seats of equal honor. Of course wives had to have seats of equal importance
with those of their husbands, and each widow retained the dignity
apportioned to her in her husband's lifetime. We can well believe that much
"discresing" was necessary in dignifying as well as in seating. Often,
after building a new meeting-house with all the painstaking and thoughtful
judgment that could be shown, the dissensions over the seating lasted for
years. The conciliatory fashion of "dignifying the seats" clung long in the
Congregational churches of New England. In East Hartford and Windsor it was
not abandoned until 1824.

Many men were unwilling to serve on these seating committees, and refused
to "medle with the seating," protesting against it on account of the odium
that was incurred, but they were seldom "let off." Even so influential and
upright a man as Judge Sewall felt a dread of the responsibility and of
the personal spleen he might arouse. He also feared in one case lest his
seat-decisions might, if disliked, work against the ministerial peace of
his son, who had been recently ordained as pastor of the church. Sometimes
the difficulty was settled in this way: the entire church (or rather the
male members) voted who should occupy the foreseat, or the highest pew, and
the voted-in occupants of this seat of honor formed a committee, who in
turn seated the others of the congregation.

In the town of Rowley, "age, office, and the amount paid toward building
the meeting-house were considered when assigning seats." Other towns had
very amusing and minute rules for seating. Each year of the age counted one
degree. Military service counted eight degrees. The magistrate's office
counted ten degrees. Every forty shillings paid in on the church rate
counted one degree. We can imagine the ambitious Puritan adding up his
degrees, and paying in forty shillings more in order to sit one seat above
his neighbor who was a year or two older.