Figure 48) by the blast 

pipe. This creates a partial vacuum in the smokebox that draws the fire, gases, ash, and smoke 

through the boiler tubes from the firebox. The 

force of the exhausting steam blows them out 

the stack. At the top of the straight stack is a 

deflecting cone which slows the velocity of the 

exhaust and changes its direction causing it to 

go down into the funnel-shaped outer casing of 

the stack. Here, the heavy embers and cinders 

are collected and prevented from directly discharging into the countryside as dangerous firebrands. Wire netting is stretched over the top of 

FIGURE 44. Cylinder head with valve box removed. FIGURE 45. Bottom of valve box with slide valve 

removed. 

FIGURE 46-47. Cylinder with valve box removed, showing valve face. 
42 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY 

the deflecting cone to catch the lighter, more volatile embers which may defy the action of the 

cone. The term "bonnet stack" results from the 

fact that this netting is similar in shape to a 

lady's bonnet. The cinders thus accumulated in 

the stack's hopper could be emptied by opening 

a plug at the base of the stack. 

While the deflecting cone was regarded highly 

as a spark arrester and used practically to the 

exclusion of any other arrangement, it had the 

basic defect of keeping the smoke low and close 

to the train. This was a great nuisance to passengers, as the low trailing smoke blew into the 

cars. If the exhaust had been allowed to blast 

straight out the stack high into the air, most 

of the sparks would have burned out before 

touching the ground. 

Frame 

The frame of the Pioneer defies an exact 

classification, but it more closely resembles the 

riveted- or sandwich-type frame than any 

other (Figures 39 and 48). While the simple bar 

frame enjoyed the greatest popularity in the last 

century, riveted frames were widely used in this 

country, particularly by the New England 

builders between about 1840 and 1860. The 

riveted frame was fabricated from two plates of 

iron, about %-inch thick, cut to the shape of the 

top rail and the pedestal. A bar about 2 inches 

square was riveted between the two plates. A 

careful study of photographs of Hinkley and 

other New England-built engines of the period 

will reveal this style of construction. The frame 

of the Pioneer differs from the usual riveted 

frame in that the top rail is 1% inches thick by 

4% inches deep and runs the length of the locomotive. The pedestals are made of two %-inch 

plates flush-riveted to each side of the top rail. 

The cast-iron shoes which serve as guides for 

the journal boxes also act as spacers between 

the pedestal plates. 

The bottom rail of the frame is a 1^-inchAlba F. Smith 

Alba F. Smith, the man responsible for the 

purchase of the Pioneer, was born in Lebanon, 

Connecticut, June 28, 1817." Smith showed 

promise as a mechanic at an early age and by 

the time he was twenty-two had established 

leadpipe works in Norwich. His attention was 

drawn particularly to locomotives since the 

tracks of the Norwich and Worcester Railroad passed his shop. His attempts to develop 

a spark arrester for locomotives brought 

Smith to the favorable attention of Captain 

Daniel Tyler (1799-1882), president of the 

Norwich and Worcester Railroad. When Tyler was hired by the Cumberland Valley Railroad in 1850 to supervise the line's rebuilding, 

he persuaded the managers of that road to 

hire Smith as superintendent of machinery.2"

5 

Smith was appointed as superintendent of the 

machine shop of the Cumberland Valley Railroad on July 22, 1850Y On January 1, 1851, 

he became superintendent of the road. 

In March of 1856 Smith resigned his position with the Cumberland Valley Railroad 

and became superintendent of the Hudson 

River Railroad, where he remained for only 

a year. During that time he designed the coalburning locomotive Irvington, rebuilt the 

Waterman condensing dummy locomotive for 

use in hauling trains through city streets, and 

developed a superheater.27 

After retiring from the Hudson River 

Railroad he returned to Norwich and became 

active in enterprises in that area, including 

the presidency of the Norwich and Worcester 

Railroad. While the last years of Smith's life 

were devoted to administrative work, he 

found time for mechanical invention as well. 

