Two for the Cabinet

By Arthur Bustard

Two for the Cabinet focuses on the lives of two neighbors who grew up in the small rural township of Worcester, in Montgomery County Pennsylvania. Senator Richard Schweiker was the second son of a relatively prosperous business man in the eastern regions of the Pennsylvania Dutch area of Pennsylvania. Richard's next door neighbor in his teenage years was Andrew (Drew) Lewis, the son of another business man and golfing partner of his father.

The business and political relationship of Richard Schweiker and Drew Lewis for over 20 years had significant impact on our national history. Senator Schweiker was selected by Reagan as his Vice Presidential running mate in Reagan's 1976 attempt to wrestle the Republican nomination away from President Ford. Drew Lewis was Ford's man in Pennsylvania, and Schweiker's former campaign manager for 3 Congressional and one Senatorial campaign.

The interactions of these three individuals has never been completely told before. Through personal interviews and access to the private papers of both the story can now be accurately set down. The Pennsylvania Dutch culture that surrounded them as they grew up had significant impact, as did their Christian background.

In discovering their heritage and their political history we can see why they made the decisions that had such impact at the national level. We can understand why President Reagan valued both of them enough to put them in his first cabinet. That cabinet decision tells us a significant amount about the character of President Reagan and the nature of the individuals with which he surrounded himself when he first went to Washington.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Arthur Bustard
• Release date: Jul 28, 2012
• ISBN: 9781476330624

Arthur Bustard

Arthur Craig Bustard holds his Masters in History from Lehigh University. Art is the third generation owner of the family Promotional Products Business, where he has worked since 1977. He is a former Chairman of the Board of Supervisors in Worcester Township, where he served for 12 years

Book preview

Preface

Near the southeastern corner of Pennsylvania, in the northwestern shadow of the city of Philadelphia, sits a small, relatively rural township of 16 square miles. The Township produced two cabinet members in the first term of President Ronald Reagan. The story of those two cabinet members: Richard Schweiker of Health and Human Services, and Andrew L. Lewis Jr. of Transportation, was intertwined even before they agreed to serve in the cabinet. Educated, smart, and aggressive, both brought to their respective positions a wealth of experience and knowledge that Reagan recognized and valued. Their remarkable lives and efforts, from the time they grew up, through business careers, to government service, brought the two into contact, friendship, and conflict.

President Reagan swept into office in 1981 looking to rejuvenate America. He sought to emphasize the positive values that America represented, to bring conservative control to a budget that had become severely out of balance in terms of conservative priorities and to reassert traditional American ideals in the foreign policy arena. President Reagan came to Washington with the most ambitious program for America since the New Deal. In his inaugural address, Reagan called for deep, across-the-board tax cuts and limits on domestic spending. ¹ In filling his cabinet Reagan approached Schweiker and Lewis to fill two positions that appeared to compliment the skills and experiences of both.

In looking at the careers of these two remarkable men, the lens through which they are viewed needs to examined. The church historian Philip Schaff stated The purpose of the historian is not to construct a history from preconceived notions and to adjust it to his own liking, but to reproduce it from the best evidence and to let it speak for itself² However, the presuppositions of the reader will tailor the perception of the best evidence in many cases, and lend itself to the preconceived notions of a lifetimes experience. Let the facts speak for themselves, not through the colored lenses of the ideological and philosophical prejudices that are endemic in today’s America.

Reagan’s first term started in 1981 and the ideological rigidity on left and right that is seen as normal today was in its infancy, or perhaps, was just less strident. We can see the split between the moderates and the conservative on the right, between the liberals and the radicals on the left, and a culture that was under severe stress following the 1960’s and the Vietnam War, in Reagan’s Presidency. Much of the cultural baggage of the past was being jettisoned and a new correctness was forming; demanding tolerance in everything, except politics.

Within this cultural and political cauldron of change and dissention the froth of ideological battles surfaced from the day-to-day decisions of people who worked to move the country forward. Appointment to Reagan’s cabinet is a testament to the qualities that Richard Schweiker and Andrew Lewis brought to their positions. It is also a testament to the insight of Ronald Reagan and his staff in looking below the froth, to see deeply into the character of the person; to determine the strengths and weaknesses of the individual, the ability to work with a team, and manage a department. The fortitude to manage decisions in a politically tumultuous time and the tenacity to push through the bureaucracy policies that are resisted by an entrenched rank and file necessitates strength of character and firmness of purpose that draws on the inner courage of the individual. The turnover rate for cabinet positions, even today, correlates with the stress created by this conflict. Both Schweiker and Lewis left the government before the end of Reagan’s first term, within months of each other, yet they were selected by Reagan when he moved to Washington to shake up the business as usual status in the nation’s capital.

