SOOT IN THE FLUES

‘Enclosed is a picture taken January 16, 1992.’

(I think you made a smart move, Carlton. I don’t know if we
have many folks doing that thank you for sending your letter).

E. DEAN BUTLER, 4325 Drake Road, Cincinnati, Ohio 45243 sends
this message: ‘In the Jan./Feb. 1992 issue of IMA, page 24, the
article on ‘Conditioning Boiler Water’ states that water of
pH9 is twice as alkaline as water of pH8 and that water of pHIO is
twice as alkaline as water of pH9.

NOT SO! Each pH step is 10 times more alkaline than the prior
step. Thus, water of pH10 is 100 times more alkaline than water of
pH8.

The pH scale is logarithmic and thus works just like the Richter
Scale used for earthquakes.’ (Thanks, good reader, for this
infowe appreciate it).

A letter comes from BOB SILVA, RR 2, Box 183CC, Columbus,
Nebraska 68601, who comments: ‘Three years ago my brother and I
purchased a steam-driven (powered) winch from a local sand and
gravel company that used it in their operations. The winch was
built by the American Hoist and Derrick Company of St. Paul,
Minnesota. We would like to research the company mentioned before
we start restoration of the winch.

‘I wrote to several different places on this subject last
year and the only thing I received back was a worn-out mail box
hinge from no reply.

‘I am a fairly new subscriber to your magazine and I am
hoping that you might have a better resource to find this
information than I would.

‘There is a photo of a smaller version in the book
Encyclopedia of American Steam Traction Engines by Jack Norbeck on
page 40, the lower left hand side.’

(My best hope is that someone in our Iron-Men Family will be
able to give you more particulars on this subject. Thanks for
writing).

‘Soot in the Flues is a dirty engine I’ve cleaned a lot
of them out,’ says PERRY WILLIS, R.D. 3, Louisville, Ohio
44641.

He continues this letter ‘Once again I recall of past years
of which others have shared in their lives. Getting up in the
morning to a warm fire and dressing for the weather to go to the
barn to do the chores before breakfast and then walking to school
afterwards. Remember this was long before school buses.

‘The school house still stands and is located on the top of
a ridge. Someone made a home of the school house. We had over a
mile to walk to school and in 20 degree below zero weather, it
wasn’t a pleasant walk as most times you faced the wind while
walking. All of the older children helped the younger kids, whether
a brother or sister or a neighbor. We don’t have the harmony of
the public as we had at that time.

‘After school term, we planted the garden and crops,
cultivating and hoeing the corn field, then the hay, then the hay
had to be harvested. All of this was done by hand. It was an art to
build a load of hay. We never had a loader, so we pitched the hay
onto the wagon. The farm was steep and if the load was not built
right, it would slide off the wagon. Then, also, the grain, oats,
wheat, rye and buckwheat all had to be cut and shocked.

‘We lived on a farm where the barn burned down. We hauled
the grain and put it in a big stack. The wheat, oats and then the
rye or reverse so the rye straw was used to top the strawstack.

‘Milking machines were not in the area and all milking was
done by hand. Then the day of threshing drew near. All the
neighbors shared labor to do the job.

‘We had a thresherman who had a Baker engine and a Russell
separator. Another man had a Fordson and a Westinghouse hand feed
web stacker. I would like to see the modern generation use
measuring boxes and carry grain or bag it in a heavy yield. They
soon would leave, as it was hard work, but a pleasure to do it.

‘Then, as time of season lengthened, butchering time
approached. Again, the neighbors shared this job. I have ground a
wash tub of sausage and never stopped the grinder until the wash
tub was full. There are a few of the older people alive who did all
of this work, fine neighbors also!

‘We don’t have this fellowship any more in this area. I
work all the steam shows I can attend, as other folks do the
same.

‘I met a pen pal by an error he wrote. He thanked me and I
treasure the friendship as he is older and did all the things I
have mentioned; from Wisconsin to Washington State.

