¹ Thomson (who had been with the Georgia Railroad Co. since 1834), was named chief engineer at the second meeting of the board, April, 1847. President Merrick presented a detailed plan for the organization of the engineering corps, which provided that assistant engineers as well as the chief were to report directly to the board. Thomson's “first assertion of his position was to demand that they should be responsible solely to him.” Burgess, George H. and Kennedy, Miles C., Centennial History of the Pennsylvania Railroad Company, 1846–1946 (Philadelphia, 1949), p. 45Google Scholar. Cf. Pennsylvania Railroad Co., By-Laws of the Board of Directors, adopted April and May, 1847 … (Philadelphia, 1847), pp. 7–8Google Scholar.

² The date was September 1, 1849, when the first stretch of track was opened for business. Wilson, William B., History of the Pennsylvania Railroad Company with Plan of Organization … (Philadelphia, 1899), vol. I, p. 57ffGoogle Scholar.

³ From June, 1849. Wilson, , History of the Pennsylvania, vol. I, pp. 57ff.Google Scholar, states that, as general superintendent, Thomson “devoted a large part of his time to the subject of organizing a system for conducting transportation. In this he was largely assisted by his personal assistant, Herman Haupt … an organizer of more than ordinary ability.” When the latter became superintendent of Transportation he “made an examination of the systems of bookkeeping and modes of operation of the more important railroads of New England and New York….” On his return to Harrisburg after two months “he was prepared to arrange a plan of organization for the company” which was approved by Thomson and the board.

⁴ Possibly a misprint. The date was Feb. 2, 1852. Burgess and Kennedy, Centennial History, p. 55.

⁵ Haupt's dates in this office were Jan., 1851–Nov. 1, 1852. Wilson, , History of the Pennsylvania, vol. II, p. 283Google Scholar.

^* Report of 1852.

⁶ Pennsylvania Railroad Co., By-Laws and Organization for Conducting the Business of the Road (Philadelphia, 1852)Google Scholar. The series thus begun seems to have been the principal documentary source used by the author of “Historical Development.” The “Organization” section commences: “That the duties, powers and responsibilities of the several officers and employees of the Pennsylvania Railroad Company may be defined and fully understood, and its accounts systematically kept, the Board of Directors have adopted the following organization for conducting the business of the road.” The terminology had clearly been influenced by that in a similar document of the New York & Erie Railroad Company, Organization and General Regulations for Working and Conducting the Business of the Railroad and its Branches, adopted by ihe Board of Directors, February 21, 1852 (New York, 1852)Google Scholar.

⁷ George R. Mowry was the first assistant. Wilson, , History of the Pennsylvania, vol. I, p. 91Google Scholar. The assistant superintendent at Pittsburgh was Thomas A. Scott, later president, who had the special tasks of arranging through schedules to the West and appeasing residents of Pittsburgh. Burgess and Kennedy, Centennial History, p. 342. A. M. Roumfort, a West Point man who had been superintendent on the Philadelphia and Columbia was the assistant superintendent at Harrisburg. Wilson, vol. I, p. 92, states that he “was really the first disciplinarian on the road,” but his attempt to put train crews in uniform was not successful. Roumfort was also responsible for organizing the baggage service.

⁸ Organization for Conducting the Business of the Road. Adopted December 2, 1857 (Philadelphia, 1858)Google Scholar. By its terms the general superintendent (now Scott) was given full charge of the Transportation Department, inclusive of road, motive power, shops, cars and operation of trains and stations. But there was, as for a couple of decades, a general freight agent reporting directly to the president.

⁹ According to the 11th Annual Report these officers were so reporting by 1857.

¹⁰ As to Thomson this date conflicts with an earlier statement and with the facts.

¹¹ It has been noted that one issue in the conflict was that of having an experienced transportation man rather than a financier as chief executive. It appears, however, that the specific issue upon which Thomson became president was his proposal to finance a plan of expansion by a large bond issue, for which he secured stockholder approval. Burgess and Kennedy, Centennial History, pp. 59–65; Sipes, William B., The Pennsylvania Railroad (Philadelphia, 1875), p. 31Google Scholar.

