Wither A Transcontinental Railroad?
Building a rail route to the Pacific became a national priority with the acquisition of territories as far west as California and the subsequent discovery of gold in 1849. It shaped up to be a monumental engineering fete in national resources, will and treasure. The first challenge was where to build it?
In 1853 Congress ordered a survey for the purpose of choosing the most practical and economic rail route from the Mississippi River to the Pacific Ocean. The War Department commissioned five survey parties. Three parties would proceed west from the Mississippi, exploring alternate routes through the northern plains, central plains to the Rocky Mountains and the newly acquired southwestern territories. Two parties would explore alternate passages for the westbound routes to reach northern or southern California.
The survey teams finished their work in the fall of 1854. The War Department put forward its recommendation of the southern route favored by Secretary of War, Jefferson Davis. Northerners in congress thought the recommendation reflected a certain ‘regional’ bias. In fact, the controversy over which route to select quickly bogged down in regional differences over the future of territorial expansion.
This is where the connections between familiar events became unfamiliar to me. I never saw the transcontinental railroad as a catalyst for the events that followed. Now I’ll admit I’m not a graduate historian. I’m sure this connection is old hat to some of them; but folks I talk to shake their heads or shrug their shoulders at the rest of this story. It seems the American history classes most of us had in school missed this connection. The controversy stirred up by selecting a route for the Pacific railroad cut straight to the heart of the slavery issue.
Next Week:
A Missouri Compromise
https://www.amazon.com/author/paulcolt
Ride easy,
Paul
In 1853 Congress ordered a survey for the purpose of choosing the most practical and economic rail route from the Mississippi River to the Pacific Ocean. The War Department commissioned five survey parties. Three parties would proceed west from the Mississippi, exploring alternate routes through the northern plains, central plains to the Rocky Mountains and the newly acquired southwestern territories. Two parties would explore alternate passages for the westbound routes to reach northern or southern California.
The survey teams finished their work in the fall of 1854. The War Department put forward its recommendation of the southern route favored by Secretary of War, Jefferson Davis. Northerners in congress thought the recommendation reflected a certain ‘regional’ bias. In fact, the controversy over which route to select quickly bogged down in regional differences over the future of territorial expansion.
This is where the connections between familiar events became unfamiliar to me. I never saw the transcontinental railroad as a catalyst for the events that followed. Now I’ll admit I’m not a graduate historian. I’m sure this connection is old hat to some of them; but folks I talk to shake their heads or shrug their shoulders at the rest of this story. It seems the American history classes most of us had in school missed this connection. The controversy stirred up by selecting a route for the Pacific railroad cut straight to the heart of the slavery issue.
Next Week:
A Missouri Compromise
https://www.amazon.com/author/paulcolt
Ride easy,
Paul
No comments have been added yet.
