Of all potential topics for profiles in Tacony history, none could be more abstract, or more enduring than Henry Disston's deed restrictions which affect properties within the "Disston Estate" portion of the community. Observed, enforced, and upheld through multiple generations and through waves of construction, demolition, and reconstruction; these restrictions have helped preserve the family orientated fabric of Tacony as envisioned by Henry Disston for over 140 years.
Having grown from a rented shop in 1840 to a national leader in saw manufacturing after the Civil War, Henry Disston's Keystone Saw Works occupied a sprawling factory at Front and Laurel Streets. A dense neighborhood had sprung up around his factory, and living conditions were cramped and unhealthy for this working-class community. In addition, frequent bell-ringing of nearby churches and volunteer fire companies served to disrupt the company's production. As the Disston Company continued to prosper, becoming "Henry Disston & Son" upon the end of Hamilton Disston's seven-year apprenticeship in 1865, it was apparent that the factory needed land for expansion. The congested surroundings and lack of skilled and stable workers was not only displeasing to Henry Disston, but it virtually stifled the company's economic growth.
Upon his land purchase in Tacony in 1871, Henry Disston immediately laid out his plan to develop the community. He thrust upon his workers and community a paternalistic approach which treated employees as valuable human assets instead of profit-making machines. A new factory with room for expansion would be built on the East side of the railroad tracks and homes for his workers would be built on the Westerly side with a buffer of trees and park-land between the railroad and the houses. He formed a building and loan association for the company, built a school and a firehouse, favored religious diversity donated land for churches and public buildings. Benefits packages were made available to workers in the case of injury or death and employees were treated to an annual outing to Riverside Amusement Park. Homes could be purchased or built on lots by workers, or even rented for $15-$25 per month.
Surveyor George Smedley Webster planned the Disston Estate by dividing it into lots which could be sold and developed into housing. It was Henry Disston's specific intent in designing these lots that a variety of housing would be available, and that ample light and air would be provided with rear and/or side yards for every home. This design was intended to contrast with the denser surroundings of Disston's original factory.
As a lasting measure to perpetuate his paternalistic influence on the Tacony Community, Henry Disston imposed deed restrictions on all residential building lots West of the railroad which not only insulated the community against unwanted urban influences, but would keep the company prosperous. These restrictions, intended to be enforceable perpetually with all land in the Henry Disston Estate, read as follows and are referenced in all deeds:
"No tavern or building for the sale or manufacture of beer or liquors of any kind or description and no courthouse, carpentry, blacksmith, currier or machine shop, livery stables, slaughter houses, soap or glue boiling establishment or factory of any kind whatsoever where steam-power shall be used or occupied on the said lots, tracts or piece of land or any part thereof."
Henry Disston's ban on alcohol not only kept the community more stable but helped ensure a sober workforce. The steam engine ban not only curbed pollution, but limited competition for workers, and the ban on stables curbed odors and kept workers close to the factory, necessitating the sale or rental of Disston-owned properties. Disston's duplicity of intent helped the Tacony community and the company grow and thrive into the 20th Century. Little did he know how the careful wording of his deed restrictions would impact the community more than a century later.
As Tacony progressed from an industrial village to a town within a town, at least three bars served alcohol legally East of the railroad and outside Disston's residential, deed-restricted tract. These were the Harbot Hotel at State Road and Longshore Avenue; The Merz Hotel near Knorr Street and State Road; and Hund's Saloon near Princeton Avenue and State Road. In addition, the Tacony Club had been formed in 1887, originally meeting in the Tacony Music Hall and building its club at Marsden Street and Longshore Avenue in 1909. With the implied consent of the community and Disston family, the Tacony Club served alcoholic beverages to its members on a regular basis.
The informal and passive acceptance of the Tacony Club operation within the boundaries of the Disston Estate eventually let to confusion about the enforceability of Disston's ban on alcohol, especially after the rise and fall of Prohibition. Installed with the passage of the 18th Amendment to the Constitution in 1919, Prohibition was the policy of legally forbidding the manufacture, transportation, or sale of alcoholic beverages except for medicinal or sacramental use. This highly unpopular law was repealed with the 21st Amendment in 1933, and basically served to create a seedy underworld of bootlegging and speakeasies.
