Brian Shoup Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The compact in its own words established a "living
> museum." Thus, it would be clearly incorrect to
> derive from the compact that the C&TS was
> established for the
sole purpose of
> economic development.
Nor is it correct to claim it was for the
sole purpose of being a museum, as some have on the other side of the argument in the not too distant past.
> The claim that the RR was
> never intended to be a living museum is a myth
> that never seems to die.
Welcome to the Internet Age. Of course Mark Twain is reputed to have said[1] "A lie can go around the world twice while the truth is still putting on it's shoes." Or something like that. Keep trying but know in advance you're never going to win, whatever win might mean.
> I see nothing
> contradictory in the joint purposes of promoting
> the public welfare and establishing a living
> museum.
Well, there's the question of what name gets painted on the equipment, referenced in this thread. There have been people who have objected, loudly, to memorializing various events in C&TS, as opposed to D&RGW, history over the years. And then there is the current discussion on steam vs diesel, oil vs coal, etc. There is always a tension between the two missions, hopefully not rising to all out, take-no-prisoners, war. I also, in the more distant past, recall complaints about boxcars getting cut up to make the rider boxes and later on about flats being used up to build their replacements.
> The C&TS, over the years, has striven to
> do both.
Didn't say they hadn't, just pointing out that it is a balancing act and that, people being people, there are going to be some upset on either side. Or at least I hope there will continue to be, since I personally support
both goals.
Hank
[1] Twain, Lincoln both get lots of things they never said attributed to them. Don't know if this attribution is correct and too lazy to track it down.