‘Being from a large family and an older boy, I had the
burden of doing most plowing and all the trading of labor for
harvest season. A lot of the older men cannot help at the shows,
but I would like to see more take an interest to preserve the steam
engines and sawmills; also the machinery their engines powered.

‘In closing to alla better life to be had is by being a
friend to allit pays!’

SCOTT THOMPSON, RR2, 12109 Mennonite Church Road, Tremont,
Illinois 61568 writes: ‘Thanks to all those who answered my
request for where the serial number was located on a wooden Rumely
separator! It was located on the top front crosspiece right behind
where the feeder attaches. It was stamped on the end, on the left
if you’re facing the machine. I have a feeling Rumely stamped
them different places over the years, because all the responses had
it on a different place. But they all got pretty close. Thanks,
again, Fellas!

‘As I restore this machine I am constantly amazed at the
old-world craftsmanship that went into it, from the wooden grain
pans on up. There is surprisingly little wear, even though it was
run hard for 25 years. Oh yes, I looked up the serial number in
Charles Wendel’s Allis-Chalmers book, and it turned out to be a
1916! I power it with the 20-40 Rumely Oil Pull which ran it from
1930 to 1941, when they were both run into the shed. This year the
team was reunited for their 50th anniversary; 50 years since the
two had worked as a team!

‘Enclosed is a picture of an interesting little
attachmentthis is the belt evener or leveler from the Rumely, which
is a 36-60. It is manufactured by Gaswell Bros., Cherokee, Iowa and
patented January 10, 1905. Does anyone have any information on this
company? I had only had the thresher three weeks before our show
and it fought us right up to the dinner hour before it threshed
well; part of the problem being this rusted-up belt leveler. Now
it’s all cleaned, painted and really works slick!

‘Also, if anyone has a copy of a Rumely thresher manual for
the 36-60 wooden separator, and/or the 36’ Heineke feeder I
could copy, I would surely appreciate it!

‘Enclosed find some memories passed on to me by my dad,’
writes WILLIAM FLOWERS, Route 1, Box 332, Adena, Ohio 43901. ‘I
hope you can keep your column going. I have been enjoying IMA since
1965 and GEM since it was first published. These magazines are
surely the spokesman of the hobby.

‘Some old threshing tales as told by my dad, Edgar
Flowers:

‘While threshing in a bank barn at the John Lachendro farm,
a near tragedy happened. The belt was run from high on the
separator to low on the tractor. John Lachendro was forking sheaves
and loose grain that had fallen over the edge of the feeder when he
got his ear against the drive belt. It nearly took his ear off! He
came up top my dad with an old rusty pen knife and told him to
‘cut ’em off!’ Of course, my dad refused and they took
the man to the town doctor, who attached his ear.

‘Another time, while baling timothy hay out of a big hay mow
with the Ohio hay press that my dad used, three or four Polish
fellows smoked ‘cutty pipe.’ One fellow smoked homemade
cigarettes all the time he was baling. His helper sat on the
tractor all day, ready to pull the baler out by the belt.

‘One of my dad’s competitors had a Case ensilage cutter
and a Case tractor. He didn’t use a distributor and had none in
a tin silo. All the heavy corn went to one side and the light
fodder went to the other side. They had just shut down when the
silo toppled over on the Case cutter!

‘When the rubber tire law came in, in Ohio, my dad
didn’t have enough money to buy rubber for his 22-36 McCormick
Deering so he used old truck tires, bolted on the front hubs and
for the rear, he made wooden blocks in four sections that would go
around the rear wheels between the spade lugs. The blocks were
lined with wagon tires for wear.

As soon as he left the hard-surfaced road, he would remove the
blocks. In 1938, he purchased new wheels and tires from Sears
Roebuck. These tires and wheels are still on the tractor.

‘While going through my dad’s things, I ran across some
old threshing account books. They were the courtesy of Advance
Rumely Thresher Company. Wheat was seven cents per bushel, oats
five cents, rye eight cents, barley five cents, for threshing. How
he ever made a living, I don’t know! Pap passed away in
October, 1990.’

