Another Theory or Myth on Cape Horn, Central Pacific Railroad.

Central Pacific Railroad Photographic History Museum

Home

Exhibits

Chinese

History

FAQ's

Links

Rights & Permissions; Homework

Another Theory or Myth on Cape Horn

CLICK HERE TO VIEW THIS PAGE

HOME | LEGEND OF CAPE HORN

OCR text is included to allow indexing.]
19 April 2004
ANOTHER THEORY OR MYTH ON CAPE HORN
Over the past several years I have had the pleasure of corresponding with many
friends about the history of the Southern Pacific and its many predecessor companies. In
the course of reading and listening to their varied and interesting comments, both written
and verbal, several subjects have taken the limelight in my mind as being those subjects
which, perhaps, need expounding and/or clarification of facts. And certainly one of the
chief among them has been the story of the construction of the roadbed, or grading, in
1865 at and around a precipitous point in the Sierra Nevada (Mountains) not many miles
railroad east of Colfax, California. The story of this grading construction has been told
again and again both by authors with expert knowledge of the subject and by others with
lesser degrees of expertise in such line. Some of the telling has been based on fact or
reasoning and some of it is pure myth or fantasy.
The newspapers of the day, which constituted the greater part of the "media" of
the time, and other writings and publications by both those engaged on the project and by
well intentioned others are mostly lacking in some essential parts of the story. This has
opened a wonderful area for writers to let their talents and imaginations run wild. And as
too many historians are wont to do, they have taken the liberty of quoting previous
writers (both of fact and fiction) without bothering to do serious research on the subject
themselves. Thus has grown a remarkable collection of truths, fancies and much that lies
in between that at least one historian has tried to correct. Edson T. Strobridge of San
Luis Obispo, California has spent a great deal of time researching the subject and has
produced a pamphlet titled "The Central Pacific Railroad and the Legend of Cape Horn
1865-1866", certainly one of the best efforts to "get at the true facts" this writer has read.
However, I strongly disagree with his theory that the maximum steepness of Cape Horn
was no more then 50 degrees. What led Strobridge and others to question the history of
the grading construction at this particular spot is the many publications that recite how
such grading was accomplished by workers, some saying Caucasians, some saying.
Chinese, some not delineating nationality or race, who were lowered in baskets tied to
ropes from above, down the face of the steep cliff to do the work.
What are the writings that are in existence today that relate to the construction of
the grading at Cape Horn? The first description of the Cape was by a railroad
construction engineer who called its face "almost perpendicular". The engineer was
Theodore Dehone Judah, a most accomplished civil engineer with extensive experience
in building railroads in the eastern United States. A copy of his 1862 report to the Board
of Directors of the Central Pacific Rail Road Company of California, in so far as it
pertains to Cape Horn and environs, is appended hereto. The next written record on the
Cape is by Samuel S. Montague, also an accomplished civil engineer, who succeeded
Judah as first Acting, later Chief, Engineer of the CPRR in a report to the Board in
December 1864. Montague used the words "...Cape Horn; which is a precipitous rocky
bluff, about 1200 feet in hight (sic) above the American River." He then goes on to say
" The dip of the ledge is about seventy-five degrees, or nearly perpendicular; but as our
line at this point crosses the line of stratification nearly at right angles, the cuttings will
admit of a much steeper slope than can be generally adopted for that class of material".
His description of the material was "a soft, friable slate". A copy of this report as
pertains to the Cape Horn area is also appended hereto. Nothing in the report mentions
how the grading was to have been accomplished except to state". . . the material... yields
readily to the pick or bar".
That was in the early 1860's and over the next half century or so other
descriptions were used by writers, most if not all, alluding to the steepness of the Cape.
Then in 1927 a gentleman by the name of Erle Heath, Editor of the Southern Pacific
Bulletin, wrote in conjunction with others, a series of stories about the history of the
construction of the Southern Pacific and its predecessors in a series of articles titled
" From Trail to Rail". When it came time for a description of the work at Cape Horn
either Heath or an associate described the grading work as done by workers suspended in
" bosun's chairs" from above (see page 12 of the June 1926 Bulletin). The Public
Relations department, in which Heath worked, had in their files accounts of the
experiences of old timers who had been employed on the original construction from
Sacramento to Promontory. These accounts included work at many locations and one
such location was at the summit and eastward thereof through a series of tunnels in a two
mile stretch. This was probably the most difficult construction work of any kind on the
Central Pacific or any other predecessor company of the Southern Pacific. In one such
instance the veteran employee mentioned the use of ropes to lower workers down the
