The Fight for Rail Access
Local boosters push back against a cynical newspaper report claiming Aberdeen does not need a new railroad depot.
The story, cleaned up
A cleaned-up reading of the newspaper page: spelling and layout repaired, one story lifted off a crowded page. It follows the original closely but it is not a transcription. The original page is below; read it if a detail matters.
The Aberdeen Herald criticizes an article in the Post-Intelligencer that suggested Aberdeen has no need for a new railroad depot on the city's north side. The Herald argues that such an opinion is akin to that of a paid attorney for interests antagonistic to the city's growth. The editors contend that the city needs depots on both sides of the river to ensure manufacturers have easy access to both rail and water transport, rather than being forced to relocate to the opposite side of the water to avoid multiple handlings of freight. They warn that ignoring this necessity is an argument for stagnation, comparing such narrow-mindedness to the 'moss-back' reputation that once hindered the growth of Olympia.
“The city of Aberdeen needs depots on both sides for the good of the whole city, regardless of the freight rate on lumber.”
The struggle for infrastructure to support industry is a classic Aberdeen story. Much like the 1891 debate over rail access, modern Aberdeen continues to grapple with how to best utilize its geography—water and land connectivity—to foster economic growth while avoiding the 'narrow-gauged' thinking that limits development.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.