‘Regarding the letter about the Scheidler Machine Works; of
course, the most interesting part of the Scheidler history is the
sudden demise of Reinhardt Scheidler in 1903 when one of his
engines under test blew down its crown sheet, and ended his
life.

‘I have read about this incident many times and everyone
points out the reason for the firebox failure was the use of crown
bars on the firebox crown sheet instead of stay bolts. It is also
mentioned that the crown bars were hot-riveted to the underside of
the wagon top, which of course is the wrapper sheet; if true I
would like to see a cut of this. Actually, a crown bar is free
standing and only attached normally to just the crown sheet and
generally used only where stay bolts can’t be normally
used.

‘Crown boxes have been used almost as long as any boiler
construction, but only as mentioned in unconventional design
boilers. Scheidler must have built a flaw in that boiler, certainly
in 1903, carrying 115 to 120 lbs. steam, a fairly poor boiler could
stand that pressure.

‘To illustrate how crown bars were used in at least one
unconventional boiler about 40 years ago, I put some flues in a
boiler that outwardly looked like a conventional firebox, only with
a very short barrel. It was about 48′ in diameter. The first
stage of flues were about 48’ long and came from the firebox to
the smoke box.

The second stage of flues came from the smoke box and extended
back over the crown sheet to the firebox back head, smoke box.

‘Because of the flues, only so many stay bolts could be used
along with crown bars. This boiler carried about 150 lbs. steam.
One can only speculate as to why that Scheidler boiler blew that
fateful day in 1903. I have seen boilers that were very thin that
were carrying at least 125 lbs. steam and just got phased out.
Actually, a big percentage of the boilers that blew up were a
fireman’s fault.

‘I have a reprint catalog of 1906 of Julius J. D. McNamar
Company. It states also, ‘Successor to John H. McNamar,
formerly Scheidler & McNamar.’

‘That company of Newark, Ohio, manufactured traction and
portable steam engines and circular sawmills. The cuts illustrate
neat, well designed engines; the cuts show stay bolts on the
firebox sides, but none visible on the wagon tops, so apparently
the McNamar had a crown sheet stayed with crown bars on it, seemed
so in 1906.

‘It is mentioned in the Scheidler article that they built
engines until around 1924. One thing for certain, for many years
before this date, their boilers would not have been built with
crown bars, because of the formation of A.S.M.E. codes, then too,
Ohio had strict codes of their own later.

‘One very important point I would like settled however, how
could Scheidler Machine Works build steamers yet in 1925?…When
McNamar was a successor to Scheidler and McNamar before 1906. The
picture in IMA shows a definitely changed Scheidler engine with an
intermediate gear, also a butt strap seam boiler. Maybe someone has
a late catalog. Also, a butt strap seam boiler.’

‘All of this, of course, makes for interesting reading.
Maybe someone could clear this up for the record.’

The above came from THOMAS STEBRITZ, 1516 E. Commercial St.,
Algona, Iowa 50511.

DANIEL GEHMAN, 419 E. Church Street, Stevens, Pennsylvania 17578
dropped us a short writing as follows: ‘Thank you for a great
magazine! I wrote the article ‘Learning to Fire the
Boiler,’ in Nov./Dec. ’91 IMA. I have received lots of co
respondence, helpful points and information. Thank you one and all.
There are some great people in this world! I hope we can continue
to read Soot in the Flues. If Anna Mae stops we will lose a great
part of IMA. PS: I now can fire the boiler okay’.

‘Hi, Anna Mae! I have a question for your column. Where is a
good place to send pop valves for resetting, or rebuilding? I sent
two to a company that was supposed to be a precision pump and valve
service center near Charleston, West Virginia. I got them back with
parts missing and a haphazard reassembly that rendered a
serviceable valve worthless. We used to have a local fellow, now
deceased, who did a good job on safety valves, but I need to find a
good service center for the steam boys in my neck of the woods.
(This comes from DAVID WHITE, Unus Road, Box 356, Route 6,
Lewisburg, West Virginia 24901. Can you help him?)