slopes to accomplish what needed to be done, be it setting stakes for the graders or the
graders themselves. It is sheer speculation on my part but I can see where it might have
been assumed that similar tactics were employed on the work at Cape Horn. The use of
the term "bosun's chairs" is entirely the work of the Bulletin's staff and no mention of
nationality was made.
Then in the 1940's or early 1950's a writer by the name of Cerinda W. Evans
authored a two volume set of books titled "Collis Potter Huntington". She had them
published through the Mariners' Museum in Newport News, Virginia where she was the
Librarian emeritus at the time I met her there circa 1967. Ms Evans was a little doll in her
90's who walked with a cane as she was partially crippled. She had been a schoolteacher
and was well known at the Museum where she had known Archer Huntington, the step
son of CPH, and had access to the voluminous letters there from and to CPH from his
associates in the Central Pacific and others. She is the one who first used the story that
the workers who were allegedly lowered in "bosun's chairs" at Cape Horn were Chinese
(vol. 1, page 156). She cites Heath's article as her source (footnote 2, chapter XXVIII).
But other writers have taken up her "cause" and unfortunately there has come to be
almost a racial issue among some writers of Chinese ancestry. They claim the Chinese
workers on the CP approached their white bosses to relate how their ancestors in China
had devised the type of work wherein workers were suspended in baskets fastened to
ropes in building great projects. On one TV program I watched about building the first
" transcontinental" railroad, fathered by Ken Bums, guru of the Civil War and other TV
series, an elderly Chinese woman shown on camera related how her grandfather himself
told her how he had worked on the project in such a manner. There are Chinese payrolls
of the CP given by me to the California State Railroad Museum with dates from 1864
forward. However none of them specifies where the work was done, at Cape Horn per
se, or elsewhere. If my theory is correct the graders at Cape Horn might well have been
Chinese but that is only conjecture. No graders, whatever their nationality, were lowered
by ropes over the cliff nor were any engaged in drilling and blasting and being hauled up
before the blasts occurred. The latter is sheer fantasy. Incidentally, the Bulletin says
Chinese workers were first used in 1865 but what the source they used was is not
mentioned, and the earliest Chinese payroll was 1864 as stated above.
Well then, how was the work of grading around Cape Horn accomplished? And
why are there no accounts of such a spectacular method of hacking out a railroad roadbed
as lowering workers in baskets? My answer to the latter question is that the work was
done in an entirely different manner. We know from most accounts that the original face
of Cape Horn was very steep. But this greatest steepness is in a distance of about 1500
feet along what became the finished track of the CP. Remember, this is in early 1865
when the Union Pacific had just gotten organized in starting to build west from Omaha.
There was no great rush on the part of the CP to try to out build the UP until about two
years later.' And why not do things in as efficient a manner as possible? Remember also,
that the CP was in a poor cash position at the time. The roadbed constructed around the
Cape was of necessity restricted to the narrowest possible width commensurate with a
safe area on which to lay a railroad track. By working the grading along the surveyed
line from both ends starting at Rice's Ravine on the west (Colfax end) and from Robber's
Ravine on the east the grading gangs could be employed with minimum crews. This is a
distance of some 7000 feet. The material could be worked by bar or pick according to
Sam Montague and the excavated material not needed for adjacent fills, or embankments,
was easily cast over the edge of the cliff or wheeled a short distance by wheelbarrows and
dumped. The narrow roadbed certainly did not lend itself to the use of one horse carts
which would have been awkward to maneuver at best. There could have been a problem
bringing up materials for the two retaining walls constructed where the gullies were too
steep to hold fill material from cuts on either side. The angle of repose for such gullies
(the angle at which material comes to rest after being dumped) would probably have been
45 degrees or so for the type of material as shown by today's USGS map (copy in
appendix) of the entire area from Rice's Ravine to Robber's Ravine. The USGS map
shows contour lines at 50 foot intervals but gives a representation of the steepness of the
area. In contrast to these maps the original railroad profile (copy in appendix) is drawn to
a contour interval of 2 feet which allows for much greater detail as to irregularities in the
surface over which the grading had to be performed. Once the roadbed had been
constructed to the point where the retaining walls were to begin the stones and mortar
could have been readily transported to the scene by one horse carts.
Getting back to the original profile, it was made by members of the engineer
corps of the Central Pacific between 1865 and 1870 and made from the original field
notes showing the cross sections of the grading. These original field notes were burned
along with most of the Charles Crocker Company and Contract and Finance Company
