Actually, that's why I was there. Not going into details about what and why, but my "targets" were/are in open view, not well-hidden. And why just join a long queue of folks wanting his stuff for free? We just wanted to establish the current status and future plans, if any, and whether there were any possibilities thereof. More likely, the "introduction" never made it through to the front desk, and I was just another in a long queue of "foamers" to her.



It appears, from outward appearances, that "we're waiting for someone to die." Or get tired, weary, etc.

I've learned, from past experiences, not to trust that approach. For every successful transition to a museum or preservation entity when the owner passes on or gets tired, I've seen an unsuccessful one, or one fraught with problems, including scrappings. (Look at the quandary surrounding the Stewartstown RR, where it appears some folks thought George Hart would just forget about the indenture at his passing, instead of passing it on to another heir.)

I've no reason to distrust the honorable intentions of the current owner of this "hoard," but on the flip side I have no explicit reason to trust him and his heirs, either, save for the say-so of mutual associates. And absent explicit evidence to trust someone (a witnessed will or power of attorney, for example), no one else hoping to "inherit" a preserved rail artifact, from an old photo or stock certificate to a whole railroad, should be comfortable with such expectations, either.

I think the gist of many of the comments on this topic come down to:
1. The Sharks are the last of their kind;
2. Their appeal to fans/preservationists may transcend several criteria (Baldwin; first-generation; covered wagon; visual appeal; etc)
3. Nobody wants to see a Paulson Spence/Dick Jensen scenario again.

So it is not surprising that this topic would bubble up again from time to time. Then comes the fine line-wanting to ensure (whomever wants to lead that charge, including $$$) the units preservation, but being mindful of (a) this is private property, and (b) the history of "fans" in the past stealing stuff.

Collectively we are fortunate in that there are a few individuals who post here who have some ties to ownership. We are also fortunate in that there are some individuals here who either have legal, accounting, or other backgrounds dealing with accession, preservation, and/or "the big picture" (acquisition, preservation, fundraising, sustainability in the long-term, etc).

I am unfamiliar with this reference. More info please?

-C.

Essentially private owners of steam locomotives that were scrapped for one of two reasons:

Paulson Spence owned a shortline at the end of steam in LA and bought a significant number of steam locomotives being retired from other railroads, then had the misfortune to die suddenly and prematurely, leaving his collection to a widow who did not care about them, selling them for scrap en mass. The largest locomotive to survive the fiasco is now Blue Mountain and Reading Pacific #425.

Dick Jensen was a middle-class guy who spent all of his resources acquiring and operating several (?) (at least a couple) of Chicago area fan trip engines when the Q and GTW quit all steam. Over time they just about all ended up being scrapped because he no longer had the resources to keep them safe, and he was too stubborn to allow them to leave his control - the "If I can't have you then nobody can!", jealous lover syndrome.

That is what is being referred to here.

You don't count these, do you? <:-)

http://baldwindiesels.railfan.net/roca/index.html

Paul -

Using your scenario, the largest locomotive that Dick Jensen saved that still survives is Chicago, Burlington & Quincy 2-8-2 # 4963, now at the Illinois Railway Museum. Also, your "jealous lover syndrome" is certainly not accurate.

Les

Considering they are not Baldwin Sharks, no, they don't count in the reference "The Sharks are the last of their kind"..

The two D&H sharks are genuinely "the last of their kind".

Scot

Due to being in a hurry, I'll admit to winging it on what locomotives were in the Spence collection, and remembered reading years ago that the 425 was the largest engine to survive. Maybe they meant operable engine. As for Jensen, from what I have read about him, he just would not entertain any attempts by others to save the locomotives from his collection that were scrapped. Perhaps not exactly a "jealous lover", but my understanding is that he just wouldn't listen to reason by anyone who cared and had the resources to help save them.