I’m happy to receive a letter from an old friend, FRANK J.
BURRIS, 1102 Box Canyon Road, Fallbrook, California 92028. It’s
been awhile since we heard from him. He writes:

‘One good thing does lead to another in your wonderful
column, consequently herewith is a bit of fine coal, which if fired
lightly, will keep down any black smoke re: the excellent response
of worthy engineer Thomas Stebritz contained in IMA Mar/Apr, page
13.

‘My previous article, as mentioned, was intended only to
reveal the drafting layout of a common type of radial valve gear,
with comments concerning the objectives of utilizing this type as
compared with shifting eccentrics, links, and simple Marsh. As
commonly utilized, such gear permits ‘hookin’ up’
without changing the lead setting of the valve. Now the question
arises ‘What is the practical advantage of hookin’ up
anyway?’

‘Well, quite often there may be an almost un-measurable
difference when we limit the discussion to our dear old traction
engine. But have no qualms if you pose that question to the fireman
for a good old-time railway engineer; for he will tell you very
earnestly that it makes all the difference in the world regarding
aching backs. And well do I recall the bitter complaining of some
of these chaps who became unlucky to heave for a hogger who seemed
to have little respect for either his fireman or the drain of water
from the tender. I do recall one instance, at the end of glorious
‘Teens’, when one good fireman became so outraged at the
engineers running ‘down in the corner’ and indulging in
excessive blowing off to ‘clean the boiler,’ that he
finally and desperately tripped the air-operated fire door and
tossed his #10 scoop into the roaring firebox! Needless to say,
without a spare scoop, that load of freight came to a rapid halt;
and one engineer was chastised ‘on the carpet’.

‘So what is the real difference between the efficiencies of
a traction engine at work, and a steam locomotive, when both are
fitted with variable cutoff valve gears? Well, the traction engine
has something else in the steam line that the locomotive does not
have! And you may not have considered it to this point, it is that
peculiar necessity, the throttling governor. Of course, the
locomotive requires no governor; for its internal loading cannot
change more rapidly than the engineer can adjust the ‘Johnson
Bar’ or close off the throttle. A good locomotive engineer
keeps his throttle well above open for the task (to keep full
boiler pressure in the steam line) and then keeps her hooked up all
she will stand to maintain the train’s moving on schedule.

‘Now, for our old farming friend, regardless of valve gear,
must operate under a combination of governor-valve-gear. If the
load in this case were so heavy as to require wide-open governor,
the engine would be considered overloaded and would be forced to
slow down under temporary fluctuations. And if a margin of power is
maintained, the steam pressure in the chest is always somewhat less
than full boiler pressure. With a hookup type valve gear under
these conditions, it may be readily apparent that comparatively
higher steam pressure may be carried in the chest to accomplish the
SAME WORK. This is illustrated in the element of the Rankin cycle
(as defined in the thermodynamics relative to the steam engine; the
Carnot cycle applying similarly to the internal combustion engine)
which also is that shown in an indicator diagram from a working
cylinder, and sketched in Fig. One herewith.

‘In the illustration at left, a comparison is shown between
cylinder developed powers with eight inch stroke, for example: in
one instance with cutoff having finished at three inches (37 % by a
hooked-up gear (solid curve A-C-D), and in another event by a fixed
cutoff (often factory designed for a round
^5/₈ stroke, five inches as shown in sketch,
62%, depicted in broken curve B-C-D).

