A Transcontinental Railroad
One of the most enjoyable aspects of writing historical novels is the research. Once in awhile, that research can take an unexpected turn. One of those turns came about while researching the politics of choosing a route for the transcontinental railroad. I discovered a puzzle filled with familiar events and unfamiliar connections. It’s an interesting bit of history that leads this post series to a rather unexpected contemporary lesson.
Many of you know from time to time these posts take on topics of interest to young people. This series focuses on a chapter of history of interest to young people, studying American History. If you have a child or grandchild studying our nation’s history, you might want to share this series with them. They will get a slant on a slice of history I doubt they will get in class. They might even find the seed for an insightful paper.
I’ve long had a fascination with the transcontinental railroad. In its day it was an engineering achievement of monumental proportions. It played an important part in two of my books. I thought I knew something about that chapter in our history. What I discovered in researching the route selection controversy surprised me.
The notion of a railway to the Pacific became a natural progression in our nation’s ambition to a manifest destiny west. The idea took root following the end of the Mexican American War. Under the 1848 Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, the United States acquired western territories stretching from Texas to California for $15 million. The discovery of gold the following year at Sutter’s Mill in California provided a tidy return on that real-estate investment.
The California gold rush highlighted the need for a rail route to the Pacific. Reaching the nation’s western-most possession could take as much as a year by dangerous overland travel or at best months by sea. As a practical matter there was no way to defend California. A Pacific railroad became a national priority. The question of what route it should take quickly emerged as a lightening rod for political controversy.
Next Week:
Whither A Transcontinental Railroad?
https://www.amazon.com/author/paulcolt
Ride easy,
Paul
Many of you know from time to time these posts take on topics of interest to young people. This series focuses on a chapter of history of interest to young people, studying American History. If you have a child or grandchild studying our nation’s history, you might want to share this series with them. They will get a slant on a slice of history I doubt they will get in class. They might even find the seed for an insightful paper.
I’ve long had a fascination with the transcontinental railroad. In its day it was an engineering achievement of monumental proportions. It played an important part in two of my books. I thought I knew something about that chapter in our history. What I discovered in researching the route selection controversy surprised me.
The notion of a railway to the Pacific became a natural progression in our nation’s ambition to a manifest destiny west. The idea took root following the end of the Mexican American War. Under the 1848 Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, the United States acquired western territories stretching from Texas to California for $15 million. The discovery of gold the following year at Sutter’s Mill in California provided a tidy return on that real-estate investment.
The California gold rush highlighted the need for a rail route to the Pacific. Reaching the nation’s western-most possession could take as much as a year by dangerous overland travel or at best months by sea. As a practical matter there was no way to defend California. A Pacific railroad became a national priority. The question of what route it should take quickly emerged as a lightening rod for political controversy.
Next Week:
Whither A Transcontinental Railroad?
https://www.amazon.com/author/paulcolt
Ride easy,
Paul
No comments have been added yet.
