Pew

A seat in a church, separate from all others, with a convenient place to stand therein. It is an incorporeal interest in the real property. The pewholder does not own the soil; Cooper v. Presbyterian Church, 32 Barb. (N. Y.) 234; Gay v. Baker, 17 Mass. 435, 9 Am. Dec. 159. And although a man has the exclusive right to it, yet it seems he cannot maintain trespass against a person entering it; 1 Term 430; but case is the proper remedy; 3 B. & Aid. 361; 8 B. & C. 294. In First Baptist Church v. Withered, 3 Paige Ch. (N. Y.) 29G, 24 Am. Dec. 223; it was held that the owner of a pew can, if disturbed in its use, maintain trespass, case, or ejectment, according to the circumstances. The right to pews is limited and usufructuary, and does not interfere with the right of the parish or congregation to pulL down and rebuild the church; Price v. Methodist Church, 4 Ohio 541; Freligh v. Platt, 5 Cow. (N. Y.) 496; Sohier v. Trinity Church, 109 Mass. 21; Com. v. St. Mary’s Church, 6 B. & R. (Pa.) 508; indemnifying those whose pews are destroyed; Gay v. Baker, 17 Mass. 435, 9 Am. Dec. 159.

See 2 Bla. Com. 429; 19 Am. L. Reg. N. S. 1; Gay v. Baker, 17 Mass. 435, 9 Am. Dec. 101; First Baptist Church v. Withered, 3 Paige Ch. (N. Y.) 296, 24 Am. Dec. 230.

The pewholder’s right is only to occupy his pew during public worship; IIow v. Stevens, 47 Yt. 262. Ilis right is subject to the paramount rights of the parish; First Baptist Society in Leeds v. Grant, 59 Me. 250; but it is held that a rule of the Roman Catholic Church forbidding a layman to control his pew will not be regarded by the courts, unless it was part of the contract; O’Hear v. De Goesbriand, 33 Vt. 602, 80 Am. Dec. 653 (criticised in 15 Am. L. Reg. 280). When pews are removed from a church O’Brien, 160 Mass. 118, 35 N. E. 313, 22 L. R. A. 206. See Perturbation. A pew may be used only for divine service and for meetings of the congregation held for temporal purposes. The pewowner must preserve order, while enjoying his pew; Wall v. Lee, 34 N. Y. 149. Where not otherwise provided by statute the interest is considered as real estate, subject to the incidents of that kind of property; 1 Washb. R. P. 9; O’Hear v. De Goesbriand, 33 Vt 602, 80 Am. Dec. 653; (see also lleeney v. St. Peters Church, 2 Edw. Ch. [N. Y.] 608); White v. Baile 3 r, 14 Conn. 279; Third Presbyterian Congregation v. Andruss, 21 N. J. L. 325. In Massachusetts and New Hampshire pews are personal property by statute. In Pennsylvania they are held personal property as to devolution, although, strictly speaking, an interest in real estate; Church v. Wells’ Ex’r, 24 Ta. 251.

See, generally, State v. Trinity Church, 45 N. J. L. 230; Best, Pres. Ill; Crabb, R. P. § 481; Baum, Church Law.