Both these men had come to Reagan’s attention before he became President. Reagan became acquainted with Pennsylvania’s Senator Schweiker when Reagan tried to unseat President Ford in the 1976 primary. Reagan announced that if he won the nomination Schweiker would be his Vice Presidential running mate. The surprising and controversial move was orchestrated by campaign chairman John Sears. Designed to pull the Pennsylvania delegation to Reagan and away from Ford, the gamble was stopped by Lewis as head of the Pennsylvania delegation. This high stake gamble didn’t gain Reagan the nomination; but it brought him into contact with the two individuals who subsequently became cabinet officials in his first administration. To everything there is a season, a time for every purpose under heaven³ and the history of our world would have been dramatically different had Reagan won in 1976. He didn’t. He won in 1980 and changed the direction of the country; Richard Schweiker and Andrew Lewis had a hand in that change.

Thirty years later we need to ask: How did these individuals come to have such a profound impact on Reagan in order to be named to his cabinet and change the direction of the country with him? What did he find in these individuals that gained them cabinet rank? Neither Schweiker nor Lewis appeared to have a philosophy of government that remotely mirrored Reagan’s. Presenting Senator Schweiker to the Republican delegates as his running mate at the 1976 nominating convention in Kansas City was so shocking precisely because Reagan’s philosophy of government appeared to be so different. Senator Schweiker was known as a liberal Republican, a member of the Wednesday Club in Washington: members included Hugh Scott, Lowell Weicker, Clifford Case, Jacob Javits, and Margaret Chase Smith. Reagan was viewed by many as the standard bearer of the conservative wing of the Republican Party, probably from the time of his famous speech for Senator Barry Goldwater in 1964. To most individuals the two did not appear to be compatible or even on the same team.

Drew Lewis, a moderate Republican, had canvassed Pennsylvania for years in working for the party. He was an unsuccessful candidate for governor in 1974, who guided the decisions of the Pennsylvania delegates to the national convention in 1976. A committed Ford man, Drew was able to prevent the defection of most members of the Pennsylvania delegation after the Reagan/Schweiker ticket was announced. This stand by Lewis effectively denied Reagan the nomination, preventing a ground swell of support that might have overwhelmed Ford at a critical juncture in the convention.

What could have induced Reagan, who hated to lose, to offer a cabinet seat to one of the individuals who had stopped months of hard work and effort four years before? Few people understood just how much Reagan hated to lose. He simply concealed it better than other politicians. Mike Deaver, Reagan’s long time aide and friend said, He was the most competitive son of a b——who ever lived’."⁴ Someone who could be creditably cited as extremely influential in preventing Reagan from being the Republican nominee in 1976 is generally not going to be considered a viable candidate for a cabinet position in 1980: a visible reminder of his failure at every meeting. Yet, Drew Lewis was not only named to be Secretary of Transportation, he was one of the stars in the early Reagan cabinet.

Ronald Reagan changed the complexion of the world. He is credited with bringing America out of the stagflation facilitated by Carter’s economic policies, revamping and modernizing the American Military, winning the Cold War, and making Americans proud of their country again. In examining the story of how two individuals, from a small rural township in eastern Pennsylvania, came to be members of Reagan’s first cabinet we, perhaps, can see how a former actor from California came to be one of the greatest Presidents of Twentieth Century America. It is the little decisions, the ones that are made every day when people are not looking, in which we can tell the true character of an individual. "Character makes the man, not circumstances."⁵ Reagan, in deciding to offer cabinet positions to these two individuals, found something in them that he thought was important in his effort to lead the nation.

Chapter One:

The Pennsylvania Dutch

It is important to understand the culture of the area within which Richard Schweiker grew up in order to understand the man. The old adage that the child is father of the man, has a kernel of truth that helps to allow an understanding of the values that an adult possesses. The small Township of Worcester (pronounced War sester by the Pennsylvania Dutch inhabitants at the time) where Richard grew up is located northwest of Philadelphia, about 8 miles north of Valley Forge where General Washington received a very bitter and cold welcome to the area during the winter of 1777.

