3 ms·
Article doesn't mention this, but the previous year, 1872, the there was a massive financial panic due to equine influenza, which brought the transport system t
by ajb 3y ago
Article doesn't mention this, but the previous year, 1872, the there was a massive financial panic due to equine influenza, which brought the transport system to a halt. Which could be a good reason for overinvestment in "iron horses"
- dredmorbius 3y agoHorses and railroads were complements rather than substitutes. Long-haul travel moved via ships, barges, or canals, with a cost advantage of roughly 20:1 over a horse and wagon. In particular, the Erie Canal was absolutely instrumental in opening up the interior of the US, connecting the Hudson River and East Coast to the Mississippi-Ohio-Missouri-Red river systems. A single horse could draw a barge of 20--40 tonnes, vs. a maximum of about one tonne on a cart or carriage. Significant political resistance to railroads came from canal operators. The Mississippi river itself was effectively the first inland highway of the US, serving as a transportation corridor from Canada to the Gulf of Mexico, from Ohio to Montana, from Virginia (west of the Continental divide) to Texas and Oklahoma Territory. What railroads could not offer was "last mile" delivery, for which horse-drawn drayage was the only viable option through the first decade of the 20th century. Trains increased demand for, and use of, horses, until automobiles ultimately displaced the latter. It's possible that investors hadn't drawn this connection in the 1870s, but the reality was that rail and horses reinforced one another.
- ajb 3y agoVery interesting, thanks!