The repeal of Prohibition in 1933, and the country's slow emergence from the Great Depression led to a sense of new-found optimism. People wanted to socialize and be merry; as a result a handful of bars and taprooms opened up within the Disston Estate, in clear violation of Henry Disston's deed restrictions. These included Jack's Cafe at 4812 Longshore Avenue; The Grille at 4709 Longshore Avenue; the Tacony S. S. Club at 4822 Longshore Avenue; and the Black & White Club at 4719 Longshore Avenue. In addition, social clubs began to dispense alcohol to members, including the William D. Oxley American Legion Post, Frank Dickel Republican Club, Tacony Athletic Association, and the 41st Ward Jackson Democratic Club. Of Course, the Tacony Club had been dispensing alcohol since its formation in 1887.
Despite a loosening of social mores in Tacony, the neighborhood remained a tight-knit, yet diverse community concerned about its quality of life. The Tacony Father's Association was founded in 1917 and at its peak was comprised of over 400 members, many of whom were business and political leaders. Besides constantly striving for improved living conditions like more light, better police protection and drainage, and improved school facilities; this motivated group of concerned men sent a clear message that maintaining a stable community was paramount in Tacony. It also signaled a shift from a primarily Republican factory town to a more pluralistic and Democratic town, affirmed when Frank Dorsey --a former Disston employee-- was elected as a Democrat to Congress in 1932.
In the mid-1930s, the concerned residents of Tacony decided to exercise its collective Democratic power by rallying around Henry Disston's deed restrictions in an effort to reverse the negative social impact the widespread distribution of alcoholic beverages was having on the community. The deed restrictions were successfully enforced against the taverns and taprooms at the municipal and lower state courts, and were forced to close by a group of residents holding deeds within the restricted era, led by Christina Benner and represented by Hymen Rubin.
Rubin's case against the five clubs dispensing alcohol in the Disston Estate, including the Tacony Club, proved to be much more complex. In proceedings which culminated in a Pennsylvania Supreme Court hearing. On December 6, 1937, an injunction was granted against four of the five flubs, with only the Tacony Club exempted from the enforcement of the deed restriction against alcohol.
At the heart of the case were several issues that needed clarification. At question was the issue of whether dispensing alcohol to a club member constituted a sale. The court decided that indeed this constituted a sale since the club purchases liquor and resells it just as any other vender; the only difference is that its customers are limited to its membership. Moreover, Disstons inclusion of tavern or building meant that the restriction could apply to non-commercial facilities. The clubs contended that changed conditions in Tacony had so affected the area that enforcing the deed restrictions would be inequitable. The Supreme Court disagreed, deciding that the restriction, to the residents of the neighborhood, has a desirability and an object unaffected by the encroachments of business.
With respect to the Tacony Club, the fact that its operation began nearly fifty years prior to the filing of the lawsuit was a significant factor in the Supreme Court's refusal to grant an injunction. Equally significant was the fact that Pennsylvanias Liquor Control Act and Beverage License Laws were not enacted until the repeal of Prohibition. Until their passage, it had not been definitely declared that dispensing alcohol to a club member constituted a sale. In essence, the Tacony Club was a "grandfathered" use since it had been in operation with community acceptance well before Prohibition began.
And so it was that in 1938, court costs were paid by the four clubs found in violation while the plaintiffs paid the court costs of the Tacony Club. That same year, an injunction was imposed at the locations of the Oxley Post (6933 Ditman Street), Tacony Athletic Association (6746 Ditman Street), and the Dickel Republican Club (6838 Torresdale Avenue). The Tacony Club continued to dispense alcohol to its members. While Hymen Rubin and the community leaders surely believed they had forever insulated the community against future violators of the deed restriction, less than fifty years would pass before its enforceability would be tested again.