The area was relatively culturally homogenous in the time period when Richard grew up, composed mostly of people of German extraction, known by the local name of Pennsylvania Dutch. A rural farming community, the Township had fourteen hundred and eighty-seven people according to the census of 1930, a decrease of one hundred people from the census of 1870. The stability of the population is evident even in the 1940 census when they counted sixteen hundred and nine people. The coming of the Second World War and its immediate aftermath fomented a fundamental change in the culture in Worcester. Population began to increase dramatically so that by the census of 1960 the Township had thirty-two hundred and fifty people.

The township of 16 square miles had several churches in it during the 1930’s, including German Reformed, Mennonite, Methodist, and a relatively small German Protestant sect called the Schwenkfelders. The Schwenkfelders were the descendants of a group of Protestants who had followed the teachings of Casper Schwenkfeld von Ossig of Silesia in part of what is today Poland, just north of the present Czech Republic. The years after the Reformation continued to be years of persecution, and eventually they were forced from their homes when they declined to follow the lead of the local government leaders and convert.

In 1726, for example, in southeastern Germany, Melchior Schultz advised his sons that choice could no longer be postponed. Either they remained in Silesia and converted to the Catholic faith, or they held to their Schwenkfelder principles and moved out. Remaining in Silesia, while retaining a dissident faith had by then become absolutely untenable as a solution.⁶

They spent several years as refugees in Saxony, where they were sheltered by Count Ludwig von Zinzendorf, supporter of the Moravians. On Tuesday, April 20, 1734, 176 persons left Saxony and sailed down the Elbe River. They found refuge in Holland where Dutch Mennonites helped them. The Mennonites paid for their passage to the New World on the ship St. Andrew. Nine died on the voyage, but the balance arrived in the port of Philadelphia on September 22, 1734.

The small group of religious pilgrims settled themselves primarily in the area of Southeastern Pennsylvania that would become the townships of Worcester, Towamencin, Lower and Upper Salford, continuing up to the town of Pennsburg. The land settled tended to be defined by the Perkiomen Creek Valley and its tributaries. The area forms a small arc twenty to thirty-five miles northwest of Philadelphia including what would become the geographical center of Montgomery County when the county split off from Philadelphia in 1784.

This fortuitous choice of residence would eventually provide both Schweiker and Lewis with a political base in the most populated Republican bastion of the five suburban counties of Philadelphia. The Schwenkfelders represented a significant number of the Pennsylvania Dutch residents in Worcester and focused on farming and preserving their teachings. They eventually expanded their small protestant denomination to five congregations throughout southeastern PA in the early twentieth century.

The Pennsylvania Dutch, as a whole, are an independent people, clinging to traditions and values that originated hundreds of years ago. They continued to speak their German dialect for years, even when the area around them became increasingly English-speaking. The First World War generated a cultural shock to the Pennsylvania Dutch, forcing many to adapt to the culture around them especially in terms of their language. In discussing the anti-German tone of the war years, William T. Parsons comments:

Vast numbers of Pennsylvania Germans resorted to the same solution they had used in the past: they simply retreated into their shell. Society was content to regard them as dumb Dutch. There was profound internal and personal conflict. That they were loyal Americans, not bound by German origins, should have been obvious to all. Faced with the reality that it was not, many Pennsylvania Dutch felt the need to apologize. The apologies took numerous, varied form. Without realizing all the implications, and without rationalizing his actions, the Dutchman found himself profoundly affected by his second-class status. Many resolved that the old ways and culture were not worth the social ostracism. They determined that their children, seventh and eighth generation Americans as they were, should not be similarly handicapped by accent or educational limitations. Thousands of young parents who had heard no language but Pennsylvania Dutch [a derivative of German ed.] in their own childhood, forbade their children to learn the dialect, and punished them when they did.⁷

The people called Pennsylvania Dutch represented numerous groups who had fled the religious wars and demands for conformity in the Old Country, mainly Germany, but also Poland, Czechoslovakia, and Switzerland. Anabaptists, such as the Mennonites, Dunkers or Brethren, and the Amish, sailed to the colony of Pennsylvania in search of the freedom to worship their God without harassment.

