Huntington v. Ramsden

• Decision Date: 04 November 1914
• Parties: HUNTINGTON v. RAMSDEN et al. TOWLE v. SAME.
• Court: New Hampshire Supreme Court

92 A. 336

77 N.H. 376

HUNTINGTON

v. RAMSDEN et al.

TOWLE

v. SAME.

Supreme Court of New Hampshire. Rockingham.

Nov. 4, 1914.

Transferred from Superior Court, Rockingham County; Sawyer, Judge.

Separate actions by Esther A. Huntington and by Bessie B. Towle against William Ramsden and others. On transfer from the superior court. Judgments directed for defendants.

Assumpsit, to recover the value of certain pew rights. The following findings and rulings were made:

The defendants are the trustees of the Methodist Episcopal Society of Newmarket, having succeeded to the trusteeship held in 1871 by John M. Towle and others, and to the title acquired by the latter to certain real estate in Newmarket. Upon this tract the trustees of 1871 erected an edifice for the society's use as a meetinghouse. Owing to the financial condition of the society at that time, it was deemed necessary to sell pews, and many were disposed of by auction, each purchaser receiving a deed signed by the trustees, in the following form:

"Be it known that ——, in consideration of —— dollars, is proprietor of pew numbered ——, in the new meetinghouse of the Methodist Episcopal Society, in Newmarket, N. H., subject to the rights of said society and to the usages and discipline of the Methodist Episcopal Church."

John M. Towle bought pew 39, and Martha S. Towle bought pew 43. The rights in those two pews are now vested in the plaintiffs.

In 1907 the society had become so poor that it met its expenses with difficulty, and therefore voted to federate with the Congregational Church. The defendant Ramsden became pastor of the federated churches. March 4, 1912, the trustees, in accordance with a vote of the society, sold and conveyed the church property for $5,000. The society has not disbanded, but maintains its organization in its integrity. The funds received from the sale of the meetinghouse and lot are invested in the name of the trustees. Nothing has been paid to any pewholder for the loss of rights as proprietor.

Subject to the plaintiffs' exception, the defendants were permitted to introduce testimony of several Methodist clergymen of long service and large experience, some of whom had been presiding elders, tending to establish "usage" of the Methodist Episcopal Church in cases where pews are held by proprietors. From such testimony, it was found to be the usage that pews are free whenever possible; and in cases where it is impossible, proprietary interests are sold, which cease without right of compensation if the meetinghouse be disposed of.

The Methodist denomination publishes a volume entitled "Discipline," which defines the "doctrines and discipline of the Methodist Episcopal Church." Copies published in 1872 and 1876 were introduced in evidence, and particular extracts therefrom were read. From this evidence it was found that the volume does not cover the usages of the church so far as proprietary interests in pews are concerned, and that there are no official written rules, regulations, or memoranda which disclose such usages. The Book of Discipline includes, among other things, the rules of the church which apply to free pews, the title of meetinghouses and other church property, and the character and disposition of funds and property of the church or society.

The court ruled as follows: (1) By bringing this action, the pewholders have elected to treat the sale of the meetinghouse as valid. (2) The proprietorship of a pew is subordinate to the title of the trustees, and carries with it the right to occupy the pew so long as the title to the meetinghouse remains in the trustees and it is used as a place for gathering of members of the society for religious and church purposes, and no longer. (3) The society cannot sell the meetinghouse, and so deprive the pewowners of the benefit of their proprietary rights, without compensation therefor, unless it is because of the usage and discipline of the Methodist Episcopal Church.

If the testimony of the clergy was competent to prove the usages of the church, and if such usages and discipline, or either of them, can bar the plaintiffs' right to compensation for the loss of their proprietary interests in their pews, then there is to be a verdict and judgment) for the defendants; otherwise, there is to be a verdict and judgment for each plaintiff in the sum of $100.

Hughes & Doe, of Dover, for plaintiffs.

Eastman, Scammon & Gardner, of Exeter, for defendants.

PEASLEE, J. This case presents questions touching the rights of pewholders in the Methodist Episcopal Church. It appears that it had become impracticable for the society of that denomination in Newmarket to longer attempt to maintain services in its own church edifice. Provision had been made for services elsewhere, and after the church had stood unoccupied for five years, it was sold by the society. Thereupon two pewholders brought suit to recover the value of their pewholding rights.

Subject to exception, several witnesses testified, in effect, that, according to the usage or custom of the Methodist Episcopal Church, when the church edifice is sold, the pewholders have no claim for compensation. Objection is made to this evidence upon the ground that the witnesses did not know of more than one or two instances where such transactions had taken place.

"It has sometimes been said that a witness to a trade usage may state only specific instances, or must at least mention one or more in support of his statement of the general practice....