‘Now, these curves show the cylinder steam pressure around
the complete cycle, against the scale of 130 shown on the sketch,
in which case the full steam pressure in the chest is 125 psi. In
order to calculate the cylinder developed horsepower, we would have
to determine the average steam pressure per stroke; then multiply
this by the area of the piston in square inches; again multiply
this product by the length of stroke in feet (because we are now
going to foot-pounds); and again multiply by the number of strokes
(revolutions) per minute; multiplied by two for a single-cylindered
engine; and finally dividing all this grand product by 33,000. But
whoop, there is only one catch so far! What is the
‘average’ steam pressure throughout the stroke, from
looking at all the curvature of the expansion and cushioning
action? To begin with, there is a slight misnomer here for
‘average’ is called ‘mean effective’; in the
parlance. But in reality, average is calculated by simply adding
all the scaled verticals and then dividing by the number of
verticals; the more the merrier. However, the ‘mean
effective’ is derived by extracting the square root of the sum
of the squared verticals. This can amount to an appreciable
difference. For example, in exacting electrical parlance, the
average value of a rectified half sine wave is 0.6 that of its peak
value; while the mean effective value is 0.707, which is what we
are paying for when we turn on an electric motor or other
line-powered device.

‘So in our case, we can either set up, say, forty scale
verticals and a correspondingly sized horizontal matrix, and then
start counting all the little squares under and inside the curve;
adding up the little halves and fractals on the borderline to get
as close total as possible. Of course, in the big shops this is all
accomplished by simply tracing the vector leg of a plan meter
around the entire curve; then reading the circumscribed scaled area
off the drum on this wondrous device. How simple, if you have one!
But now back to our comparison discussion.

‘We are considering identically developed powers; therefore
the shaded area ‘X’ under the hookup curve must be equal to
that indicated by the shaded area’ Y’ under the fixed
cutoff curve. What does this entail? Well, first, Old Papa Rankin
demonstrates that, amongst several other things, the efficiency of
the expansion cycle depends to some empirical extent upon the
difference between the steam pressure at admittance and that at
release (E vs. d’ for the hookup), and F vs. d’ for the
fixed. Not only is this in favor of the first, but it is seen that
higher steam pressure is released to the atmosphere in the latter
case. Another disadvantage is found in the latter case because of
more wiredrawing at cutoff (because of a slower moving gear
action). Wire-drawing is a shortfall because steam is cooled by
being squeezed off during expansion, as also occurs in the governor
throttling valve; less of which is evident in the hookup system
because of higher chest pressure. Wire-drawing areas are indicated
at a – a and b – b correspondingly.

‘So now, can we expect all the hookup boys to outperform the
fixed boys? Well, hardly! For one thing, as we have seen, the
hookups are somewhat compromised by that throttling governor,
although not as badly as their competitors. Another thing, shorter
stroke engines tend to have larger valve ports and shorter
passages. And then, there are schools advocating larger fireboxes
for the same capacity boilers. And, lest we forget, some firemen
(engineers) appear to have a keener knack at handling their
engines. Another item of no small concern, the simpler a valve gear
is, the less maintenance and difficulty. All in all, it appears
that we have a wonderful group of Yester-men out there to entertain
the great host of us who do not possess one of those grand old Iron
Men, as the founder of this fine magazine defined them. No doubt he
had the nostalgia of the Iron Horse in mind when he took up the
life of the Ninth Wonder of the World.’

‘Your appeal for articles for your column has prompted me to
ask for your help to enable me to find an answer to a question that
has bugged me for some 70 years. I realize that my question
involves steam traction trivia, but sometimes information of this
sort makes interesting reading’, writes JAMES B. ROMANS, 9111
Louis Avenue, Silver Spring, Maryland 20910.

‘My question is simply this: Did the J. I. Case Threshing
Machine Company or any affiliated Case organization ever make a 30
HP two-cylinder (double-simple) steam traction engine? These are
not to be confused with the well-known, two-cylinder,
tandem-compound steam traction engines. I have brought this subject
to the attention of a number of steam engine ‘experts’ over
the years and to date I have not been able to obtain a positive
answer.