...The Schwenkfelders acquired their identification from Caspar Schwenkfeld von Ossig, the Mennonites from Menno Simons, the Amish from Jost Amman, and the Herrities from Chrisitan Herr. The latter was a branch of the church of the Brethren. The Amish were a splinter group of Mennonites who emphasized ostracism or shunning (Meidung) both of members who broke rules, and of outsiders.⁸

The Dutch first settled in an area called Germantown, a settlement north and west of Philadelphia, planned by Francis Daniel Pastorius who encouraged the emigration of the Germans to Pennsylvania. They rapidly expanded to the north and west in search of productive land and a place where they could be surrounded by their fellow Germans.

A peace-loving clannish people, they worked the land, valuing hard work, refusing to swear and understanding that their word was their bond. Their religion was, and is, important to them. It is not something that means going to Church one day a week and forgetting about it until the next week. It is their way of life. They tended to distain academic learning as impractical and unnecessary to living a Christian life. Instead, they tried to follow the teaching of St. Paul: being in the world, but not of the world. The Pennsylvania Dutch are not a monolithic religious block. While they have similarities there is a relatively wide spectrum of variation in their Christian beliefs. The Amish resolutely reject compromises with society that would require them to incorporate modern conveniences such as electricity, motor vehicles, and telephones to name a few. Lancaster County has created a large tourist industry in the past 50 years promoting the black, horse-drawn buggies and lifestyle that the Amish present to our modern world. Mennonites are not quite as strident, but they still frown on brightly colored cars and clothing, playing card games, and gambling, among other sins. At the other end of the spectrum we have the mainline Protestant denominations of Lutherans and the liberal United Church of Christ (the result of the merger of the Congregationalist church and the German Reformed in the 1950’s). In the early 1900’s even the mainline Protestant denominations were more conservative in approach and closely followed the traditions of the early refugees who escaped Europe looking for religious freedom in Penn’s noble experiment.

Within this assembly of religious refugees, the Schwenkfelders formed a tight-knit sub-group. Unlike the Anabaptists, they did not distain extensive book learning and many were, and are, well-educated. The Schwenkfelders were not rigidly pacifist like the Amish and Mennonites. They did have members of the denomination fight in our country’s wars, a point that had significant implications for Richard Schweiker and his family. The original 44 families that came aboard the St. Andrew settled into the area of Central Montgomery County surrounded by fellow German speakers and prospered amid the freedom of religion that first the colony and then the State of Pennsylvania afforded them. They kept their values and identity in the same ways as the other Pennsylvania German sects.

"One means of reinforcing the values of the particular religious sect was an insistence upon marriage within the denomination. In a Quaker province where Friends were read out of the Society for marrying outside its limits, this did not seem a particularly exceptional requirement. In fact, some of the small sects exerted considerable pressure upon the young people, virtually forcing them to marry within the bounds so set. It was both socially and economically disastrous to contemplate marriage outside the religious circle. As a result, among Amish, Mennonite, Dunker, or Schwenkfelder groups ten or a dozen family names become almost identifying labels, showing the sect to which a person or family belonged."⁹

In addition to frowning on intermarriage with those outside the sect, a common feature of the Pennsylvania Dutch was their approach to interaction with the wider culture. Having been refugees who fled Europe in search of religious freedom they tended to turn a wary eye on the established power structure in Pennsylvania. Some refused to vote or participate in elections, but others voted as a bloc to protect their values. Most tended to keep to themselves, interacting with the English when necessary, but not wanting to do more than that. By clinging to their German dialect, they limited communication with others and when they did speak English it tended to be with a strong accent. One result of these decisions was the development of a caricature of the dumb Dutchman by the non-German residents of Pennsylvania. Stories abounded of the strange customs and the unwillingness of the Dutchmen to speak or understand what was being asked of them. Over the years this caricature has been used by many of the Pennsylvania Dutch to their advantage, playing dumb as they deal with overbearing and arrogant customers, businessmen, and public officials. This is not to say they obtained something that they didn’t pay for or deserve. Instead, the thrifty Germans drove a very hard bargain when they had to interact with outsiders. This caricature of the dumb Dutchman was reinforced by their religious convictions. Much has been made of the difference between the Plain and the Fancy Dutch but it can probably be said that it is simply a matter of degree in how rigorously they defined what it meant to follow their faith. Most appear to try to deny the pursuit of worldly achievement as they strive to live a life of faith. They tend to exhibit a manner toward outsiders that is calm and reserved; perhaps even placid.

