The Passing of the Streetcar

Utah Historical Quarterly

Vol. 24, 1056, Nos. 1-4

THE PASSING OF THE STREETCAR

BY C. W. MCCULLOUGH

ON May 31, 1941, the last streetcar to operate over Salt Lake City tracks made its final run. Tracks were torn up and right-of-ways repaved. Thus closed an era of urban transportation of great local and national significance, one that Utahans may well consider with pride.

Although many of our younger generation have never seen a Salt Lake City streetcar, there is alive today another not insignificant age group who experienced the thrill of riding the first cars to operate on the streets of Utah's capital city. These latter saw the horsecar born in 1872 and saw it die with the introduction of electric trolley cars in 1889. They have lived to see these replaced by pneumatic-tired trolley buses and finally our presentday motor buses. Thus, the lifespan of a single generation of man has been greater than four generations of traction service and development.

To the oldsters of Salt Lake City the history of mass passenger transportation is a page out of the book of their lives. But to oncoming youth, the scrapping of outmoded rails and trolley poles and the healing of pavement scars conveys small hint of the drama of the trolley car's heyday and its earlier progenitor powered by horses and mules. So to the old who remember and the young who accept modern traction service as a matter of course, this brief retrospect is dedicated.

In common with the instigation of streetcar service throughout the world, Salt Lake City's first streetcars were dependent upon animal traction. For seventeen years, from 1872 to 1889, the lowly mule served as "horsepower" to operate the system that included some fourteen miles of track and a total complement of twenty-one cars. This was a one-street line, and a ten cent fare was charged.

Reflecting the progressiveness that has marked the development of local traction facilities, is the fact that the electrification of Salt Lake City's streetcar system began in 1889, just a year after the first successful operation of an electric carline in the United States at Richmond, Virginia. Local service was then in the hands of two companies, the Salt Lake Rapid Transit and the Salt Lake City Railroad Company. Competitors for eleven years, the two lines finally merged into the Consolidated Railway and Power Company. A third line, the Fort Douglas Rapid Transit, was organized in 1890, but was taken over by the Salt Lake Rapid Transit before operating.

The trolley cars of this era, while marking a definite advance over the slow-moving mule car, left much to be desired in the matter of service and comfort. Open cars were the rule rather than the exception, and no provisions were made for heating them in winter. As a concession to the danger of frost-bitten or chilblained feet in very cold weather, straw was spread deeply over the car floors. Thus in a few short blocks, a passenger's clothing might acquire the appearance to be gained from a day's visit to. the Ogden Livestock Show. Whether this lavish use of straw on the part of the operators is to be traced to leftover stocks from horsecar days, cannot be determined at this late date.

Roadbeds and trackage were not engineered to present-day standards of smoothness. The single track cars, then in vogue, had a disconcerting habit of centering themselves upon the all too prevalent humps in the tracks. Once stopped, the vehicles would refuse to stir until passengers and crew would unload and vigorously rock the balky thing over the hump. This detail of bouncing a homebound streetcar over a few bumps appears to have been listed among the stock excuses to which wives had to listen when hubby arrived late for dinner. Despite these and similar minor shortcomings, the trolley car met a definite need and was accorded general patronage. New lines and extensions were instituted to keep pace with the city's growth.

With the consolidation of the parent companies and the development of new routes, the convenience of transfer privileges entered the picture. In keeping with the nationwide practice of traction companies, these transfer slips bore the notation—"Not Transferable." Just how such, a restriction might be enforced has ever been a mystery to traction patrons. It is doubtful if such an interchange of transfers has ever become a widespread practice among streetcar riders or one that has caused any traction line a serious loss of revenue.

Of more interest than economic importance was the attempt of local traction officials to put teeth into this "Not Transferable" edict. Delving into early streetcar history, we find Salt Lake City transfer slips going "arty" with a rogue's gallery of seven faces, five of men and two devoted to the fair sex. When a patron requested a transfer, in addition to the usual time and place information, the conductor punched out the face that most closely answered the patron's appearance. Foolproof! Only an identical twin could beat that game. Let us see!