books, etc. by Mark, Hopkins in the early 1870's after it was learned the Credit Mobilier
of the Union Pacific was to be the subject of a Congressional Committee investigation.
The grading profile was used on a regular basis by the Engineering Department and so
was not among the items "available" to Hopkins. I drew up some projections (see
appendix) of what the degree of slope might have been at the time of original
construction based on using assumed widths from the centerline of the track to the edge
of the cliff. Connecting this point with various elevations of cuts shown on the original
profile, which represents the original ground line at the centerline of the track, I measured
the angle of the line with a protractor to get the degree of slope. My projections and
calculations show the slope to be as high as 70 degrees which correlates closely with the
Montague statement of the dip of ledge being 75 degrees.
I have enclosed in the appendix a right of way map of the railroad line in the Cape
Horn area for ease in orienting the 1500 feet of Cape Horn that I refer to as the Cape
itself. The solid line is the current location of the track while dashed lines indicate the
location of tracks that have been removed or relocated. Notice particularly the tunnels
under Cape Horn that were driven for the 1913 line change. They were double track
tunnels but on a heavy 2.3 % grade. The heavy freight trains, which had multiple steam
locomotives, created so much heat in tunnel 33, the longer one, that in 1929 it was
decided to restore the eastbound main line, now the No. 2 track, to the original location
on the outside of Cape Horn. When this work was done the roadbed was widened further
into the bluff and many yards of additional excavation were disposed of over the side of
the bluff. It is my opinion that the many thousands and thousands of cubic yards of
material so disposed of in the line changes and double tracking, as well as the original
construction, are reflected to a considerable degree by the contours shown on USGS
maps. Because of this additional cutting into the face of the bluff and weathering of the
face a slide detector fence was installed to actuate the track signal system if significant
material slides down onto the track.
But what about the engineer corps members who had to set the stakes for the
graders? It is my opinion that they are the ones who would have had to be lowered by
ropes in order to set up their instruments and make their measurements. I have engaged
in running survey lines in college, in the army artillery for setting up aiming stakes and
orientation, both in the US and in Europe, and in private practice before joining the
railroad. I have been associated with railroad survey parties culminating with the crew
which did the final survey over the top of tunnel 1/2 east of Bena prior to the daylighting
of that tunnel after the storms wreaked havoc with Caliente Canyon in 1983. While I
never learned to readily "throw" a chain and I have only used survey instruments in
common use circa the WWII era, transit, level, bull chain, aiming circle (artillery), I can
identify with trying to run a line of stakes around the face of Cape Horn in the 1860' s. It
was no easy task, believe me. It was far more difficult than surveying on Tightwad Hill
by Memorial Stadium at Cal Berkeley. And I read in one of the CP veteran's stories of
surveys made in the Summit tunnel area where on one "expedition" the survey crew
dangled a member by rope down the face of a cliff to get readings or measurements and
broke for the day leaving the poor soul dangling. Upon reaching their quarters I guess
someone recognized they were a man short and went to rescue him. Imagine the
pleasantries that were exchanged upon completion of the mission!
All in all, the easiest way to have graded a railroad roadbed around Cape Horn in
1865 was as I have outlined above. And that is why there are no newspaper articles or
sensational stories about graders being lowered in baskets, bosun's chairs, or even just
ropes to do such grading. There never had to be.
I will let the next generation of historians, and perhaps this generation's, seek the
true story of Cape Horn. And I hope it will lay to rest what seems like Topsy to keep
growing not only in books and article, but regrettably in videos and other media
presentations. My most sincere hopes are that these historians will go after facts, not
fiction.
APPENDIX
A. Judah's report of 1862
B. Montagues' report of 1864
C. Original grading profile of Central Pacific at Cape Horn
D. Section of USGS map at Cape Horn
E. Portion of railroad Right of Way map in the Cape Horn area
F. LDF's projections of the original slopes at Cape Horn prior to any excavations.
The interwoven letters C and L refer to the centerline of the railroad track. From
the profile selected elevations above the finished grade of the roadbed are shown
in sketch B as 28 feet and in sketch A as 38 feet. The standard width of a finished
roadbed in excavations was 8 to 10 feet from the centerline on both sides or a
total of 16 to 20 feet.. Sketch A uses 10 feet which produces a slope of 75
degrees. 5 feet further from the CL produces a slope of 70 degrees while 22 feet
from the CL produces 60 degrees. One has only to look at the early photos of the
construction to see that there was not a great deal of width outside the track itself
to the brink of the cliff.

HOME | LEGEND OF CAPE HORN