In 1862 he patented a safety truck for locomotives, and became president of a concern 

which controlled the most important patents 

for such devices.28 Alba F. Smith died on 

July 21, 1879, in Norwich, Connecticut. 
NUMBER 25 43 

diameter rod which is forged square at the pedestals and forms the pedestal cap. The frame 

is further stiffened by two diagonal rods running from the top of each truck-wheel pedestal 

to the base of the driving-wheel pedestal, forming a truss. Six rods, riveted to the boiler shell 

and bolted to the frame's top rail, strengthen 

the frame laterally. Four of these rods can be 

seen easily as they run from the frame to the 

middle of the boiler; the other two are riveted 

to the underside of the boiler. The attachment 

of these rods to the boiler was an undesirable 

practice, for the boiler shell was thus subjected 

to the additional strain of the locomotive's 

vibrations as it passed over the road. In later 

years, as locomotives grew in size, this practice 

was avoided and frames were made sufficiently 

strong to hold the engine's machinery in line 

without using the boiler shell. 

The front and rear frame beams are of flat 

iron plate bolted to the frame. The rear beam 

had been pushed in during an accident, and instead of its being replaced, another plate was 

riveted on and bent out in the opposite direction 

Seth Wilmarth 

Little is known of the builder of the 

Pioneer, Seth Wilmarth, and nothing in the 

way of a satisfactory history of his business 

is available. For the reader's general interest 

the following information is noted.31 

Seth Wilmarth was born in Brattleboro, 

Vermont, on September 8,1810. He is thought 

to have learned the machinist trade in Pawtucket, Rhode Island, before coming to Boston and working for the Boston Locomotive 

Works, Hinkley and Drury proprietors. In 

about 1836 he opened a machine shop and, encouraged by an expanding business, in 1841 

he built a new shop in South Boston which 

became known as the Union Works.32 

Wilmarth was in the general machine business, but his reputation was made in the 

manufacture of machine tools, notably lathes. 

He is believed to have built his first locomotive in 1842, but locomotive building never 

became his main line of work. Wilmarth 

patterned his engines after those of Hinkley 

and undoubtedly, in common with the other 

New England builders of this period, favored 

the steady-riding, inside-connection engines. 

The "Shanghais," so-called because of their 

great height, built for the Boston and Worcester Railroad by Wilmarth in 1849, were 

among the best known inside-connection engines operated in this country (Figure 37). 

While the greater part of Wilmarth's engines 

was built for New England roads, many were 

constructed for lines outside that area, including the Pennsylvania Railroad, Ohio and 

Pennsylvania Railroad, and the Erie. 

A comparison of the surviving illustrations 

of Hinkley and Wilmarth engines of the 1850s 

reveals a remarkable similarity in their details (Figures 36 and 37). Notice particularly 

the straight boiler, riveted frame, closely set 

truck wheels, feed-water pump driven by a 

pin on the crank of the driving wheel, and 

details of the dome cover. All of the features 

are duplicated exactly by both builders. This 

is not surprising considering the proximity of 

the plants and the fact that Wilmarth had 

been previously employed by Hinkley. 

In 1854 Wilmarth was engaged by the New 

York and Erie Railroad to build fifty 6-foot 

gauge engines.33 After work had been started 

on these engines and a large store of material had been purchased for their construction, Wilmarth was informed that the railroad could not pay cash and that he would 

have to take notes in payment.34 There was at 

this time a mild economic panic, and notes 

could be sold only at a heavy discount. This 

crisis closed the Union Works. The next year, 

1855, Seth Wilmarth was appointed master 

mechanic of the Charlestown Navy Yard, 

Boston, where he worked for twenty years. 

He died in Maiden, Massachusetts, on 

November 5,1886. 
44 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY 

0 

3 

o 

u 

'—' er, lev 

hil sinj rH cu l> 

<1) r H 

,—s <N rH 0) r P !d ed r P 

u r H «, 

^-v. 

1 - t 

W tive. locomo meer 

•?* " H 0 0 T f 

H os 

r-J 

o l-H 

rH ID 

:,_) O r P 

O 

-t-> 

CI. 