‘This whole thing began in the 1920’s when the largest
steam traction engine I had ever seen came by our farm near Monroe,
Iowa. I asked my father what kind of engine it was and he said it
looked like a Case and that it was a two-cylinder engine. Even
though I was perhaps no more than 10 years old, I was very much
interested in steam engines and knew what a tandem-compound engine
looked like and realized this big engine was not a compound engine.
Later I learned that the engine was enroute to a nearby coal mine
where it was to be used for hoisting purposes. We went to the mine
later to see the engine. They had blocked the engine, raised a rear
wheel and wrapped the hoisting cable around the wheel. The owner
told us that the engine was a 30 HP double cylinder. I can’t
say if the name Case appeared anywhere on the engine.

‘I had not thought about the above incident until the steam
shows began to springing up all over the U.S. in the 1950s and 60s.
I became a fan and participated in some of these shows some 30
years ago. I never saw an engine like I had seen so long ago and
thought perhaps I had dreamed the whole thing. Then, out of the
blue came an account of an interview with the late Arlo Jumey in
the International Case Heritage Foundation publication, ‘The
Heritage Eagle’ #14, page 23. Mr. Jurney had reported to Editor
Arthur P. Brigham that the Jurney family had owned a number of
steam traction engines over the years, including a Case 110, three
Case 40’s, two Case compounds and a 30 HP double-simple which
he liked to operate. From the way it was worded, it appeared that
the 30 HP double engine was also a Case.

In the next issue of The Eagle, #15, Editor Brigham was
challenged (cover Par. 3) regarding the Jumey article in Eagle #14
by Rod Pitts of Silverton, Oregon. He felt that Mr. Brigham must
have misunderstood Mr. Jumey for Case had never made a 30 HP double
steam engine. He went on to say that the only doubles made by Case
were sold under the Jacob Price name. Jacob Price engines are shown
in Floyd Clymer’s Album of Historical Steam Traction Engines
and Threshing Equipment No. 1, page 26 and in 150 Years of J. I.
Case by C. H. Wendel, pages 186 and 187. These Price engines had
vertical boilers, whereas the engine I saw had a horizontal
locomotive-type boiler.

Referring again to Mr. Wendel’s Case book, page 194, there
appears a picture of a 1907 Morris 30 HP double-cylinder steam
traction engine of rear-mounted design. Mr. Wendel indicated that
George W. Morris had been associated with Case at one time and
about 1896 he had contracted with Case to build two or three heavy
duty (single-cylinder) traction engines. A picture of the engine
appears in Mr. Wendel’s Case book, page 193. A picture of a
somewhat similar plowing engine, under the Morris name is pictured
in Mr. Clymer’s book, page 90, though there are important
differences. Mr. Wendel also reports that the Morris engine
possessed many features later associated with Case traction
engines. According to Mr. Wendel, Mr. Morris obtained patents on a
side crank type engine along with a unique line system which
supported the rear axle. From this patent, J. I. Case launched the
final design of the Case steam engines, according to Mr. Wendel. It
would seem that Mr. Morris was closely associated with the Case
Company. Close examination of the 30 HP double-cylinder steam
engine on Page 194 of Mr. Wendel’s Case book shows some typical
Case features, including the ‘peep hole’ on the crank disc
side of the boiler, the feed-water heater, the stabilizing bar or
brace between the boiler and front axle pedestal, the short
smokebox similar to the early Case engines, and finally the rear
mounted design.

‘During a recent private conversation with Mr. Wendel, he
indicated to me that he believed it was likely that the 30 HP
double-cylinder Morris engine pictured in his Case book was
probably built by Case; though he has no documentary proof of this.
He bases this conclusion on (1) the known close association that
Mr. Morris had with the Case Company, (2) the use of
Morris-patented features in Case traction engines, (3) the fact
that Case made engines for Mr. Morris earlier and (4) that
evidently Morris did not have his own facilities to manufacture
steam traction engines.

