History Unlocked – August 2017, Early Auto Laws
Early (and Absurd) Pennsylvania Automobile Laws By: Karen Dingle Kendus, Concord Township Historical Society When my husband and I started looking for a house last year, we had a list of must-haves. I needed a two car garage, a spacious kitchen, and at least two toilets (they did not have to be full bathrooms). My husband wanted a single family house, with a yard, and sufficient bedrooms so he had an office space. We thought for only a moment about location in relation to other places such as workplace, family, and friends. My husband is a mobile therapist in Chester County, and works from home unless he is seeing a client. My office is in Wilmington Delaware (or Horsham PA, or Philadelphia PA), but I spend most of my work time in a home office. Our families are settled in Delaware and Chester counties. Our friends are spread out among the same counties. When we settled in southern Chester County, we were not too concerned about distance. We only transplanted about 25 minutes west from where we were previously. Our families are still within an hour of where we live (most are 45 minutes or less drive away). Our friends are nearly the same, with only a handful further than an hour from where we settled. And we could not have done any of this without our cars. My husband and I each have a car, which seems to be rather common today. With two income households, and perhaps a number of adult children living at home (but also working outside the home), multiple cars per household is a necessity. Nearly 60 years ago, only 19% of American households had two cars. By 2014, that percentage increased to 37%. With so many people moving to the suburbs and countryside, (a trend that has existed for quite a while), and public transportation struggling to keep up, ownership of automobiles had to increase. Automobiles have not always been such a huge part of American life, however. Cities today struggle to find a way to decrease personal vehicles on city streets based purely on volume, but when vehicles were first on the scene, cities restricted them because they were a menace. The rural population was especially resistant to an increase in vehicular traffic. After the first vehicle was manufactured in 1893, continuous improvements and a competitive price allowed for a steady increase in demand. These original vehicles were loud, though, and had to share the roads with horses and carriages. There were limited rules governing how to drive these new machines, and for the traditionalists, automobiles were a menace to society. While it sounds ridiculous now, the naysayers had legitimate concerns. Traffic signals were not introduced until 1912, and the first stop sign was not introduced until 1915! That is a full four and 7 years respectively after the first Model T was sold. Early on, the number of people who died in car accidents was tenfold, and so many were injured, it was largely left unreported. On country roads, an automobile, barreling along at 20 mph, could easily spook horses with its unnatural noise. Horses would break carriages, trying to get away from the sound, according to one report. Additionally, farmers lost livestock, especially chickens, to reckless drivers. As a matter of fact, drivers paid dearly when accused of hitting livestock with his or her car. The negative sentiment toward automobiles was so strong that around 1910, a group called the Farmers Anti Automobile Society (FAAS) formed in Pennsylvania. They were troubled by the rapid increase of automobiles on the road and sought to protect their horses and livelihood in any way possible. The FAAS drafted a number of laws they wished to see ratified, and the text of these still exists as part of the historical record. To any modern person, the demands seem rather extreme. The group of farmers wanted automobiles traveling on a country road at night to send up a rocket every mile, then wait ten minutes for the road to clear (presumably, of livestock). The driver could then proceed, with caution, blowing his horn and shooting off Roman candles (a type of rocket), as before. The FAAS also wanted the driver of an automobile, who sees a team of horses approaching, to stop, pull over to one side of the road, and cover the car with a blanket or dust cover which is painted or colored to blend into the scenery, and render the machine less noticeable. The rule did not mention where one could buy such a blanket, or how much it would cost. And in the event that the horse was still too spooked to pass the automobile, the driver of the car must take the machine apart as rapidly as possible and conceal the parts in the bushes. I must admit, I would have no idea where to begin taking apart my car in the event that a horse could not bring itself to pass me. It was also recommended that a