Case Name: The Inhabitants of the First Parish in Shapleigh versus Zebulon Gilman
Court: Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Jurisdiction: Massachusetts
Decision Date: 1816-05
Citations: 12 Tyng 190
Docket Number: 
Parties: *The Inhabitants of the First Parish in Shapleigh versus Zebulon Gilman.
Judges: 
Reporter: Massachusetts Reports
Volume: 13
Pages: 155–157

Head Matter:
*The Inhabitants of the First Parish in Shapleigh versus Zebulon Gilman.
The proprietors of a new township appropriated a lot of land for a parsonage, at the same time voting, that they would endeavour that a congregational minister should be settled in the town. Afterwards a congregational society was incorporated in the town as a poll parish. It was holden, that the said society were not entitled to the use of such parsonage ; but that the same remained to the first parish, whether of the congregational order or not.f
t See Jewett vs. Burroughs, 15 Mass Rep. 465.
Trespass quare clausum fregit. The defendant pleaded, that the locus in quo was, at the time of the supposed trespass, the soil and freehold of the First Congregational Society in the first parish in said Shapleigh; upon which issue was joined. - Trial at the last October term, before Wilde, J.
It appeared, that the original proprietors of the 'town of Shapleigh, at a legal meeting on the 9th of January, 1775, divided a portion of the township into lots of 300 acres, and assigned them to the individual proprietors ; and at the same time voted, that one lot, including the locus in quo, “be reserved for a parsonage lot” ; and that they would “ endeavour that a congregational minister should be settled in said township within seven years from that time.”
At a meeting of the same proprietors, Sept. 8th, 1780, they passed a vote, reciting that the township would accommodate two parishes, and that, being divided by a pond north and south, it was expedient that the territory on the western side of the pond should form one parish, and that on the eastern side the other ; and thereupon setting off another lot of 300 acres on the eastern side of the pond, “for the sole use and benefit of the gospel congregational ministry” in that section of the town ; exclusive of the former assignment of 300 acres on the western side, as before mentioned.
On the 24th of February, 1795, a law was passed for dividing the town into two parishes, the western part to be the first parish, and the residue to be the second parish. On the 24th of August, 1795, the Rev. Joseph Brown was settled as a gospel congregational .minister in said first parish ; who thereupon entered upon the said first-mentioned lot, and possessed the same so long as he contin ued to be * the minister of the said parish ; since which the parish have possessed the same until the defendant entered n the summer of 1814, and committed the supposed trespass.
On the 6th of March, 1810, a law was passed incorporating fchabod Lord and others into a religious society, by the name of “ The First Congregational Society in the First Parish in Shapleigh.” It was in evidence, that, since the incorporation of the said first congregational society, there have always been some of the inhabitants of the said parish of the congregational persuasion and belief; and one witness testified, that there were as many such as belonged to the said society.
The defendant justified under the said first congregational society ; and he contended, that, upon the whole evidence, by the true construction of the first-mentioned vote, the lot therein mentioned as reserved for a parsonage lot was appropriated for the use of the ministry of the congregational order, and that, on the incorporation of the said first congregational society, they had the right to enter and hold possession of the same.
But the judge instructed the jury, that the said lot was, by said vote or grant, lawfully appropriated for the use of the ministry generally in said first parish in Shapleigh; and that the said first parish had a lawful right to enter upon and occupy the same, while destitute of a minister.
A verdict was returned for the plaintiffs, subject to the opinion of the whole Court, upon the facts and direct"ons aforesaid.
Emery, for the defendant,
argued, that the intention of the proprietors of the township, in appropriating this lot as a parsonage, was evidently to limit it to the use of a minister of the congregational order. It was a gross perversion of the grant, to permit a minister or society of any other persuasion to hold the land. The defendant represents such a society in the first parish, and he entered lawfully under them.
Holmes, for the plaintiffs.
The original appropriation * was for a parsonage in the western part of the town, afterwards constituting the first parish. It is true, the proprietors express their views at that time to be in favor of settling a congregational minister ; but they do not so limit their grant or appropriation.
Stat. 1704, c. 40.
Stat. 1809, c. 120.
Cruise's Digest, Tit. Deed, c. 22.
First Parish in Brunswick vs. Dunning & al., Mass. Rep. 445.—Brown vs. Porter, 10 Mass. Rep. 93.

Opinion:
By the Court.
The declared object of the grant of this land by the proprietors of the township was for the support of a minister. They at that time preferred a minister of the congregational order or persuasion ; but there is nothing in the grant that limits the benefit of it to that particular sect. If the inhabitants of that part of the town, constituting the first parish, should hereafter become anabaptists, or Christians of any other sect within the description of protestants, they would still have a right to this land. The incorporation of Lord and others into a religious society constituted them what is commonly called a poll parish ; but it vested no part of the estate or funds of the first parish in the society. Those still belong exclusively to the original first parish, who are the plaintiffs in this action.
Judgment according to the verdict.