The five man set-up should be of momentous historical value, depicting as it did the gamut of male facial adornment of that era. Perhaps it deserves a brief analysis—

No. 1. The Smoothie. "Little shavers" and close shavers qualified here.

No. 2. The lip adorned. Pre-Hitler; mustaches leaned to the handlebar type.

No. 3. Muttonchops, sidecurtains.

No. 4. Uncle Ezra, feather duster on chin.

No. 5. House of David, full crop of alfalfa.

Passing on to the ladies, we find emphasis turning to hats, the younger miss sporting a sailor, and madame a bonnet. This brings up the thought that times have changed. Imagine alloting the menfolk of our day five classes, while the ladies rate only two! And what a Solomon the modern conductor would have to be to distinguish between mother and daughter, for instance! Transfers would need to assume the proportions of a round the world travel ticket to classify the range of zany hats to be seen on most any rush-hour trolley bus.

Rumor has it that all was not "hotsy-totsy" from either the company's or the patron's standpoint. Some of the more mature ladies of that time had young ideas and resented being relegated to the oldsters. And there were complications in the field of the male, it is said. Mr. Muttonchops thought he was pulling a fast one when he dashed into the corner barbershop and was clean-shaven "on his transfer/' Then again, there was the case of the transfer holder who boarded a car and presented a transfer punched to provide free transportation to a smooth-shaven individual. The conductor regarded this and, in turn, the ample growth of stubble that adorned the man's face. When confronted with the discrepancy, the passenger corroborated the first conductor's classification but insisted that he had waited so long for the car that his whiskers had grown in the interim.

Whether or not this latter incident is true, it appears that after a reasonable trial, Salt Lake City's "Keep 'em honest" transfer slips were abandoned. The transfers of today, however, still insist that they are "Not Transferable."

In step with the use of electricity for both power and illumination, the third era of streetcar development witnessed the consolidation of traction and lighting utilities in Salt Lake City and Ogden under one management, the Utah Light and Railway Company. This occurred in 1904. Two years later, this company's entire holdings were purchased by E. H. Harriman and operated as a subsidiary of the Union Pacific Railroad until 1914, when the Utah Light and Traction Company assumed management. This organization, in turn, gave way in 1944 to the present operators, the Salt Lake City Lines.

The early phases of this era were characterized by a widespread extension of facilities and service. As was the case throughout the nation, these were the golden years of the streetcar. The automobile was yet in its infancy. Streetcars were the accepted means of urban travel. Young and old, rich and poor—"all God's children" rode the trolleys. Traffic justified the introduction of larger, heavier cars and the extension of lines into the rapidly growing suburban districts. At die peak of this period, trolley cars were operated over some 150 miles within the metropolitan area.

With the advent of the automobile, the tables were turned. Trolley car patronage fell off in the same ratio as the use of private cars increased. The use of motor cars led to a widespread demand for paved roads, and this paving tended to follow die thoroughfares being used by the traction lines. Due to antiquated franchises under which the latter operated, formulated in a day that little dreamed of the motor car, one-third to one-half of such paving expense was assessed against the traction company. The speed and comfort of the automobile led streetcar patrons to demand faster and more luxurious trolleys. The growth of the city lent pressure for new lines and extensions that gave no promise of producing adequate revenues.

These were the years when the public mind was particularly antagonistic to great corporations and the utilities. "Down with the trusts!" "Soak the rich!" were popular slogans of the day. With city government and state legislatures generally unfriendly, the traction company could hardly look to these bodies for alleviation of these burdens which were rapidly driving operating costs into the red. Far-seeing officials could see the handwriting on the wall—the trolley car was doomed and other methods of transportation must be evolved if the utility were to continue functioning. At the same time, any plan which involved scrapping a tremendous corporate investment and the sinking of another fortune in experimental equipment was not to be assumed lightly by an organization that was struggling for its very existence.

The success of the automobile and the highway motor bus had inspired considerable fruitless pioneering to produce a rubbertired trolley bus. Those buses which had been put into operation were equipped with hard rubber or cushion-type rubber tires. The initial starting force of the high-torque railway type electric motors then in use tended to strip pneumatic tires from the wheels. The bodies were such as to be designated a "glorified truck," which, writers contend, in the light of modern truck development, to be an insult to the truck.