man with a red flag walk in front of an automobile to clear the way, which defeated the purpose of having an automobile in the first place. It is not clear whether these requests made it into law. While few have heard of the FAAS or their requests, there is one automobile law that exists today. While considered part of the blue laws, there is evidence that it began as a part of the anti-automobile movement. Pennsylvania dealerships are not permitted to open on Sundays. While other Sunday closure rules have been relaxed, (state stores are now open on Sundays in some locations), Pennsylvania automobile dealerships remain closed. Today, there are not many horses on the road. My husband and I only see them on our way to visit his sister in Lancaster County. And while it is not unheard of, one would be hard-pressed to find livestock crossing the road in Concord Township. I am sincerely grateful that automobiles are
History Unlocked – The Mills of Concord Township
The Mills of Concord Township Originally written by Karen Dingle Kendus on behalf of the Concord Township Historical Society in July 2017/Updated August 2021 Milling was one of the first industries to come to Concord Township, which was incorporated in 1683. Grist mills, which processed flour, were not the only type of mill in the township. Saw mills turned forests into wood used in building houses and fences. Paper mills turned wood pulp into paper used for everything from currency to legal documents. Bark mills extracted tannin for use in tanning leather. Fulling mills cleaned wool for clothing. Cotton mills spooled cotton and stone mills processed stone. By 1694, the first mill in the township, called Concord Mill, was in operation on Thornton Road, north of Route 1. Concord Mill appeared to be a small grist mill based on the tax rolls for 1694, showing only £10 in its assessment. By 1699, there was a road from Concord to Joseph Coeburn’s mill in Chester Township because Concord Mill could not handle the demand from Concord farmers. Nathaniel Newlin constructed a grist mill in 1704 on the West Branch of Chester Creek to handle the volume. Eventually, he added a dry goods store that specialized in cloth, sewing materials, and housewares. The second oldest mill in Concord Township, in operation by 1696, was a saw mill built by Nicholas Newlin north of Scott Rd, on Route 1. It later became a spoke mill, creating pieces of wagons. Around 1729, Thomas Wilcox built Ivy Mills paper mill, the second oldest paper mill in the United States. Ivy Mills started out manufacturing heavy pressboard paper. They manufactured a lighter paper for the printing of various colonial currencies. By the 1760s, demand for higher quality paper was used for newsprint and books. This led to a thriving business at the mill, and contracts with several printing houses, including Benjamin Franklin’s firm. During the Revolutionary War, the Ivy Mills created all paper for the Continental Currency. Today, Concord Township has one mill still functioning. The Newlin Grist mill operated commercially until 1941. In 1956, E. Mortimer and Elizabeth Newlin purchased the mill complex and immediately started to restore it. Mr. and Mrs. Newlin established the Nicholas Newlin Foundation in 1960, and it continues to support the mill today. They welcome visitors all year around and conduct demonstrations of the mill operation, where they grind the corn and sell the final product. Like many mills in Concord Township, the Newlin Grist mill was, and still is, operated by water power. A water wheel, connected to the two millstones inside the mill, is moved by the water current, from a millrace. A millrace is a diverted route of water, manmade, to create a stronger current from a mill pond. As the water moves the water wheel, the miller pours the grain into the millstones and produces the powder product from wheat, corn, and other grains. Concord Township was not alone in their building and running of mills. With the time needed to travel in 1700, it was useful to have any mill the residents needed close by. Concord Township is not lacking in creeks and waterways, and several families had the capital and desire to open mills, serving the residents and travelers in and around Concord Township. In the summer months, Newlin Grist mill has several programs for visitors. The property has a park attached, the mill and demonstrations, a museum, and opportunities for a picnic or fishing. I make an effort to visit anytime I need to appreciate my 45-minute baked goods! Check out their website here: https://www.newlingristmill.org/. References Case, Robert P. 1983. Prosperity and Progress: Concord Township Pennsylvania, 1683-1983. Chester, Pa.: John Spencer, Inc. pp. 92-110, 339. Newlin Grist Mill. 2017. Newlin Grist Mill: About Us; www.newlingristmill.org Accessed: 6/3/2017.