The ancient Greek philosopher Plato introduced the concept of the cardinal virtues: wisdom, courage, temperance and justice. Temperance can be used to describe the lifestyle that the Pennsylvania Dutch seek to achieve. Temperance not defined in the common usage of modern times as a person who does not imbibe alcohol or carouse around the neighborhood, but as defined by the Greek word "sophrosyne". The self-control, fortitude to endure and prudence that the definition of the word tries to convey gives a picture of the attributes cultivated by many of the Pennsylvania Dutch. This growth in character is not the result of self will or effort in the mind of the Dutch, but the result of the in-dwelling of the Holy Spirit as their Christian faith promises to all who seek him. It is this critical difference in giving the Holy Spirit the place of honor in their life that helps define the Pennsylvania Dutch character. It enables them to endure and persevere in the world and maintain their lifestyle in the face of modern encroachment on that lifestyle.

Numerous migrations from Europe occurred following the founding of Pennsylvania by William Penn. A large number of the Dutch settled to the west of Germantown and Philadelphia in what are today the Townships of Franconia, Upper and Lower Salford, Towamencin, and other areas further west or north, including the Lehigh Valley. Migrations occurred to the even more fertile farm land of Lancaster County, close to the frontier of the Susquehanna River. The Pennsylvania Dutch tended to settle areas beyond the inner ring of English and Welsh Quakers, but within the frontiers that were established by the Scotch-Irish pioneers. The migration of the German Anabaptist refugees to the western reaches of what are today Montgomery and Bucks County took them to the limits of practical market-garden agriculture in the early eighteenth and nineteenth century.

The western limits of these counties represented a trip of 25-35 miles to the city over the old Skippack Pike, Sumneytown Pike, Germantown Pike and further to the south, Ridge Pike. The old roads were barely roads in the beginning. At most they were well worn paths that were increasingly maintained by the use of tolls. The old term pike, which is still used by residents in the area, refers to the metal stake and pole which pivoted across the road. The metal pike held the pole up from the ground about three feet when it was let down, effectively barring the way past, enabling the toll taker to exact his fee.

Most farmers could get to market in the city if they started very early in the day, but they occasionally had to spend a night at a tavern or inn along the way. Stopping at the inn, either going or coming back from the city if they lived in the western reaches of the counties was frequent. Without refrigeration technology, other than packing in ice, or covering the barrels in wet canvas, the products needed to be of limited perishability. Going further to the west, such as Lancaster County, farmers needed to focus on grain crops such as wheat, or they needed to bring their meats to the market on the hoof. One main road in Hatfield Township to the north (settled by the German Rosenberger family) is still called Cowpath to this day in recognition of its use in colonial times. The economics of bringing vegetables and freshly butchered meat to market from longer than the thirty-five miles was adverse and rarely done. Access to rivers such as the Schuylkill and the Delaware allowed some bulk traffic to Philadelphia, but it was insufficient to change the prevailing agricultural patterns, and was used primarily for bulk goods. The smaller local creeks, such as the Perkiomen and Skippack, were insufficiently deep to allow for boating most of the year and as such had no utility beyond being a source for water-powered mills.

The adventure of going to market at the time was not like driving today on these same roads. The roads followed the contours of the land, down the hills and across the valleys, usually crossing the numerous streams at ninety degree angles. Many times when a wagon approached the stream it would have to turn to cross, either by fording in the eighteenth century, or over a wooden, or later a stone bridge as we get closer to the twentieth century and populations increased in the area. By the time Richard was born, macadamized roads had started to reach into the area. For example, it was only in the late 1940’s that the Skippack Pike was leveled out, filling in the dips and valleys and cutting through some of the hills, straightening the bridges to align with the roads and making it easier to commute.