¹² Cf. Sipes, The Pennsylvania Railroad, pp. 22–23, for similar statements in appreciation. Sipes mentions also his taciturnity, slowness of decision, and patience in listening to others.

¹³ Formal statement of this principle appears in early editions of the Organization. For instance, that issued in 1858 states: “All instructions emanating from the Board of Directors, or President, in regard to the proper business of either of the departments, shall be given through the heads thereof.” The statement had appeared in almost the same words in article 30 of the New York & Erie Organization of 1852.

^* Quoted from a well-known officer of another road.

¹⁴ The ambiguity and instability of relations between divisions and departments in the 1860's might be illustrated even further. Under the 1866 formulation it was by no means certain that duties on the several divisions would be homologous. This aspect of the matter was taken in hand by a special committee in 1874. Cf. pp. 169–170 for further discussion.

^* Who afterwards became general solicitor.

¹⁵ The number and duties of vice presidents underwent recurrent change for a quarter of a century or more. However, the numbering of these offices until 1912 corresponded to seniority rather than to duties. Burgess and Kennedy, Centennial History, p. 794. Duties seem to have been grouped to fit the person available for the rank, rather than vice versa.

¹⁶ The office of general manager, unifying operational control for all lines east of Pittsburgh and Erie, was established December, 1871, with A. J. Cassatt, later president, as first incumbent. Wilson, , History of the Pennsylvania, vol. II, p. 19Google Scholar.

¹⁷ The date “1878” is possibly a misprint. The Organization of June, 1873, placed the general manager in charge of Passenger and Freight Departments as well as of Transportation. In the following year this combination of duties accompanied Cassatt up the ladder to a vice presidency, leaving only Transportation in the hands of Frank Thomson, the new general manager. By the late 1890's traffic had been divorced again from transportation, in the hands of a separate vice president. Wilson, , History of the Pennsylvania, vol. II, pp. 43ffGoogle Scholar.

¹⁸ The absence of coordination between rate-making and the costs of doing business deserves the attention of historians interested in the rate wars of the period. It was a matter of frequent comment in the railway press. But perhaps conditions bordering upon anarchy within many freight and passenger departments were more troublesome.

¹⁹ These three “grand divisions” were described as early as the Organization of 1873.

²⁰ The allusion is probably to the facts that the headquarters of the Motive Power Department were located at Altoona, where there was the principal manufactory of engines and cars for the entire system, and that the superintendent of that department for the Pennsylvania grand division for many years filled the same office on the New Jersey division. What happened in 1882 was another case of assigning duties to the same individual at a higher rank.

²¹ This date is certainly incorrect, and the error arises from the lack of clarity of which the author has complained. The Organization of 1863, for instance, vested Maintenance of Way in a chief engineer, assisted by three resident engineers.

²² Cf. pp. 168–170, and “Historical Development,” pp. 8–9.

²³ Here “staff” is dearly used in the context of a “line-and-staff” pattern as now understood.

²⁴ Executive self-restraint had been for a decade a principal theme of S. Wright Dunning as editor of the Railroad Gazette.

²⁵ Support for this rule was also formal. As early as the Rules and Regulations for the Government of the Transportation Department of 1864 it had been flatly stated, article 7: “Employees of every grade, will be considered in line of promotion, dependent upon the faithful discharge of duty, qualifications, and capacity for assuming increased responsibilities.”

²⁶ Personality requirements for promotion to an official position were frequently mentioned in the 1880's in the context of personnel policy. But I have not found so explicit a formulation of the conception of an “organization man,” quite free from the current, invidious connotations of that term.

²⁷ This president was also president of the Pennsylvania Company, which otherwise had a wholly different set of officials. The operative organization of the Pennsylvania Company, including an analysis of the significant role of the executive committee, was treated in “The Relations of the Pennsylvania Railroad Company to Other Organizations in which it holds an interest,” Railroad Gazette, vol. 15 (1883), pp. 45–46Google Scholar. This article is to appear in a subsequent issue of the Business History Review.

²⁸ See page 162 and foot notes 31–34.