History Unlocked-May 2017, Taverns
Taverns in Concord Township By: Karen Dingle Kendus, Concord Township Historical Society When I was a child, summertime meant road trips, battlefields and hanging out with my cousins. My parents liked to mix family visits with anything else we did so that we could keep in touch at least once a year, (and have a welcoming landing pad, no matter how far from home we ventured). My dad would take a week off each summer and we would head south in our blue Dodge Minivan. We had family in Virginia, Ohio, Atlanta, Kentucky, and Tennessee and managed to visit all of them, every year, (with some exceptions). My parents were lucky in that my family was spaced rather well for road tripping. We rarely had to stay in hotels or find accommodation on any given leg of our trip. In the 18th and 19th centuries, travelers sought good accommodation and refreshment as well. When travel from Philadelphia to Lancaster took a wagon team 5 days, accommodation along the way became necessary. As the market grew for taverns and “public houses,” entrepreneurs along major thoroughfares took little time in purchasing buildings and conducting business. Even though taverns started as accommodation, they became more than just a place to stay throughout the 19th century. Concord Township was prime territory for running taverns. With the Great Road (Wilmington-West Chester Pike/Route 202) and the Chester-Philadelphia Road from points west (Baltimore Pike then Concord Road) crossing the township, Concord Township residents and travelers had their choice of places to stay, eat, and drink. While official records of taverns are rare before 1709, taverns became easier to track when Pennsylvania passed a law requiring any proprietors, wishing to sell “rum and other liquours therein”, to apply for and receive a liquor license from the government entity, the Pennsylvania Court of Quarter Sessions. Liquor licenses were granted to the proprietor, as opposed to the establishment. Since this was the case, the first two liquor licenses granted in Concord Township went to Mathias Kerlin of Kerlin Tavern and John Hannum of Buck Tavern, both in 1722. In most cases, application for a liquor license came with a petition from area citizens either vouching for the proprietor and his morality, or imploring the court to reconsider as there are too many taverns already and this proprietor is not morally equipped to run such a place. Licenses were renewed yearly, and if sentiment in the community changed, the renewal was not guaranteed. For those who continued to obtain liquor licenses, the business model for taverns was rather lucrative. While taverns did accommodate travelers passing through the township, money was made on the sale of alcohol. The market for alcohol consumption did not slow down when travelers were rare, for example, in winter when the roads were not passable. The local community could also be found imbibing at their nearby establishment, and offering a constant flow of patrons, no matter the season. While taverns were important to travelers, local citizens also found value in having a tavern nearby. The quickest way to get news outside the immediate township was from travelers passing through. Local citizens could whet their whistle and listen to stories coming out of Philadelphia, New York, and Wilmington. Local residents also found taverns to be a convenient place to congregate with others in the community. In addition to being a convenient meeting place, taverns could also be used as polling places. The White Horse Inn, opened in 1817 by Joseph Hannum, was used as a polling place until 1837. This inn was located on Concord Road and offered a central location for residents from Concord, Birmingham, Bethel and part of Thornbury Townships to cast their votes. After Hannum closed his White Horse Inn, the polling place was moved to Concordville Inn, which was opened in 1830 by John Way. Toward the end of the 19th century, the number of taverns dwindled. While still several decades before the start of the Temperance movement in the United States, local residents started to voice their displeasure at the number of public houses, usually through petitions submitted to the Quarter Sessions for review. Licenses seemed to be more difficult to acquire, and owners turned their sights to other business ventures. In some cases, taverns were transformed into personal homes, with the surrounding land tilled for farming. In Concord Township, several of the buildings where the taverns once thrived are still standing today. The Nine Tun Tavern, opened by Nathaniel Newlin in 1748 on the corner of Route 202 and Beaver Valley Road, contains the offices of State Representative Steve Barrar. The Drove Tavern, opened by James Smith in 1823 on the corner of southbound Route 202 and Smithbridge Road, is now the Pool Care Specialists. Other tavern buildings are private residences. If you ever have a desire to see the Cross Keys Tavern sign, it is housed in the Virginia Merion DeNenno History and Educational Center at the Pierce-Willits. Please stop in when we are open to check it out! Taverns of Concord Township Kerlin Tavern: opened by Mathias Kerlin in 1722; located on Concord Road near Mattson Road; closed 1750. Buck Tavern: opened by John Hannum in 1722; located on Concord Road near Cheyney Road; closed 1822 (with periodic closures in the 100 years it was open). Nine Tun Tavern: opened by Nathaniel Newlin in 1748; located at the corner of Route 202 and Beaver Valley Road; closed 1814. Known for accommodating the large teams of horses used to transport goods from Wilmington to Reading. Nine Tun referred to the size/weight of the wagon, which was normally pulled by 8-10 horses. Bullock Tavern: opened by Moses Bullock Jr. in 1815; located a quarter mile north of Nine Tun Tavern on Route 202; closed 1832. Cross Keys Tavern: opened by Joshua Vernon in 1787; located on Concord Road at Cross Keys Drive (near Kerlin Tavern); closed 1836. The White Horse Inn: opened by Joseph Hannum in 1817, was located on
History Unlocked-June 2017, Temperance