0 

U 

<X> 

1 3 Ol t -

u 

Q> 

r - H CJ 

o rH CO 

fn" ho 

c 

rrt 

r P 

r -N 

c 

~ I P « M 

Cx! to he 

0 

'm rH 

> rH 

^ + J r C 

fin 

c3 CQ a- +2 X

 UJ CO i H CO — • 

- U « » &S Hg 

-—^ -u 0) - TJ r H d> ,—s hO LO 0 i-t P *— P i P_n -!- CD > 2 o 

r-Hr P 

rH hD 

rH 0 

""' "-£> 

., -r-> 

CJ CD i f <JJ 0 U CO •[ - r H -' a *p 1 3 3

 a rH 

^ -s (J) 

Ol -rJ 

w OJ 

•rf l O ID 3 ^ ,« co 0 rH S '*"' 

,—s CD 

00 P 

--^ 3 

r f i 

£ 

« 

I—, >> r P 

to 

0 

H e$ rH 

'—' rH Or 

P U H 

o 

r P 

M 

u ca co 

1— r H 
NUMBER 25 45 

M 

X T xt 

tj > 

P 

-

-^:Hi-

'3 K 

• a * 

P 3 

5- -rs g 

•8 Q 

OH W 

f=n 

•^f 

OH 
46 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY 

to form a pocket for the rear coupling pin. Note 

that there is no drawbar and that the coupler 

is merely bolted to the beams. Since the engine 

only pulled light trains, the arrangement was 

sufficiently strong. 

Running Gear 

The running gear is simply sprung with individual leaf springs for each axle; it is not connected by equalizing levers. To find an American 

locomotive not equipped with equalizers is surFIGURE 50. The Pioneer was exhibited at the Franklin Institute between 1934 and 

1948. (Pennsylvania Railroad negative E17414.) 
NUMBER 25 47 

prising since they were almost a necessity to 

produce a reasonably smooth ride on the rough 

tracks of American railroads. Equalizers 

steadied the motion of the engine by distributing 

the shock received by any one wheel or axle 

to all the other wheels and axles so connected, 

thus minimizing the effects of an uneven roadbed. The author believes that the Pioneer is a 

hard-riding engine. 

The springs of the main drives are mounted 

in the usual fashion. The rear boiler bracket 

(Figure 39) is slotted so that the spring hanger 

may pass through for its connection with the 

frame. The spring of the leading wheels is set 

at right angles to the frame (Figure 48) and 

bears on a beam, fabricated of iron plate, which 

in turn bears on the journal boxes. The springs 

of the trailing wheels are set parallel with the 

frame and are mounted between the pedestal 

plates (Figure 39). 

The center of the driving wheel is cast iron 

and has spokes of the old rib pattern, which is 

a T in cross-section, and was used previous to 

the adoption of the hollow-spoke wheel. In the 

mid-1830s Baldwin and others used this ribpattern style of wheel, except that the rib faced 

inside. The present driving-wheel centers are unquestionably original. The sister engine, Jenny 

Lind (Figure 43), was equipped with identical 

driving wheels. The present tires are very thin 

and beyond their last turning. They are wrought 

iron and shrunk to fit the wheel centers. Flush 

rivets are used for further security. The left 

wheel, shown in Figure 38, is cracked at the hub 

and is fitted with an iron ring to prevent its 

breaking. 

The truck wheels, of the hollow-spoke pattern, 

are cast iron with chilled treads. They were 

made by Asa Whitney, one of the leading carwheel manufacturers in this country, whose extensive plant was located in Philadelphia. Made 

under Whitney's patent of 1866, these wheels 

may well have been added to the Pioneer during 

the 1871 rebuilding. Railroad wheels were not 

cast from ordinary cast iron, which was too weak 

and brittle to stand the severe service for which 

they were intended, but from a high-quality cast 

iron similar to that used for cannons. Its tensile 

strength which ranged from 31,000 to 36,000 

psi, was remarkably high and very nearly approached that of the best wrought-iron plate. 

The cylinders are cast iron with an 814-inch 

bore about half the size of the cylinders of a 

standard eight-wheel engine. The cylinders are 

bolted to the frame but not to the saddle and are 

set at a 9 degree angle to clear the leading wheels 

and at the same time to line up with the center 

of the driving-wheel axle. The wood lagging is 

covered with a decorative brass jacket. Ornamental brass jacketing was extensively used on 

mid-nineteenth-century American locomotives 

to cover not only the cylinders, but steam chests 

and sandboxes, check valves, and valve boxes. 