By the 1980s, Tacony was showing glimpses of an aging, century-old community. Signs of urban blight like graffiti and isolated abandoned property began to impact Tacony, especially along Longshore Avenue; once a thriving commercial center long displaced by Torresdale Avenue. Even along the major artery of Torresdale Avenue, the advent of strip malls helped cause a decline in pedestrian traffic and a shift from retail to office and service-oriented uses.
Despite these unavoidable urban influences, Tacony retained its small-town atmosphere and had been almost unknowingly insulated from alcohol-related nuisances within the Disston Estate. The Avenue still contained a Rite-Aid, Woolworth's, Party Cake Bakery, two pharmacies, two banks, and a nearby hardware store and post office. The Tacony Civic Association, formed in the 1960s and officially resurrected in 1982, was created to oversee the stability of the community amidst changing economic conditions. The Tacony Business Association was established in 1982, resurrecting the mission of the Tacony Merchants' Association of the 1950s and 1960s, and that of the Tacony Businessmen’s Association some eighty years prior, to help strengthen the business climate in Tacony. No less than twelve religious congregations were still thriving amidst a diverse, primarily working-class population.
It came with some measure of surprise when, in the mid-1980s, an establishment in the center of the Disston Estate expressed a desire to sell beer in violation of Henry Disston's restrictions. Foodarama, located at the community crossroad of Longshore and Torresdale Avenues, was a mainstay of the Torresdale Avenue Business District. The store opened at 6918 Torresdale Avenue in 1930 and eventually expanded into a supermarket and produce store down the corner. Although business flourished through the 1970s, with the eventual addition of a restaurant, seasonal flowers, catering, check cashing, and lottery services, its family-owned management felt that beer sales would boost the existing restaurant and delicatessen income.
In 1982, an application was made to the Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board for the sale of beer and malt beverages at the Foodarama Store. The Tacony Civic Association spearheaded an effort to oppose the granting of a liquor license and in the Spring of 1984, the community packed a Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board hearing room to let their feelings be known. Led by Civic leaders William Harden, William Lamey, and Pastor Arthur Johnson, Jr. of Tacony Baptist Church, and teaming with property owners within 300 feet of Foodarama, the community was successful in convincing the applicants to withdraw.
Several more years passed, and Foodarama opened another location on Grant Avenue in Northeast Philadelphia. This facility also served beer for take-out and as part of the delicatessen. It is likely that by contrast, the Tacony store was missing a potentially lucrative component as a stop and go delicatessen, and in 1987 Foodarama pursued a license to sell malt beverages. Once again, on June 9, 1989, the Tacony Civic Association and over sixty Tacony residents attended the Liquor Control Board hearing before Examiner Timothy Savage.
It was recommended that, since matters of real estate law such as deed restrictions are not under the jurisdiction of the Liquor Control Board, the license for Foodarama be approved. Nonetheless, vociferous community and political opposition resulted in the Liquor Control Board refusing the application on February 14, 1990. The owners of Foodarama decided to appeal the decision of the Liquor Control Board, and a liquor license transfer was placed in safekeeping on November 23, 1990.
At about this time, Allen W. Wetter and Louis A. Iatarola formed the Historical Society of Tacony, whose mission was to recognize and perpetuate the historic significance of the community. The Society joined forces with the Tacony Civic Association, various local community churches, and Tacony Town Watch in what would be the most protracted and expensive defense of the deed restrictions to date.
On October 22, 1993, Hearing Examiner Timothy Savage again heard testimony relative to the granting of a liquor license at Foodarama. Once again, the Examiner reinforced the Liquor Control Board's lack of jurisdiction over deed restrictions and noted in his report that, there must be a reasonable basis for the protestants' position. In this case, the deed restriction aside, there is no such evidence. Although the Liquor Control Board considers general community opposition, Mr. Savage noted that none of the protestants present in 1993 owned property within 500 feet of Foodarama. As a result, on December 10, 1993, the Liquor Control Board granted Foodarama a license to dispense malt beverages.
Almost immediately, in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas, the community appealed the decision, and the license was returned to the State for safekeeping. On May 26, 1994, over 100 Tacony residents attended Municipal Court in an impressive effort to help persuade Judge Bernard Avellino to rule in their favor. Although the judge reversed the decision of the Liquor Control Board to grant a liquor license, Foodarama appealed the decision and out-of-pocket legal fees to the community had exceeded $2000.