The Temperance Movement in Concord Township By: Karen Dingle Kendus, Concord Township Historical Society Previously, History Unlocked discussed the history of taverns and public houses in Concord Township (Taverns in Concord Township – May 2017). Not everyone was thrilled about the flow of liquor through the community. For the religious leaders in the township, especially the Quakers and Protestants, the increase in alcohol consumption was alarming. They had been preaching moderation for many years. By 1830, Americans above the age of 15 were consuming nearly 7 gallons of pure alcohol each year. This is about three times the amount Americans drink today. Religious leaders started preaching outright abstinence, and pursued governmental intervention in the sale and possession of alcohol. Another group interested in curbing alcohol consumption was women. Alcohol abuse, primarily by men, was directly affecting the lives of their wives. In a time when women had few legal rights, and depended on their husbands for sustenance and support, alcohol abuse was a huge problem. In an attempt to mobilize support for their cause, temperance supporters began societies to promote their ideas and call attention to the issue. Many temperance groups formed all over the country. The Delaware County Temperance Society was founded in 1835 and encouraged the townships and boroughs therein to join. Concord Township joined the Temperance Society under the name Union, and can be found in the meeting minutes. Temperance societies like these were so strong, that the state legislature took notice. In 1846, a bill passed authorizing a vote by those in each township to determine whether or not liquor should be sold in their area. (This law was later struck down as unconstitutional). In this pre-Civil War period, Concord Township voted to keep selling liquor in the township, 60 votes to 15 votes. By the 1850s, support for temperance dwindled as the tensions between the north and south of the country intensified. As a matter of fact, the temperance movement did not come back to full force until after the war, and nearly the end of Reconstruction (early 1870s). In Pennsylvania, the state legislature passed the “Local Action Law” in March 1872 that had electors in each township vote on whether or not liquor should be sold therein every three years. Concord Township voted against selling liquor within the township in the spring of 1873, 96 votes to 56 votes. (This law was repealed by the legislature in 1875. The post-Reconstruction period saw the most fervent support for temperance. The National Prohibition Party was founded in 1869 and even nominated someone for president. In 1873, the Women’s Christian Temperance Union was formed and chapters opened all over the country. By the end of the 1800s, the Women’s Christian Temperance Union, led by Frances Willard, began lobbying the government for local laws restricting alcohol. Once the Anti Saloon League formed, bringing together many different social and political groups, and World War I contributed to the image of drunk Germans creating war, public opinion had swayed enough in favor of temperance for the passing of the 18th Amendment in 1917. It went into effect in 1920. As it turns out, the easy part of curbing alcohol (making it illegal to manufacture, sell, or transport/export intoxicating liquors) was completed with the 18th Amendment, which ended up being ratified by all but two states within two years of flying through Congress. Enforcing this law would be a whole different story. Economically, temperance supporters expected the sale of clothing and household goods to increase, rents to rise (as neighborhoods were cleaned up with the closing of saloons), and attendance at theaters to increase (as citizens looked for other ways to entertain themselves). None of this happened. Instead, there was a decline in amusement and entertainment industries across the board. Restaurants failed when they could no longer sell liquor to pay their bills. There was also a loss of jobs since without breweries, the barrel makers, transporters, and waiters were no longer needed. And perhaps the largest consequence of the criminalization of alcohol was the lost tax revenue. At the time of passing, 75% of New York’s state revenue came from liquor taxes. The Federal government gave up a total of $11 billion in liquor taxes and it cost the federal government $300 million to enforce the 18th amendment. Income tax was supposed to replace the revenue gained through liquor taxes, but it did not come close. Socially, the criminalization of alcohol did not necessarily lead to less drinking. There were a number of loopholes that led to continued drinking since the law did not prohibit possession or consumption of alcohol. Pharmacists could administer whiskey for all sorts of illnesses and bootleggers realized that running a pharmacy would be a lucrative way to sell their merchandise. The number of registered pharmacists in New York tripled during this period. Americans could also still obtain wine for religious purposes, so enrollments in congregations at churches and synagogues increased, as did the number of self-professed rabbis who could obtain wine for their followers. The law was not clear about Americans making wine at home, and while the stills were illegal, one could still buy them at a local hardware store. Unfortunately, with how lucrative the illegal alcohol trade became, the quality of black market alcohol declined. 1000 Americans died every year during Prohibition from drinking tainted liquor. Prohibition had good intentions but led to an increase in the excess of alcohol consumption. The consequences were so severe that a repeal amendment, the 21st, was passed in 1933. By this point, the public supported decriminalization of the liquor industry and were pleased to see the passing of this amendment. References Ashmead, Henry Graham. 1884. History of Delaware County, Pennsylvania. Philadelphia: L.H. Everts & Co. pp. 190-192. Case, Robert P. 1998. Concord Township: Progress and Prosperity in the Nineteenth Century. Kutztown, Pa.: The Kutztown Publishing Co. pp. 295-297. Lerner, Michael. 2011. Prohibition. PBS. http://www.pbs.org/kenburns/prohibition/roots-of-prohibition/ Accessed: 6/6/2017. Lewis, Jone Johnson. 2017.