There's a pretty detailed account of the Dick Jensen story on steamlocomotive.com-- I can't vouch for the accuracy or lack thereof though.

http://www.steamlocomotive.com/union/jensen.shtml

I'm no attorney, but I sure can't make heads nor tails of the actions and rulings that led to the scrapping of #5629. Seems like moving it-- even dragging it- less than the distance of two football fields would have been much easier and cheaper than cutting it up!

Not to be pendantic, but...

-Was't that CB&Q 4-8-4 Jensen owned a tad bigger?

-I believe IRM traded a number of 0-8-0s to a scrap merchant that owned the 4963 at the time, thus we can credit IRM and probably J. David Conrad for the survival of the 4963 rather than Jensen.

To the best of my knowledge, the only two locomotives to make it out alive from the Spence collection were the W&W 4-4-0 #98 and the R&N 425. The Spence collection included at least one NKP Hudson and a great cross section of steam power. It is my understanding that he only purchased locomotives that were in excellent condition. He had set up a trust for the collection, but failed to sign all the paperwork in his will and the trust was overturned by the family looking for money. While Great Britain did great with the Barry scrapyard, we lost a great collection to the scrapper in the early 1960's.

I believe the two 4-4-0's that operated at Stone Mountain Scenic in Georgia were also from the Louisiana Eastern/Spence collection

Oh goodness, this again (read Spence & Jensen) and to some extent Larkin:
1) Of Spence collection of 34(?) locomotives, 4 survived (as mentioned above): 425, 98 and the two 4-4-0s at Stone Mountain.
2) The survival of CB&Q 4963 is quite complicated. I was personally involved in Jensen vs. C&WI (interviewed by both sides, testified for C&WI). Suffice to say that 5632 and the bulk of the first generation of RJ tools, parts and machines were scrapped due to RJ not moving them off of private property. 4963 was part of the same action but ended up being saved due to an amazing series of (mostly) unrelated events which culminated in IRM trading 5 ex-NWS&W 0-8-0s (stripped of parts AND asbestos) for 4963. IRM Steam Department Foreman Tom Schnider had far more to do with the trade than I.
3) Other RJ locos: NKP 965 (lost due to non-payment of rent), L&C (York Southern) 34 and the second generation of tools, parts and machines (lost due to not moving them off of private property) and GN 102 (sold to IRM by RJ's sister after his death).
4) The Sharks (and most of the Larkin collection) are inside a secure building that doesn't allow leakage on them. The suggestion that Larkin's collection is somehow to be considered hording is beyond me. What part of Constitutional guaranties for private property needs further explanation? The suggestion that he should provide copies of his signed and witnessed will to satisfy the peanut gallery is (in my opinion) ludicrous. In his youth Larkin was a volunteer at a Railway museum. Later in life he has become a long time benefactor (mostly behind the scenes and always without ego) to more than one major railroad museum. There are several posters on rypn who have worked or done restoration projects for him, myself included.
5) Yes, it is true that E&LS doesn't want railfans on it's property, but it wasn't always like that. In July 1964 (thank goodness for dates on slides!) I (without prior notice) dropped by the E&LS while on a trip to see the new Marquette & Huron Mountain operation. We ask, and had zero trouble gaining access to the roundhouse, dead lines, etc. The hospitality shown us at E&LS was typical for railroads at that time. Of course, this was before some person or persons unknown, stole builder's plates off locomotives (including one that had been freshly shopped and re-painted).
One way to avoid having your property stolen is to lock it up!
I'll get off my soap box now...
Be well,
J.David

Thanks for chiming in, Dave.

Bill D.

I am in NO WAY WHATSOEVER suggesting that Larkin, or anyone else, is under ANY obligation whatsoever to supply copies of any wills or agreements, or even to make said wills or agreements. It's none of our business, anyway.

I am simply pointing out that, absent any confirmation of any arrangements in writing, no one should count on any benefactor assuredly following through with promises to donate or otherwise provide an artifact for preservation.

In this case, and many others, there have been rumors and allegations. But until it shows up at the siding switch for the museum, is delivered in a briefcase, etc.--don't count the iron horses.