The possibilities of a pneumatic-tired traction bus offered transportation engineers many intriguing elements of advantage and superiority over track-type streetcars:

1. Cost of installation and maintenance of trackage and paving would be eliminated.

2. Operation would be quieter.

3. Maneuverability of vehicles would be increased.

4. Traffic capacity of streets would be increased.

5. Passengers could be picked up and unloaded at the curb.

6. Routing of buses could be changed at will to meet any emergency.

It should be a matter of particular local moment and pride to realize that the first successful pneumatic-tired trolley bus to operate over any city street in the world was engineered and developed by officials of the Salt Lake Traction Company, under the direction of Mr. E. A. West, general manager, and Mr. Jed F. Woolley, chief engineer. Their contribution to the advancement of mass transportation included many innovations that are still in use. But the basic feature of their revolutionary vehicle involved the development of a new type motor with a lower starting torque that permitted the use of pneumatic tires.

In this connection it is of more than passing interest that national traction engineers and financial backers were "sold" on Mr. Woolley's proposition by a photograph of a trackless trolley coach that never existed. As much as Mr. West and Mr. Woolley believed in their dream trolley coach, they knew that hard-headed businessmen and financiers, experienced in many failures of similar types, would be difficult to convince. They knew how cold and uninspirational a set of blueprints might be. There must be a. way to dramatize their vision. Put it across!

There was. A gasoline highway bus passing through the city at that time was pressed into service. The driver was induced to station his bus on South Temple Street, where the vehicle was photographed with the Mormon Temple as a background. Utilizing photographic artifices too detailed to enumerate here, trolleys were superimposed on the bus together with necessary appurtenances to achieve verisimilitude. The final result depicted an imposing example of an electric trolley bus operating on Salt Lake City streets—a vehicle luxurious, practical, and in.use, and one that would well compete with the automobile in comfort, maneuverability and rider appeal.

With this mythological photograph as Exhibit A, and the complete plans and specifications of a trolley coach, a contract was negotiated for the manufacture of a fleet of buses by the Vesare Corporation of Albany, New York. The Herculian aspects of this feat may be better understood when one stops to realize that it involved the underwriting by the manufacturers of an unproven and wholly experimental innovation in the field of urban transportation.

When delivered and put into service in 1928, these buses focused the attention of the world upon Salt Lake City. Representatives from twenty-six states of the union and from thirteen foreign lands were sent here to study their design and operation.: The success of the trackless trolley coach was sensational. A new era in urban transportation was born. The streetcar was definitely on its way out.

But, the economic operation of local traction lines was only half solved by the introduction of the trackless trolley. There still remained the problem of service over very hilly routes and to outlying areas where patronage would not justify trolley wire installation and the use of expensive electric coaches. The gasoline motor bus appeared to be the logical answer, but there were inherent shortcomings and disadvantages to the front engine gas bus that rendered it unsuitable for city traction use.

Again Mr. Woolley worked out the details of a new type streetcar, a rear engine gasoline bus, and succeeded in finding a manufacturer who would pioneer its building. In 1933, Salt Lake City traction patrons were given a "first in the world" thrill for the second time, when rear engine gasoline motor buses were successfully placed in service locally.

The trackless trolley and the gasoline bus, in supplanting the streetcar, have proved themselves the essential mediums that enabled the local traction company to meet demands for better and more extensive service through the difficult years of the depression and the period of wartime growth that has followed.

Salt Lake City coaches and buses travel 12,000 miles daily over 154 miles of streets. An average of 16,000,000 passengers are carried annually with an amazing factor of safety. Although well over a billion people have ridden the trolleys and busses of the several traction companies, statistics reveal that there has never been a passenger fatality on the Salt Lake City lines.

Today, Utah's capital city enjoys mass transportation as modern as any in the nation. Literally, "its line has gone out unto the ends of the earth," for the imprint of its pioneering is to be seen in cities all over the world.

For full citations please view this article on a desktop.