During the late 1800’s and early 1900’s the area still supported large numbers of farmers who focused on a form of Market-Garden agriculture that catered to the needs of citizens in Philadelphia. Numerous farmers took produce, butter, eggs, fresh and processed meats to the city where they stood in market, or developed delivery routes to sell their products. The Worcester History includes the following example in referring to Township farmer Isaac Schultz:

"Each Thursday morning, with few exceptions, he drove to the city with his market wagon, later with his truck, loaded with butter, eggs, chickens, pork in season, sausage, scrapple and other farm products. He returned to his farm in Worcester on Friday evening. These trips to the city in 1896, by wagon, meant rising at 3:30 A.M. in order that the horses be fed, the wagon loaded, all ready for a 6 A.M. start."¹⁰

Small food processing operations were developed by the entrepreneurial members of the hard working Dutch. In the description of the market run to Philadelphia mentioned above you see the statement Pork in Season, pointing to a major problem in the days before mechanical refrigeration. Pork was a key food for the Pennsylvania Dutch, but it spoiled quickly. It was normally not butchered until the fall or winter, when due to lower average temperatures, it lasted longer. Numerous attempts across the centuries to prolong the shelf life of pork resulted in various smoked and processed meats. These came to be considered ethnic German foods such as scrapple, sausages, knockwurst, Lebanon Bologna and many others. These foods, such as Pork and Sauerkraut for New Years Day (said to ward off worms in the coming year), became a tradition for many Philadelphia homes as a result.

By processing the meats into sausages, smoked hams, and bolognas, the farmers were able to have a longer period to sell product to the city dwellers, increasing the productivity of the farms and offering a much greater return on their investment of both time and labor. A local favorite of the Dutch was a breakfast meat called scrapple, a ground up pork puree that solidified in a rectangular form and was then sliced and fried. The name adequately describes the dish, coming from the root word scrap, and which contained everything but the oink, according to Dutch lore. Many loved to eat it smothered with ketchup, which also covered the eggs on the plate. Waste not want not, as the Germans say. Some of the small processing operations have survived to this day, growing to become major east coast food processing companies. One is Hatfield Quality Meats, maker of Phillies Franks, which was started by John C. Clemens in 1895.

One of the advantages the Dutch culture provided for their economic well-being was the position of the women in the farm community. While the culture was patriarchic, the women were expected to help work the fields, especially at harvest time. Such was not the case with the English and the Irish of the area. This provided extra hands that increased the productivity of the farm, enabling critical time-sensitive harvesting to be done as completely and quickly as possible. The industrious nature of the Dutch, combined with the frugal nature of their lifestyles, enabled many of the rural farmers to attain a standard of living that was significantly better than many of the English who lived in the area.

Agriculture was central to the lifestyle of the Dutch and those industries that eventually sprang up in the central Montgomery County area in the late 1800’s tended to service the agricultural field. The importance of the agricultural base, combined with the ethnic German demographics and the religious separatist nature of the Anabaptist and Schwenkfelder culture cannot be overstated when you look at the area in which Richard Schweiker grew to adulthood. The culture of the German religious refugees involved the passing down of the traditions and stories of previous generations. The traditional culture imbued the members with an appreciation of the hardships their ancestors had faced in trying to live their faith. The persecution in Europe was not forgotten and many could name members of their family, generations back, that had experienced persecution. Richard Schweiker’s roots run deep in this culture. He would have been intimately familiar with the story of his ancestor Christopher Schultz who came over on the St. Andrew in the Schwenkfelder migration of 1734, and with the formation of the Society of the Schwenkfelders in 1786. Blanche and Malcolm Schweiker made sure their children were schooled in those traditions and teachings. The Pennsylvania Dutch were, and are, a plain people who frown on ostentatious displays of wealth, value their religious freedom and recognize the need for the Christian community to help those less fortunate. This cultural platform was taught to all children as they grew up, both at home, and in Sunday School.

Although primarily agricultural the area around Worcester did have several small towns where manufacturing firms grew in the mid to late 1800’s. The Heebner Agricultural manufacturing works of Lansdale was a major industrial employer to the north of Worcester, while to the southeast the county seat of Norristown, where famed Civil War General Winfield Scott Hancock was buried, was one of the largest towns in the county.

The town of Lansdale was a growing town that resulted from the introduction of the North Penn Railroad. The railroad connected to Philadelphia and pushed on to Doylestown, the county seat of neighboring Bucks County to the north. Access to the city enabled many to live in the rural areas and commute to work in Philadelphia or use the train to take produce to market. Lansdale, named after the chief surveyor of the North Penn Railroad, was to become the location of the future American Olean Tile Co. The ceramic tile manufacturing company was the result of the hard work of Richard Schweiker’s father, Malcolm, and Malcolm’s brother Roy. Originally started as the Franklin Tile Co in 1923 with six employees¹¹, the firm was able to survive the economic tumult of the great depression of the 1930’s and grow through the 40 and 50’s. Eventually it provided employment to Malcolm’s son Richard before his entry into politics.

