1. Topics
  2. Photo: Vegetarian Meat Reefer - Cudahy 5177

Photo: Vegetarian Meat Reefer - Cudahy 5177

Bob Chaparro
 

Photo: Vegetarian Meat Reefer: Cudahy 5177

Well, sort of.

This is a photo of a Cudahy produce reefer, circa 1912 or earlier. At the time Cudahy, like most of the large meat packers, used their refrigerator cars to carry and distribute produce and other non-meat products in their refrigerator cars. This was before anti-trust regulations and the Supreme Court forced the large meat packers to divest themselves of many non-meat product lines and properties.

Cudahy had a number of reporting marks so I am not sure what marks would have appeared on this car.

Bob Chaparro

Moderator

Railway Bull Shippers Group

https://groups.io/g/RailwayBullShippersGroup
Tony Thompson
 

Bob Chaparro wrote:

Photo: Vegetarian Meat Reefer: Cudahy 5177

Well, sort of.

This is a photo of a Cudahy produce reefer, circa 1912 or earlier. At the time Cudahy, like most of the large meat packers, used their refrigerator cars to carry and distribute produce and other non-meat products in their refrigerator cars.

      That practice was almost entirely an Armour activity, though some of the other packers handled non-meat cargo, as this photo shows.

This was before anti-trust regulations and the Supreme Court forced the large meat packers to divest themselves of many non-meat product lines and properties.

      Actually, it was the Federal Trade Commission, not the Supreme Court, that ordered Armour out of the non-meat reefer business, in 1919. By that time, no other meat companies still were operating non-meat reefers.

Tony Thompson
Dave Parker
 

This is not really my bailiwick, but don't you have to make a distinction between what the packer could carry in their meat reefers, versus what the billboard adverting was touting?

In Chapter 3 of the Hendrickson and Kaminski billboard reefer book, there are a number of meat-packer cars advertising lard, butter, cheese, eggs and, yes, even Old Dutch Cleanser (in 1929 and 1932 photos of Cudahy cars).

I have never tracked down the 1919 ICC ruling, but it doesn't seem that it was very cut-and-dried.  Or am I missing something?
-
Dave Parker
Swall Meadows, CA
Tony Thompson
 

Dave Parker wrote:

This is not really my bailiwick, but don't you have to make a distinction between what the packer could carry in their meat reefers, versus what the billboard adverting was touting?

        Most of the advertising was for the benefit of lessees, so for example a butter ad on the car likely meant that it was being used for that, or at least for a company that shipped butter among other things.

I have never tracked down the 1919 ICC ruling, but it doesn't seem that it was very cut-and-dried.  Or am I missing something?

    Not the ICC, it was the FTC. It ordered Armour out of the produce business, and they got out (selling most of the reefers to a new company called Fruit Growers Express).

Tony Thompson
Bob Chaparro
 

Roger Hinman commented,

"Not all Cudahy’s were the same company which adds to the confusion.  The largest of them was the Cudahy Packing Co in South Omaha and later many locations. They also had the Cudahy tank line and produce line when listed.   Cudahy Milw Rfg Line was run by Cudahy Brothers in Milwaukee, later Cudahy, WI. Their brothers ran the larger business in So Omaha.

And then there are various small efforts made by John Cudahy who was a part owner of the Milwaukee company but also had some of his own private ventures. My suspicion is the car shown in the Union Fibre book has CRL reporting marks. The Old Dutch Cleanser was a trademark of the Cudahy Packing Company."
San Antonio & San Francisco <sanantonio-sanfrancisco@...>
 

Prior to 1911:

Cudahy Refrigerator Line:   C.R.L
Cudahy Produce Refrigerator Line:   C.P.R.L
Cudahy Oil Tank Line:  C.O.T.L.
Cudahy Stock Express:  C.S.E.
John Cudahy Packing Company:   J.C.P.Co.
Cudahy Milwaukee Refrigerator Line:  C.M.R.L.

Levi


Verified through ORER and actual railroad car pictures.
San Antonio & San Francisco <sanantonio-sanfrancisco@...>
 

The 1914-16 car has the reporting marks of C.R.L and is marked Cudahy Refrigerator Line.

The 1890s car has the reporting marks of C.P.R.L and is marked Cudahy Produce Refrigerator Line.

Take from actual photographs of both.

Levi
Schuyler Larrabee
 

This may have been answered, though I didn’t see this particular question answered:  WHY did the FTC force the meat packers to divest their other businesses, such as produce?  What was the rationale?

Schuyler

 

 

        Most of the advertising was for the benefit of lessees, so for example a butter ad on the car likely meant that it was being used for that, or at least for a company that shipped butter among other things.



I have never tracked down the 1919 ICC ruling, but it doesn't seem that it was very cut-and-dried.  Or am I missing something?

 

    Not the ICC, it was the FTC. It ordered Armour out of the produce business, and they got out (selling most of the reefers to a new company called Fruit Growers Express).

 

Tony Thompson

 

 

 
Tony Thompson
 

Schuyler Larrabee wrote:

This may have been answered, though I didn’t see this particular question answered:  WHY did the FTC force the meat packers to divest their other businesses, such as produce?  What was the rationale?

    The decision is focused on the "unfair" advantage to Armour's meat business to also operate a produce reefer business. Railroad regulation in the early 20th century often focused on preventing railroads or railroad-connected businesses from becoming conglomerates (in those days, railroads were no longer among the largest and richest corporations, but the Progressives eager to control "bad behavior" by railroads still regarded them as they had been in the 19th century).
      Armour's cars, icing facilities and shops largely became part of brand-new Fruit Growers Express in 1920 -- reviving an operating name previously used by Armour.

Tony Thompson
1 - 9 of 9