‘I am inclined to believe that the steam traction engine I
saw in Iowa years ago was probably a Morris engine and that it was
indeed built by the Case T. M. Company or other Case organization.
It obviously was a heavy duty engine designed for plowing. This
could explain the flat-spoked rear wheels which certainly do not
look like those made by Case. In my mind, yes, Case did make a 30
HP double steam traction engine. The production may have been very
limited.

‘I have Mr. Wendel’s blessing as I attempt to find some
proof that the 30 HP double cylinder steam traction engine was made
by the J. I. Case Company. I am appealing to IMA readers for help
in this endeavor. I would appreciate receiving any information,
photographs, documentaries or the whereabouts of one of the Morris
double cylinder engines as well as any evidence that this engine
was made by Case. Any information I may receive will be shared with
all IMA readers.

HENRY BECKER, 4700 Bay-shore Road, Sarasota, Florida 34234
writes, ‘With all the articles and publicity about J. I. Case,
I have not seen nor read about the enclosed Case advertising
postcard (above). Hope it will be good enough to reprint, as I
think your readers will enjoy it.’

‘I am 14 years old and I have the three greatest hobbies
that exist. I collect, read about, and enjoy vintage gas engines,
tractors, steam and any related farm equipment. In relation to your
magazine I’ll talk about steam, ‘ states CHARLES DURHAM,
2930 Butternut Road, S.E., Brainard, Minnesota, 56401.

‘My favorite types of steam traction engines are the huge,
large horsepower, plowing engines. I suppose I should support and
collect the smaller engines that were sold to smaller farms, but
the monsters have more unique characteristics. They also tum out to
be the rarest engines to find, and the most expensive, but they
will always be my favorite.

‘I wish something could be done about making parts to put
that 150 HP Case back together. It would probably cost a fortune,
but it sure would draw a lot of people to Rollag in ’92. Even
better than watching it would be being the engineer and pulling a
20-plus bottom plow or a 40×65 separator.

‘My favorite types of stationary steam engines are the
smaller, lower horsepower engines. I don’t like the huge ones
very much because not many had much to do with agriculture. The
really old ones are alright and some of the Corliss ones are fine,
but the others, to me, seem less intriguing.

‘As of now, I own neither a traction engine, nor a
stationary, but I will get to own one in no time. My dad was really
fascinated by them when he was a kid and still enjoys them.
‘Next summer I even have the chance to operate one and get my
engineer’s license. Someday I’ll own a steamer and it will
probably be a 110 HP Case or something even bigger!’

The following letter and pictures are sent in by DICK BURD of
Burd Contracting Inc., 201 Security Building, 101 South Main, Sioux
Falls, South Dakota 57102: ‘While snow-mobiling in the Black
Hills of South Dakota near Moskee, Wyoming, I came across this
boiler up a draw. I took these photos with my friend, Jeff Hagen,
Sioux Falls, South Dakota, at the rear of the boiler and me in the
front. The smoke box cover has a casting #9448. None of the
‘locals’ I spoke to even knew of its existence. Is this a
Minneapolis boiler? Can anyone identify it?’

In closing, I hope you will appreciate the following called
‘Who RisksIs Truly Free’, Author Unknown

‘To laugh is to risk appearing the fool. To weep is to risk
appearing sentimental. To reach out for another is to risk
involvement. To expose feelings is to risk exposing your true self.
To play your ideas and dreams before the crowd is to risk their
loss. To love is to risk not being loved in return. To live is to
risk dying. To hope is to risk despair. To try at all is to risk
failure . . . but risk must be taken, because the greatest hazard
in life is to risk nothing. One may avoid some suffering and
sorrow, but one simply cannot learn, feel, change, grow, live, and
love. Chained by one’s certitudes, one is a slave, one has
forfeited freedom. ONLY ONE WHO RISKS… IS TRULY FREE!!!’

And few proverbs to ponder and follow . You are a poor specimen
if you can’t stand the pressure of adversity. Proverbs 24:10
Worry grows lushly in the soil of indecision. Steady plodding
brings prosperity; hasty speculations brings poverty. Proverbs
21:5. That’s it for this time, Folks!