> You've raised an interesting question. Union Stations occurred
> when two or
> more railroads joined together with a common station. There were
> (and still
> are) depots that are joint facilities of two or more railroads
> which aren't
> referred to as Union Stations. Quite often (perhaps always)
> Union Stations
> were operated by a jointly-owned subsidiary corporation, whereas joint
> agencies didn't have a separate corporate existence.
Interesting that they all picked the same name, or that it was allowed. The
??/?? railroads were allowed to name their place Union Station in Cincinnati
for example. You would think that who ever had the name first would have
objected to the next guys naming theirs the same. It made me think that
maybe there was a Union Station Company that was involved. Found the land,
built the building, sold, leased, whatever to a group of railroads.
Seems peculiar also that ( or at least by todays practices) that the RR's
consented to a station name that didn't include their names. Could it be
that they rented space or paid fees like the Airlines do? O'Hare is owned
by the City of Chicago, hence no United Airlines in the name.
John S
|