In a shocking opinion filed November 29, 1995, by Judge Rochelle S. Friedman on behalf of the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court, it was decided that the Tacony Civic Association and Historical Society of Tacony lacked valid standing to challenge the issuance of Foodarama's liquor license. It was reiterated that no one who testified in 1993 lived within 500 feet of the premises. In December of 1996, Foodarama installed neon signs with beer logos in its windows and began to sell beer and malt liquor.
To this point, the community had been represented first by I. Harry Checchio, Tacony Ward Leader and lifetime resident, and since 1993 by the firm of Sand and Saidel. It was decided to consult with a firm that had extensive experience in real estate law, Fox Rothschild, O'Brien, and Frankel. Although the firm provided a glimmer of hope, it was clear that to pursue such hope would not be cheap.
After deciding to move forward with Fox/Rothschild, a registered letter was sent to Foodarama informing them that the facility was now in violation of a restriction in their deed forbidding alcohol sales. On March 13, 1996, the Tacony Baptist Church, in conjunction with other churches located in the Disston Estate, as well as Louis A. Iatarola, Peter A. Naccarato (Historical Society of Tacony), and James W. Labenz (Tacony Civic Association), all landowners within the Estate filed a petition with the Common Pleas Court for injunctive relief. The community sought a permanent injunction against alcohol sales as a matter of basic real estate law.
On September 30, 1996, Judge Joseph O'Keefe granted preliminary injunctive relief to the community, which was made permanent by Judge Norman Jenkins on December 5, 1996. The community was granted some relief as Foodarama was forced to cease selling beer and malt liquor; however, as Foodarama continued to exhaust its appeals, the price tag for the community was ever increasing.
As briefs were filed on the appeals, and legal fees were being measured in tens of thousands of dollars, a critical and somewhat murky issue continued to surface. Because the 1938 Supreme Court case was viewed as a benchmark in subsequent cases, it had generally been accepted and stated for the Supreme Court record that the boundaries of the Henry Disston Estate extended as far West as Frankford Avenue. This is because at the time dense woods and creek separated the Westerly end of Disston's residential tract from Frankford Avenue. Without a definable Disston Estate, the lawyers felt that Foodarama could be successful on appeal since several establishments on Frankford Avenue sell alcoholic beverages.
The only copy of the George Webster Plan at the Historical Society of Tacony was tattered at the edges, making the outer boundaries undefinable. After an exhaustive search at City Archives, the lawyers uncovered a plan dated 1882 depicting Henry Disston's building lots. The Westerly boundary of his residential tract is located near Cottage Street, nearly half a mile from Frankford Avenue. Although the Disstons owned land out to and even beyond Frankford Avenue, unity of Disston ownership and the defined Disston Estate extended to about Cottage Street.
In its appeals, Foodarama's lawyers contended, as the clubs in 1938 did, that the character of the neighborhood had changed enough to render the restrictions unenforceable. After the case reached the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in 1999, a three-judge panel upheld the permanent injunction granted in 1996, which was summarized in a written opinion submitted October 29, 1999. Judge Brinkley wrote:
Clearly, throughout the history of Tacony, various groups and individuals have fought establishments that sell alcohol. Therefore, this Court finds no support for respondents' contention that conditions have changed sufficiently to permit neighborhood alcohol sales.
For nearly two decades, a weary battle of historic preservation versus free enterprise had been valiantly fought in the public eye. Although the community prevailed and was given the opportunity to progress as Henry Disston intended, the price was steep. From 1993 to 1999, over 100,000 in legal fees were incurred over the course of proceedings.
Tacony History Day, held annually between 1992 and 2012, served not only as a time to reflect, but as an opportunity to raise funds to help diminish the cost of preserving the deed restrictions and continue the mission of preserving Tacony history. By 2010, the Civic Association and Historical Society had paid off these debts. Officially, the Disston Estate has been resolutely dry for more than 20 years.