The greater expense for brass (Russia iron or 

painted sheet iron were a cheaper substitute) 

was justified by the argument that brass lasted 

the life of the engine, and could be reclaimed for 

scrap at a price approaching the original cost; 

and also that when brightly polished it reflected 

the heat, preventing loss by radiation; and its 

bright surface could be seen a great distance, 

thus helping to prevent accidents at grade crossings. The reader should be careful not to misconstrue the above arguments simply as rationalization on the part of master mechanics more 

intent on highly decorative machines than on the 

practical considerations involved. 

The valve box, a separate casting, is fastened 

to the cylinder casting by six bolts. The side 

cover plates when removed show only a small 

opening suitable for inspection and adjustment 

of the valve. The valve box must be removed to 

permit repair or removal of the valve. A better 

understanding of this mechanism and the layout 

of the parts can be gained from a study of Figures 44, 47, and 49 (8, 8A, and 8B) . 

Both crossheads were originally of cast iron, 

but one of these has been replaced and is of steel. 

They run into steel guides, bolted at the forward 

end to the rear cylinder head and supported in 

the rear by a yoke. The yoke is one of the more 

finished and better made pieces on the entire engine (Figure 48). The main rod is of the old pattern, round in cross-section, and only 1*4 inches 

in diameter at the largest point. 

Valve Gear 

The valve gear is of the Stephenson shiftinglink pattern (see Figure 48), a simple and de-
48 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY 

G(S= ^ 

FIGURE 51. Reconstructed sandbox replaced on the locomotive, August 1962. (Drawing 

by J. H.White.) 

FIGURE 52. This reproduction of the headlight, based 

on an 1852 patent model, was made in the Smithsonian's 

workshops by John Stine in 1965. (Smithsonian negative 60,240-A.) 

pendable motion used extensively in this country 

between about 1850 and 1900. The author believes that this is the original valve gear of the 

Pioneer, since the first mention (1854) in the 

Annual Report of the Cumberland Valley Railroad of the style of valve gear used by each engine states that the Pioneer was equipped with a 

shifting-link motion. Assuming this to be the 

original valve gear of the Pioneer, it must be regarded as an early application, because the 

Stephenson motion was just being introduced 

into American locomotive practice in the early 

1850s. Four eccentrics drive the motion; two are 

for forward motion and two are for reverse. The 

link is split and is made of two curved pieces. 

The rocker is fabricated of several forged pieces, 

keyed and bolted together. On better made engines, the rocker would be a one-piece forging. 

The lower arm of each rocker is curiously 

shaped, made with a slot so that the link block 

may be adjusted. Generally, the only adjustment 

possible was effected by varying the length of the 

valve stem by the adjusting nuts provided. A 

simple weight and lever attached to the revers-
NUMBER 25 49 

ing shaft serve as a counterbalance for the links 

and thus assist the engineer in shifting the valve 

motion. There are eight positions on the quadrant of the reversing lever. 

Miscellaneous Notes 

The cab is solid walnut with a natural finish. 

It is very possible that the second cab was added 

to the locomotive after the 1862 fire. A brass 

gong used by the conductor to signal the engineer 

is fastened to the underside of the cab roof. This 

style of gong was in use in the 1850s and may 

well be original equipment. 

The water tank is in two sections, one part extending below the deck, between the frame. The 

tank holds 600 gallons of water. The tender holds 

one cord of wood. 

The small pedestal-mounted sandbox was 

used on several Cumberland Valley engines including the Pioneer. This box was removed from 

the engine sometime between 1901 and 1904. It 

was on the engine at the time of the Carlisle 

sesquicentennial, but disappeared by the time 

of the Saint Louis exposition. Two small sandboxes, mounted on the driving-wheel splash 

guards, replaced the original box. The large 

headlamp (Figure 25) apparently disappeared 

at the same time and was replaced by a crudely 

made lamp formerly mounted on the cab roof as 

a backup light. Headlamps of commercial manufacture were carefully finished and made with 

parobolic reflectors, elaborate burners, and 

handsomely fitted cases. Such a lamp could 

throw a beam of light for 1,000 feet. The present 

lamp has a flat cone-shaped piece of tin for a 

reflector. 

