Harlem River and Port Chester Railroad

In reading articles on the New Haven’s Harlem River Branch that date from 1904 to the 1930’s, the rail line is attributed to the New York, New Haven and Hartford Railroad or New Haven. There is also mention of the New York, Westchester and Boston. Technically the line was part of the Harlem River and Port Chester Railroad, yet this is not mentioned in any of the articles or listed on any maps of the time. The HR&PCR would merge with the New Haven in 1927, which I assume the year that the railroad’s charter expired.

Prior to 1927 were the New Haven and the NW&B leasing trackage rights from the Harlem River and Port Chester Railroad?

The New York Central also seemed to have a similar arrangement with the New York and Harlem Railroad for access to Grand Central and Port Morris. When did the N&HR cease to exist?

I am assuming that the New Haven and New York Central had controlling interests in these respective companies.

I think the answer is that both the Harlem River & Port Chester and the NY & Harlem were leased, which is different from being merged. In a merger, the merged company's capital stock disappears, having been bought by the company it is being merged into. That can sometimes be expensive, as the New York Central found out when it merged the Lake Shore & Michigan Southern in 1914 and had to pay off the minority stockholders. For many railroads, NYC and NH included, a lease was simpler and cheaper.

Thanks BaltOhio. Your comments have led me to further research.

It appears that through most of its life the Harlem River and Port Chester was a railroad in title only, without rolling stock or locomotives. What I find interesting is that beginning in 1904 the New Haven issued $15,000,000 (1904 dollars) in bonds to commence a series of improvements or betterments (as they were known then) on the Harlem line. The improvements would eventually include a six track line, elimination of grade crossings with cuts and overhead road bridges, six double track rolling bascule bridges over two rivers and the electrification of the branch. That seems like a great expenditure for a leasehold!

In August 1920, the New Haven was permitted through a court modification of the decree of dissolution against the company, to begin merger talks with the H.R. & P.C and the Central New England. It took seven years for the years for the H.R. & P.C merger to take place. I am assuming this merger had to be reviewed and approved by Federal and state authorities.

What is would interesting to find out, if the capital improvements noted above increased the value of the lease, hence more money that the New Haven had to pay the H.R. & P.C or did the New Haven deduct the cost of theses expenditures from the lease with the theory that the Harlem River and Port Chester would benefit financially from these improvements in the long term.

I think you'd need to find the specific lease agreement to see what it covers. But generally, those old railroad leases ran for very long periods of time -- 999 years wasn't uncommon. They were usually structured to pay a guaranteed "X" per cent return on the lessee's common stock so that, in effect, the minority stockholders got a fixed income that was pegged to a set value of the stock. Often the lessor guaranteed interest payments on the on the lessee's bonds. With the lessor usually holding a stock majority, it was unlikely that someone else would come along and either disown the lease or change its terms.

Unless the lease specified otherwise (which it seldom, if ever, did), for all practical purposes the lessee was treated as an integral part of the lessor's system, managed by the lessor and using the lessor's equipment.

As a sidelight, this caused the New York Central some problems after it leased the Boston & Albany in 1900. As it would normally do under a lease, the NYC charged in and started relettering everything "NYC&HR." They also sent in a new operating general manager who lacked PR sensitivities. The Boston brahmins were already very unhappy about (horrors!) a New York corporation taking over "their" railroad, and a political outcry ensued. The NYC then backed off and re-relettered things back to "Boston & Albany" and set up separate equipment rosters -- but it all really meant nothing.

My memory is vague on this, so I could well be wrong, but as I recall, the New Haven leased the HR&PC before anything had actually been built. I think it had property, but no actual rail line.

Regarding the Harlem River & Port Chester, your memory is correct - it had right of way but no rolling stock. The New Haven leased it and finished building it, at least to New Rochelle Junction. A fascinating "branch" line, it included joint service with the Second Avenue El at one time, operating New Haven trains all the way to the 126th Street terminal in Manhattan.

Regarding the New York, Westchester & Boston, that was a separate company set up by the New Haven. Its operations between West Farms Junction and Harlem River were via trackage rights on New Haven tracks.

Regarding the New York & Harlem, that was indeed leased by the New York Central, and operated as part thereof, but remained a separate corporation. When the new Grand Central Terminal was built, all three railroads (NYC&HR, NYNH&H and NY&H) were signatories to the agreement (also known in railroad circles as the Tripartite Agreement). It did complicate matters somewhat when Metro North was formed to take over all the commuter operations - the New York & Harlem insisted on its piece of the pie.

Harlem River & Port Chester was merged with the New Haven in 1927. Likewise with the Central New England. Don't know when, or if, the Old Colony was merged with the New Haven.

Oh, the picture posted, although identified as "HarlemRiver", is actually a shot of Oak Point Yard taken across the six-train main.

Thanks Statkowski

Here is an excerpt for the New York Times from July 2, 1869.

“The Harlem River and Port Chester Railroad Company have contracted with Messrs. BERTHONEL, SMITH and WHITE to build the first or lower section of their railroad, from Harlem River to the village of Westchester, a distance of six miles, for $50,000 per mile, complete the grades not to exceed thirty-five feet per mile.”

A year after the New York, New Haven and Hartford was formed, the company embarked upon a lease with The Harlem River and Port Chester to gain direct access to New York and the H.R. and P.C.R.R. designated facilities on the Harlem River. So it is correct to assume that the H.R. and P.C.R.R was the solely the owner of the right of way. It would be interesting to find out the extent or width of the right of way. Was the right of way originally four tracks, with the additional two parallel tracks belonging to the New Haven?

Concerning capital improvements, I came across notes from the New York Public Service Commission. On November 19, 1908 the New York, New Haven and Hartford Railroad and the Harlem River Railroad both submitted an application to the Public Service Commission to operate the Harlem River and Port Chester Railroad by alternating current. On January 8, 1909, the presiding commissioner found that the Commission by law governed only applications submitted by street railways and not stream railroads, hence both railroads were able to proceed with electrification.

It’s amazing that the New York and Harlem Railroad lasted well into the Twentieth Century! It probably relinquished its interest to the threat of government condemnation.