During the USRA control, the Rutland was assigned two 0-8-0's, Nos. 109 and 110. In Jim Shaughnessy's "Rutland Road" p125 he states that the 109 and 110 were diverted to the NYC Buffalo (NY) yard for the duration of USRA control. On p85 of Bob Nimke's "Rutland: 60 Years of Trying, Vol. I" there is a Rutland RR Data sheet for Class B-11-k 0-6-0's Nos. 613 and 621.

109 1918 60158 scrapped 11-51, Alburgh (VT) switcher
110 1918 60159 scrapped 12-51, Rutland (VT) switcher
613 12-1913 54067 order #S-1011, scrapped 6-51, p52 6-1-19 Rut Loc book, p85 NVI
621 12-1913 54075 order #S-1011, p85 NVI, renumbered 6721 1936, sold to Central Illinois Public Service as their No. 7, donated to the Mid Continent Railway Museum in 1964, and then sold to a group in Utica, NY, where it is currently on display.

The question that has me, and a few others, perplexed is:
1. Did the Rutland actually receive these two 0-6-0's, or was it a paper transaction?

2. Does anyone have photographic or other evidence of this swap?

Thanks!

Romi Romano

Very interesting. Historically, does a locomotive actually need to be lettered for a particular railroad in order to be counted as (at one time) being from that railroad? Even if the period of ownership lasts only as long as it may take to write one's signature...what's the standard?
http://steamlocomotive.info/vlocomotive.cfm?Display=935

This is my personal take on this. If a locomotive actually ran on a given line it made revenue for the owner; if it just sat on the yard or an engine shed not doing anything is is not part of the railroad.

Whatever name was painted on the cab or the tender could often take a long time to catch up with the paper work.

Ted Miles