The brushes attached to the pilot were used 

in the winter to brush snow and loose ice off the 

rail and thus improve traction. In good weather, 

the brushes were raised UD to clear the tracks. 

After the Pioneer came to the Smithsonian 

Institution, it was decided that some refinishing 

was required to return it as nearly as possible 

to the state of the original engine. Replacing the 

sandbox was an obvious change.35 The brass 

cylinder jackets were also replaced. The cab 

was stripped and carefully refinished as natural 

wood. The old safety valve was replaced, as already mentioned. Rejacketing the boiler with 

simulated Russia iron produced a most pleasing 

effect, adding not only to the authenticity of the 

display but making the engine appear lighter 

and relieving the somber blackness which was 

not characteristic of a locomotive of the 1850s. 

The question arises, has the engine survived 

as a true and accurate representation of the 

original machine built in 1851 ? In answer, it can 

be said that although the Pioneer was damaged 

en route to the Cumberland Valley Railroad, 

modified on receipt, burned in 1862, and operated for altogether nearly forty years, surprisingly few new appliances have been added, 

nor has the general arrangement been changed. 

Undoubtedly, the main reason the engine is so 

little changed is that its small size and odd 

framing did not invite any large investment for 

extensive alteration for other uses. But there 

can be no positive answer as to its present variance from the original appearance as represented in the oldest known illustration of it— 

the Hull drawing of 1871 (Figure 29). There 

are few, if any, surviving nineteenth-century 

locomotives that have not suffered numerous rebuildings and are not greatly altered from the 

original. The John Bull, also in the Smithsonian's collections, is a good example of a machine 

many times rebuilt in its thirty years of service.36

 Unless other information is uncovered to 

the contrary, it can be stated that the Pioneer 

is a true representation of a light passenger 

locomotive of 1851. 

Since the publication of the first edition of 

this study of the Pioneer in 1964, restoration 

of the locomotive has continued. The crude 

replica headlight was replaced by a more perfect 

replica made in the museum's workshops by 

John Stine (Figure 52). Its general size and details were based on a large-scale patent model 

for T. Snook and S. Hill's (Patent No. 9,490, 

December 21, 1852) locomotive head lantern 

now in the collections of the Baltimore and Ohio 

Transportation Museum. The blowoff cocks and 

connecting linkage to the cab have been replaced. In February 1966, the old-style, valvechest mounted, oil cups were installed. 

In the process of removing the paint from the 

feed-water pumps, it was discovered that the 

right-hand pump was a solid cast-iron dummy. 

Apparently, it was fabricated as a cosmetic re-
50 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY 

placement for the original, which had been lost 

or was so badly corroded that a facsimile was 

required. 

NOTES 

1. Of the several hundred 4-2-0s built in the United 

States in the 1830s and 1840s, only a lone original example has survived to the present time. This machine 

is the Chicago and North Western's Pioneer now exhibited by the Chicago Historical Society. 

2. American Locomotives: An Engineering History, 

1830-1880 by John H. White, Jr. (Baltimore: Johns 

Hopkins Press, 1968). 

3. Railway and Locomotive Historical Society Bulletin, no. 114 (April 1966), pp. 27-36. 

4. Ibid. 

5. Information on the Lovett Eames is from the following sources: Railroad Gazette, May 7, 1880, p. 246; 

July 30, 1880, p. 409; August 18, 1882, p. 514; June 6, 

1884, p. 423; and American Locomotive Engines by 

Emory Edwards (Philadelphia: Baird & Co., 1883), pp. 

132-142. 

6. Locomotive Engineering, 1895, pp. 500-503 and 

587; and A Century of Reading Motive Power, no author 

(Philadelphia: Reading Company, 1941), p. 66. 

7. Locomotive Engineering by Z. Colburn (London, 

1871), p.77. 

