Steam & Excursion > Dudley Thickens: "Little Buttercup" under steam

A couple of threads down, someone asked whether Santa Fe's 0-4-0 exhibition steamer "Little Buttercup" was used in the 1946 movie "The Harvey Girls" (it wasn't).

Thinking about it some more, I haven't come across photos of any events where Buttercup was actually under steam other than its debut as an exhibition engine at the Chicago Railroad Fair in 1948-49. Does anyone know of any? Santa Fe's other exhibition engine, 2-8-0 #1 "Cyrus K. Holliday" (ex-2414, originally 132), did steam several times as a show pony, but Buttercup was smaller, slower, and generally less suited to excursion work.

The photo below from the Western Railway Museum Archives was taken by Dudley Thickens at the Chicago Railroad Fair in June 1949.

---

From the Kansas Memory website.

---

Evan_Werkema Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> The photo below from the Western Railway Museum
> Archives was taken by Dudley Thickens at the
> Chicago Railroad Fair in June 1949.


If the date is correct, this is a unique image of Little Buttercup.

The CK Holiday was not initially available to participate in the 1948 Chicago Rail Fair. Santa Fe searched for an “old” locomotive on their roster resulting in the selection of 0-4-0T #9419 in Needles. With both the water and fuel tanks removed and the additional of a diamond stack, old style headlight, a tender followed with a new paint scheme, the homely looking 0-4-OT roundhouse goat became the old-tyme 0-4-0 #5, the Little Buttercup. The engine was sent to Chicago where it became the railroad’s representative in the fair and the daily pageant with other historic locomotives.

Someone within Santa Fe management attended the Fair and must have been embarrassed to see the railroad’s selected representative among other noted historic steam locomotives, such as NYC #999 and the B&O locomotives. Directives were given to get the CK Holiday operational and sent to Chicago in time for the 1949 Fair. LBC was placed on static display and no longer an active participant in the 1949 Pageant.

The image must have been taken during a rare moment when the LBC was fired up as a Santa Fe substitute for the CK Holiday in the pageant. After the fair, CK Holiday became the historic and active face of the railroad with LBC making occasional static appearances. The image may show one of the last times LBC was in steam.

Little Buttercup currently is owned by the California Trolley and Railroad Corporation and is on display in the trolley barn at History Park in San Jose.

---

I am sorry, but the second photo is not LBC...look hard at both photos, plus the newer one at Redondo. The drivers are spaced differently. Sure it is not the Holiday?

Cyrus K Holliday was a 2-8-0.

---

Here's a picture of me standing on #1 a couple of years ago, at Houston Union Station.

Brian Ehni

---

CPRR Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I am sorry, but the second photo is not LBC...look
> hard at both photos, plus the newer one at
> Redondo. The drivers are spaced differently. Sure
> it is not the Holiday?

Correct it is neither locomotive. The pictured locomotive was named "Buttercup" by the railroad in the late nineteenth century and was scrapped a long time ago.

CPRR Wrote:

> I am sorry, but the second photo is not LBC...look
> hard at both photos, plus the newer one at
> Redondo.

Both of Santa Fe's 1940's era exhibition steamers, 2-8-0 #1 and 0-4-0 #5, were given "recycled" names that originally adorned 19th century 4-4-0's. "Cyrus K. Holliday" was Santa Fe's first locomotive, and "Little Buttercup" - well I'm not quite sure why it was chosen over any of the other possible names. The original "Little Buttercup," shown in the picture posted by flynn, was built by Hinckley in 1879 as a narrow gauge engine for the D&RG, and was rebuilt to standard gauge a year later to become Santa Fe #100 with the Gilbert and Sullivan inspired moniker. According to Iron Horses of the Santa Fe Trail, the engine was "used for many years to pull Jim Moore's pay car." It was renumbered three more times, to 111, 80, and finally 0172 before it was scrapped at Topeka in 1923. According to the Kansasmemory.org site, the occasion that prompted the over-the-top decoration seen in the second photo was "the Union Depot corner stone dedication in Atchison, Kan."

http://www.kansasmemory.org/item/208678

KMiddlebrook wrote:

> If the date is correct, this is a unique image of Little Buttercup.

We only have Thickens' "6/49" date on the envelope to go by.

Some of you folks are not paying attention to Santa Fe rosters. There were three (3) C.K.Hollidays.
AT&SF #1 (1st) 4-4-0 was an six foot gauge loco. bought 2nd hand. then 344, then 78A and 0177.
AT&SF #1 (2nd) 4-4-0 built by AT&SF in 1881 (first home built loco). then 81 and 0171.
AT&SF #1 (3rd) 2-8-0, first built as #132, 912, 2414, 132 and #1 and finally 132(again). Now in museam in Kansas State Hist. Soc. collection.

Now let us talk about the "Little Buttercap".
AT&SF 100, built by Hinkley in 1879, the 4-4-0 was narrow gauge (3ft).
rebuilt by AT&SF to standard gauge 1880 #111, 80 (1886) and last as 0172 1900) and scrapped in 1923.
2nd "Little Buttercap" started as Santa Fe Terminal #1 (0-4-0T), then AT&SF 2419, 02419, 9419 and AT&SF #5.

If you care for more info, by a copy of "Iron Horses of the Santa Fe Trail".

wag216



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/11/15 21:11 by wag216.

wag216 Wrote:

> Now let us talk about the "Little Buttercup".

Any insights on how they chose that name for the 0-4-0 in 1948? Worley doesn't say, and neither does Stagner in his book on surviving Santa Fe steam. There were certainly plenty of other Santa Fe locomotive names from the late 1800's to choose from. Heck, if they had called it "Uncle Dick," they could have justified leaving it as a tank engine:

http://www.atsfrr.com/resources/Baldwin/p2.htm

Evan_Werkema Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> wag216 Wrote:
>
> > Now let us talk about the "Little Buttercup".
>
> Any insights on how they chose that name for the
> 0-4-0 in 1948? Worley doesn't say, and neither
> does Stagner in his book on surviving Santa Fe
> steam. There were certainly plenty of other Santa
> Fe locomotive names from the late 1800's to choose
> from. Heck, if they had called it "Uncle Dick,"
> they could have justified leaving it as a tank
> engine:
>

Someone likely made a "Buttercup" reference while she was being painted and the name stuck.

Isn't 'Buttercup' a Flower?

--Jim Baker

JimBaker Wrote:

> Isn't 'Buttercup' a Flower?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WOf4FFailmQ

During my power distributor days, a fellow power distributor when things got real tight would say, "it's time to pull out 'Little Buttercup'". That engine ranks higher than "The Little Engine That Could" in my estimation.