The Remington Story – Part II

IV. Continuation

In part I, we covered the period of introduction of the steam traction engine as developed by one Marquis de Lafayette Remington of Woodburn, Oregon. The tractor proceeded to prove its worth by hauling multiple pipe sections to the site of the first Bull Run Reservoir at Mt. Hood, quite unbelievable in that era.

As a consequence of this and other tests, Remington recognized the potential of his invention. Seeking manufacturing capacity which he lacked and market opportunities, he took the machine to California where it was demonstrated powering a combined thresher.

The test was successful and a deal made with an acquaintance, one Dan Best formerly of Albany, Oregon, to produce and market the machine through his company, the Daniel Best Agricultural Works using Remington’s patent.

V. Best Moves Forward

Best was quite successful selling the tractor for a variety of purposes including plowing, harvesting, hauling, mining and logging. One of his tractors was fitted with lights which may have effected the introduction of “around-the-clock” farming.

He also made several improvements to the Remington design although the basic configuration and the conventional twin cylinder steam engine approach were retained. The horse power rating was increased from 25 to 50 hp and eventually 110 hp, hence the introduction of the Best 110. In fact, the 110 hp rating was achieved with the same engine used in the 50 hp model which obviously had been underrated.

VI. Remington’s Activities

While Best was successfully pursuing the California and Northwest markets, Remington was attempting sales closer to home. At some point in the life cycle of the Remington, Marquis de Lafayette’s son, C. L. (Leo) Remington took over the business.

In fact, reference was made in one informational source that the senior Remington sold the business in the 1890-1891 time period however sales of Remington’s continued beyond that period. It is possible that he sold the business to Leo who continued production. It would be of historical value to more accurately evolve this part of the Remington story.

As we look back at the “time” of the Remington, two intriguing questions come to mind. How many were manufactured and sold, and “what happened to them!” Let’s take albeit a brief glimpse at these topics rendered such simply because of lack of documentation.

VII. How Many Remington’s

For many years, it was concluded by those researching the Remington including F. Hal Higgins that five were manufactured. In fact, the number appears to have been six in all! Unfortunately none apparently survived and not even remnants of any Remington’s are known to be “out there.”

It would be most fortuitous if some person would come forth and refute this conclusion. Of significance would be the location of even a few parts! Any guidance regarding who to ask or where to look would be most beneficial. Our goal here is fundamentally to preserve!

So what are the stories of the six Remingtons? Who purchased them, what applications were entailed, what other owners may have come into the picture, and when did each machine “go away?” Lots of good questions, few answers!

Well, there was the first Remington nicknamed “Rough and Ready” by Marquis de Lafayette, this being the “one” taken to California for testing. The engine was subsequently sold to W.S. Peters, Secretary of the Best Works, and a J.H. Kester of Colusa County to be used for plowing on a 10,000 acre farm. Final outcome is unknown.

Then there was the so called Arlington engine that spent its last years on the banks of the Columbia waiting its fate at the hands of the junkman. The story concerning its history is a bit fluid. In 1889, evidently it was being used by the Hadley Brothers, the purchasers, on a farm in the Goldendale, Washington area. It turns out that the Hadley’s were related to the Remington’s.

That operation failed in 1890 and the engine became the property of a C.L. Miller who was owed back wages for operating the engine. Miller shipped it to Lost Valley located about 65 miles from Arlington to be used at the sawmill of a Halbert Halstead.

The engine stayed at the mill until 1904-1905 when it was returned to Arlington, not to work again even though it was shipped to the Willamette Iron Works for repair. It went under the torch in 1942.

A third Remington was the Marquam area engine. Initially owned by Thomas Scott of Scotts Mills, it was used to power a threshing machine. Thomas and his brother Robert went on to establish the Woodburn Roller Mills in 1892. The engine was later sold to a George Jenson who logged with it north of Marquam. Again, the final determination of the engine is not known.

Another was reported to have been purchased by a David Kauffman of the Hubbard, Oregon area around 1885 to be used for steam and power supply in a woodworking operation. Supposedly it was later used to supply steam at a creamery until 1920. The name plate on this machine listed the name C. L. Remington! Outcome unknown!

Of the two remaining Remingtons, one was sold to a Jenkins Hardy for farming near Woodburn, and the other was sold to a George Cline of Woodburn for logging in Cowlitz County, Washington. This machine was fitted with a winch and drum mounted on the front end. There is no documentation of the circumstances surrounding the demise of either engine.

So we conclude a rather truncated story of the Remington. More research will be attempted as time permits. Was the Remington a significant development? Of course! Did it leave a meaningful legacy? The eventual formation of Caterpillar, a well known American “institution”, through the merger of Holt and Best attests to its role in the advancement of the machine and the success of industrialization.