8. Railway and Locomotive Historical Society Bulletin, no. 47 (September 1938), pp. 79-85. 

9. History of the Long Island Railroad, part 2, by V. 

E. Seyfried,p. 151. 

10. A History of Industrial Paterson by L. R. Trumbull (Paterson, N.J., 1882), pp. 140-141. 

11. Railway and Locomotive Historical Society Bulletin, no. 61 (May 1942), pp. 10-34. See also G. M. Best, 

"The Single Drivered Steam Locomotive in the West," 

The American Railroad Journal (San Marino, Calif.: 

Golden West Books, Pacific Railroad Publishers, Inc.), 

vol. 1. 

12. Engineering News, vol. 23, no. 24 (June 18, 1890), 

p. 616; and Railway and Locomotive Historical Society 

Bulletin, no. 34 (May 1934), p 52. 

13. American Engineer and Railroad Journal, vol. 

68, no. 6 (June 1894), pp. 263-265. 

14. Railway and Locomotive Historical Society Bulletin, no. 67 (May 1946), p. 70. 

15. American Railway Review, vol. 5, no. 4 (August 15,1861), p. 42. 

16. Minutes of the Board of Managers of the Cumberland Valley Railroad June 25,1851. This manuscript may 

be found in the office of the Secretary, Pennsylvania 

Railroad, Philadelphia, Pa. Hereinafter cited as Minutes 

C.V.R.R. 

17.Ibid. 

18. Minutes C.V.R.R. 

19. Franklin Repository (Chambersburg, Pa.), August 26,1909. 

20. Railroad Advocate (December 29,1855), vol. 2, p. 3. 

21. C. E. FISHER, "Locomotives of the New Haven Railroad," Railway and Locomotive Historical Society Bulletin, no. 46 (April 1938), p. 48. 

22. Minutes C.V.R.R. 

23. Evening Sentinel (Carlisle, Pa.), October 23, 1901. 

24. Norwich Bulletin (Norwich, Conn.), July 24, 1879. 

All data regarding A. F. Smith is from this source unless 

otherwise noted. 

25. Railway Age, vol. 14, no. 37 (September 13, 1889). 

Page 600 notes that Tyler worked on C.V.R.R. 1851-

1852; Smith's obituary (footnote 24) mentions 1849 as 

the year; and minutes of C.V.R.R. mention Tyler as early 

as 1850. 

26. Minutes C.V.R.R. 

27 A. F. HOLLEY, American and European Railway 

Practice (New York: 1861). An illustration of Smith's 

superheater is shown on plate 58, figure 13. 

28. JOHN H. WHITE, Jr., "Introduction of the Locomotive Safety Truck," (Paper 24, 1961, in Contributions 

from the Museum of History and Technology: Papers 

19-30, U.S. National Museum Bulletin, no. 228, Washington: Smithsonian Institution, 1963), p. 117. 

29. Annual Report, Cumberland Valley Railroad, 1853. 

30. ZERAH COLBURN, Recent Practice in Locomotive Engines (1860),p.71. 

31. Railroad Gazette (September 27, 1907), vol. 43, no. 

13, pp. 357-360. These notes on Wilmarth locomotives by 

C. H. Caruthers were printed with several errors concerning the locomotives of the Cumberland Valley Railroad and prompted the preparation of these present remarks on the history of Wilmarth's activities. Note that 

on page 359 it is reported that only one compensatinglever engine was built for the C.V.R.R. in 1854, and not 

two such engines in 1852. The Pioneer is incorrectly identified as a "Shanghai," and as being one of three such engines built in 1871 by Wilmarth. 

32. The author is indebted to Thomas Norrell for these 

and many of the other facts relating to Wilmarth's Union 

Works. 

33. Railroad Gazette (October 1907), vol. 43, p. 382. 

34. Boston Daily Evening Telegraph (Boston, Mass.), 

August 11, 1854. The article stated that 1 engine a week 

was built and that 10 engines were already completed for 

the Erie. Construction had started on 30 others. 

35. The restoration work has been ably handled by 

John Stine of the Smithsonian staff. Restoration started 

in October 1961. 

36. American Locomotives (note 2), pp. 248-268. 

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 1973—O-494-500