Chapter Two:

Growing up in Worcester

Richard Schultz Schweiker was born June 1, 1926 to Malcolm A. and Blanche Schultz Schweiker. Malcolm, Richard’s father, was born on Feb. 27, 1895, in Skippack Township, which is immediately to the west of Worcester Township. Blanche Schultz was three months older than her husband and was raised in Worcester Township. The family never moved far from her roots after she married Malcolm. Their first home was carved from the Schultz family farm on Skippack Pike. Later in life Malcolm built another home for her on the farm property. The Schultz’s were an old and relatively prosperous farm family in the Township and Blanches’ father was an important man in the community. Amos Schultz was active with the local school, serving as a member of the Worcester School Directors.¹² The Genealogical Record of the Schwenkfelder Families gives us a bit more information: As Secretary of the Worcester School Board, Mr. Schultz was instrumental in raising the Public Schools of Worcester to their present high standard, and succeeded in having the present fine high school building erected.¹³ Amos had followed much the same pattern as his father William A. Schultz who also was a member of the Worcester School Board, having served over 30 years. William was a director of the Lansdale National Bank and his son Amos served in that capacity as well. Interestingly, the vice president and a fellow director of the Bank was William Heebner, owner of the Heebner Agricultural Machine Company, the largest employer in Lansdale in the 1890’s. The Heebner families were also descendants of the Schwenkfelder refugees who had settled in Worcester. William Heebner’s father, David S. was an entrepreneurial farmer who set up a machine shop in Worcester to make agricultural machinery: threshers, reapers and horse power equipment. He moved the operation to Lansdale in 1870. David, a Whig and later a Republican, was appointed Lansdale’s Postmaster in 1891 by President Harrison. In 1871, when Lansdale was incorporated into a borough he was elected the first Chief Burgess. It can be seen that Richard Schweiker’s maternal grandfather and great-grandfather were of some prominence in the area and knew leading men of the region.

Richard was the second of three children. He had an older brother, Malcolm Jr. who was born in February of 1922, and a younger sister, Sylvia. The Schweiker’s were a very close knit family, given to hugs and other signs of affection at home. Malcolm Sr. was always met with a hug by the whole family when he returned from work. The affection between the members of the family was evident to friends and neighbors¹⁴. Growing up in the pre-World War II era was significantly different in many ways from the generations both immediately before them and those who grew up after the war. The Great Depression had an effect on the worldview of many of these individuals, no matter what economic bracket they found themselves in. Those families where the bread winner had a secure job and were lucky enough to have money in a bank that was solid, were able to find tremendous opportunities as deflation enabled them to get more value for their dollar. But the majority of people where not so lucky, indeed many were just scraping by, going from day-to-day worried about how to feed the family during the week, how to cloth them and making sure they had a roof over their heads.

The pressures on the people of Worcester were typical of most Americans in the period. Everyone knew of families that were experiencing economic difficulties, farms were being foreclosed for back taxes and failure to pay the mortgage. Stories were told of barns that were mysteriously struck by lightning, and insurance companies reluctant to pay the resulting claims, usually this was mentioned as happening in some neighboring area. Cash was a difficult thing to find during the depression, and those people who had a job made sure they showed effort and interest in it. There was always a line of people angling to get it for themselves. Everyone in the family was expected to chip in and help, including the children.

Much of the school year revolved around the agricultural schedule, so when harvesting season came around some of the schools declared a short holiday so everyone could help, or the farmers simply pulled the kids from school. Many of the Dutch failed to see the value of schooling beyond the eighth grade, as late as early in the twentieth century. By the time of the depression, most children in the area were going to the tenth grade and a significant number continued on to graduate high school.

In a traditional Dutch farming area, such as Worcester, the idea of children chipping in was nothing new or unique. But during the depression it took on added significance. Children had chores. Richard was expected to haul wood every day to his grandmother’s house next door, for the kitchen stove. Richard Schweiker was