 |
||||||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
||||||
|
The Center Meeting House: A History
The first meeting house in town was built on Bly Hill in 1791. The decision to build was made in town meeting and the management of the project was in the hands of the selectmen. However it was financed by the sale of pews rather than by taxes. Forty years later when town meeting voted to raze the building, the town seem to think it had some financial interest. In 1790 when the civil and religious focus was on Bly Hill, the population
was 331. By 1820 the population had grown to a peak of 874, and by 1830
had slipped to 797. Apparently during this time there had been a shift
in interest to the southern end of the lake. In addition to the desire
to abandon the old meeting house on Bly Hill, there was a desire to
build a new meeting house by the pond. Also this was an era of economic
prosperity owing to the sheep raising boom which occurred between 1800
and 1840. The rugged, rocky country was well suited to raising sheep
at a time when top prices were being paid for wool. The third meeting house in town, the Center Meeting House, was built
at its present location in 1832. The record books have been lost, but
we have a few scraps of evidence that can be used. It is likely that
the financing followed the model of the South Meeting House. We do know
that the proprietors group called themselves the First Toleration Society.
One of their first acts was to ask town meeting for some land. The following
is recorded in the minutes of the town meeting of 22 October 1831: "Voted
that the Selectmen lease a part of the common land lying at the South
End of Sunnepy Lake in Fishersfield to the Religious Toleration Society
so called." It is likely that their constitution was similar to
the South Meeting House in that the meeting house would be It is apparent that the men of the First Toleration Society were prosperous. They chose a design for the meeting house by the well known architect Asher Benjamin who published several books for country builders. Instead of being a simple box with a steeple, this house has a projecting pavilion on the entrance side with the bell tower rising out of it and the main roof. In addition they hired experienced craftsmen to erect the structure and craft the finish details. James L. Garvin, State Architectural Historian, studied the Center meeting House in May 2006. In his report he had this to say: "Despite its architectural conservatism, the Newbury building displays excellent workmanship. [The interior architectural features] all display virtuosity in design and execution. The pulpit exhibits especially fine craftsmanship and detailing. ...the Newbury Center Meeting House is a skillfully designed and built but conservative example of a rural church building."
The Center Meeting House is thought to be one of three identical meeting houses built in a three year period. Although the South Sunapee Meeting House (1833) was demolished, a photograph of it survives which shows an identical structure. Also there is another picture of the interior which has an identical reverse pulpit. The other is the one in Unity (1831) which has been extensively modified for a town hall. A picture from 1892 shows it to be much the same except there are two windows on the side instead of three. The downfall and salvation of the building was declining population. As the building aged fifty years, the population declined by 200 people. With fewer resources, the building was not maintained and decay set in. From The Granite Monthly of July 1880 we read this description of the town: "The steamer lands you at old Newbury, a sleepy, decayed hamlet at the foot of Sunapee lake. Some way it reminds you of Sleepy Hollow, which the pen of an Irving has celebrated in his matchless prose. Life is stagnant here. Enterprise has long since taken its flight elsewhere. There is an old tumble down church, where there has been no preaching for many a day, I will be sworn. Back of it is the village graveyard, an aerie [sic], ghostly place enough in a dark night. You notice no children in the street, and even the inevitable boy and girl of young and tender years do not stand at the depot or in the post-office chewing gum, eating candy, and looking doves eves at each other. Newbury must have lived before the deluge, for there is no life there now. It cannot always sleep, however, and before many a year we shall see the place Rip Van Winkled into life again. The tide of fashion upon Sunapee's shores will ere long stimulate enterprise. Hotels and boarding houses and rural cottages will rise as if by an enchanter's wand, and old Newbury will become new, not only in her garb but in her spirit. Years of prosperity are before her."
At the turn of the twentieth century, the decline began again. The financial responsibility was still in the hands of the proprietors who were dwindling in number owing to age and leaving town. They had little money for upkeep. Meanwhile the nature of the summer people was changing as they became more interested in play than religion. In 1932, just one hundred years after the Meeting House was built, the remaining proprietors transferred their title to a board of trustees. The trustees had even fewer resources. From time to time they tried to raise money for paint or a roof and tried in small ways to prevent the collapse of the building. Again there was no pressure to remodel or modernize. On March 20, 2005, a group of about twenty concerned citizens led by
Dan Wolf met to discuss the current condition and the future of the
Meeting House. Five members of the Board of Trustees were present as
well. The group agreed that the deterioration had gone on long enough
and that action needed to be taken immediately. The first decision was
to restore the building as an historical artifact with no modern improvements.
Each person was assigned to one of four committees and work began. The
Board of Trustees were reformed into a Board of Directors of a general
membership organization that anyone could join and support. Also the
board filed for and received tax exempt status from the IRS. The first
major project, carried out in 2006, was to square up and level the building
by placing a new foundation under it. As of this writing, the remainder
of the restoration is in the planning stage. |
||||||||
 |
||||||||
The Center
Meeting House is the icon of Newbury. This architectural gem has been
standing at the crossroads of the town for 175 years serving the spiritual
needs of both the lakeside area residents and the summer visitors.
The Center
Meeting House was one of the last country meeting houses built in the
pure federal style and one of the few to survive intact to this day.
Another aspect of this meeting house which makes it a rare example is
the reversed pulpit. The usual plan of a meeting house has the congregation
facing away from the entrance doors and toward the pulpit in the rear
of the building. In the Center Meeting House, the congregation faces
the entrance doors and the pulpit. Garvin quoted extensively from the
Ph.D. thesis of Philip D. Zimmerman who apparently was the only one
to study this phenomenon. Zimmerman makes the following points: "The
importance of reverse church plans to meeting house architectural history
is threefold. First, the plan was widespread and significant in terms
of the numbers of these buildings [that were] erected. Second, the plan
did not appear in urban areas and has no known European precedent. For
this reason, reverse church plans represent a rural innovation. Third,
the plan directly influenced rural ecclesiastical (and schoolhouse)
designs for years after it fell from favor. " Garvin went to say:
"In explaining the possible origins of the "reversed"
plan, Zimmerman refutes popular interpretations (to "discourage
latecomers" to service, or to permit the minister to "note
the comings and goings of the congregation"), and substitutes the
thesis that this plan furthered the Protestant insistence that no part
of the meeting house should be regarded as sanctified." And then
he quoted Zimmerman: "Thus, they rotated the inside arrangement,
assuring themselves that their auditoriums would express no artificial
sanctity. They ensured that the mere act of entering the room would
undermine any sense of progressively more sacred space, since all people
had to walk past the pulpit and essentially ignore it as they went to
their seats." Zimmerman searched throughout New England for examples
of the reversed plan and found that Newbury had the only example in
a federal style meeting house.
Because
of this neglect, there had been no effort to remodel or modernize to
the latest fashion. In 1892 John Hay, an entrepreneur and secretary
to statesmen who had built an estate on the lake, came to the rescue.
He bought a bell in Grantham and had it installed while paying for other
repairs and improvements. It was his wish, fortunately, that nothing
should be changed. The motivation for this restoration was the need
for a place of worship for the expanding summer population. Indeed as
time went on, there were special steamer runs on Sunday to the "Pond"
Meeting House.