53/6/0/-/46

Two entries on three pages of a book of decrees of the land court at Konin for the years 1773 to 1777, kept in the State Archive in Poznań (Archiwum Państwowe w Poznaniu). Both are decrees of the sitting of October 1777. The first rules on where the boundary decree of the commission had to be entered. The second sends a claim for money, which Stanisław Chełmski had bought from a merchant, to a hearing on the ground of Trąbczyn. Both are in Latin, and each is a document. The reading is made from a microfilm and is uncertain in places.

Historical background

The commission that fixed the boundary between Trąbczyn and Łukomia ruled for Antoni Prusimski, and its decree was entered in the court records at Brześć Kujawski, in another province, in September 1776: 53/17/0/-/Konin Gr.145. A judgment took its public force from being entered in the books of a court, and by law in the province where the land lay. Stanisław Chełmski of Łukomia, who had lost, went looking for the entry. A castle office searched its books on request and certified what it found; such a search is a “requisitio”. One of his searches survives: at Kalisz, on 23 November 1776, nothing was found: 53/15/0/-/Kalisz Gr.424.

The copy of the commission’s decree that survives is the one in the book of the castle court of Konin. This decree of the land court is the likely reason it is there.

The volume belongs to the archive’s fonds “Księgi sądu ziemskiego w Koninie”, the books of the land court at Konin. According to the archive’s description of the fonds, the land court at Konin was a court of the nobility. The starost or his deputy, as the king’s lieutenant, had the leading part in it, with the judge, the sub-judge, the voivode, the chamberlain and the standard-bearer. The court travelled round the palatinate and held its sittings in the district; the terms at which it sat were called “roczki”. It was competent in every suit in which a nobleman was the defendant, except those assigned to other courts, such as the dietine courts or the royal court, and except uncontested business. In 1792 its competence passed to a new land court, the “sąd ziemiański”. The fonds holds resignations, inscriptions, reports, judgments, papers brought in for entry, registers of causes, citations, extracts and inquiries.

Contents

The claim. Stanisław Chełmski, heir of Łukomia, plaintiff, through Melchior Krzyzanowski, against Antoni Prusimski, Starost of Niszczewice, cited and present in person. Chełmski demands that Prusimski produce a certain act, “as though a boundary act”, given between the estates of Łukom and Trąbczyn by commissioners appointed by the Estates and brought in by the Starost. He lays down three searches for it: at the castle court of Kalisz on the Saturday after the Presentation of the Virgin 1776, made by Antoni Mierzejewski in his name; at Kościan on 2 January, made by Antoni Smoliński; and at Konin in October of the current year, made by himself. By them he proves that the act was not in the records of its own province [1].

The answer. Prusimski, to free himself from the demand, lays down a search of his own, made at the castle court of Brześć in Kuyavia on 10 October 1777 and entered at Konin on 16 October. It shows that the commission’s decree, between the estates of Trąbczyn Minus or Nowa Wieś, Łukom and Drzewce, was entered at Brześć in September 1776 [1].

The decree. Rights, settlements and decrees must be brought in for entry in their own province. The court therefore orders Prusimski to bring the decree to the castle records at Konin within four weeks, on pain of outlawry [1].

The next entry: the debt bought from Tracholz. Entry no. 17 is between the same parties. Chełmski sues under a transfer acknowledged at the castle court of Pyzdry in 1768, by which the merchant Jan Tracholz made over to him sums he claimed from the late Paweł Prusimski, and demands the contract for the sale of the pine wood of Trąbczyn. The court is shown that a decree of its own of 1766, between Tracholz and Antoni Prusimski, had sent the cause to a hearing on the ground, and that this was never held. It suspends the matter and fixes a hearing of the court on the ground of Trąbczyn for the Monday after Laetare Sunday of the coming year, at which Prusimski is to be ordered to produce the contract [2].

Form and language

The first entry is no. 16 of its sitting. It begins halfway down leaf 182 verso and fills the page; for want of room the clerk wrote its end at the foot of the other side of the same leaf, under entry no. 15, and put a direction to it at the foot of the page. The Latin is in a small hand that abbreviates nearly every word, and the images are frames of a black and white microfilm. The transcription writes the abbreviations out where the word is sure and marks four places where it is not.

The entry has no date of its own. The heading of the sitting, which the editor transcribed from a page that is not among the images, reads: “Actum in Judiciis Terrestribus Palatinatus Calissiensis Districtualibus Feria Secunda post Festum Sanctae Hedvigis Viduae Electae Dei videlicet Die 20 mensis Octobris Anno 1777 in Conin celebratis”, before Franciszek Wierusz Walknowski, judge, Stefan Leszczyc Zielonacki, deputy judge, and Franciszek Ksawery Mikorski, notary, of the land of Kalisz. The deputy judge is one of the five commissioners who had adjourned the boundary cause in September 1776: 53/15/0/-/Kalisz Gr.425.

Entry no. 17 follows on leaf 183 recto, in the same hand. The editor had made a first reading of it; the text given here was read again from the film in the working session, and the editor settled two of its words on the page. It names the Monday after Laetare Sunday for the hearing on the ground. The citation to that hearing, entered at Konin in March 1778, names the Monday after Invocavit Sunday, three weeks earlier: 53/17/0/-/Konin Gr.117. The editor has looked at both pages, and each stands as written.

Related holdings

The suit on the debt bought from Tracholz, from 1778: 53/17/0/-/Konin Gr.117. The commission’s decree: 53/17/0/-/Konin Gr.145. The search at Kalisz: 53/15/0/-/Kalisz Gr.424.

Scans

The folder has two frames of a black and white microfilm, each showing two facing pages. Both were cut at the fold. The entry begins on the left page of the second frame and ends at the foot of the right page of the first; those two pages are shown, and with them the right page of the second frame, which has the next entry.

Transcription

The editor transcribed the entry from the film and supplied it by paragraph, with about thirty marks of doubt in it: the hand is small and abbreviates nearly every word. The editor’s file also has the heading of the sitting, from a page not among the images, and a first reading of the entry that follows, no. 17, without a translation.

At the editor’s word an AI model (Claude) transcribed entry no. 17 again from the film, enlarged, with the editor’s reading beside it, and translated it in the editor’s terms. It is the second document. The editor then settled two of its words against the page. A word the clerk struck out is not given.

Check against the scans

An AI model (Claude) read the whole entry against the film, enlarged, and corrected ten passages. The film shows the words but not every ending, so the document is marked as a rough transcription. Three corrections change the sense: the opening is the usual formula of a decree; it is Chełmski who lays down three searches and proves that the act was not in the records of its own province; and what Prusimski lays down is a search for the decree, made at Brześć Kujawski on 10 October 1777. The clerk’s direction to the other page was added. Four places stay marked as not surely read. Each change is logged with its reason.

Division and dating

Each of the two entries is a document. Neither has a date of its own. The heading of its sitting gives 20 October 1777 as the day the sitting opened; the decree mentions a search made later that month, so only the year is claimed.

Translation

The editor’s English had been made from the first reading and marked ten places as unresolved. Claude revised it throughout to follow the corrected reading, keeping the editor’s terms. The editor’s notes, each on a word then unread, are not used.

Summary

The summary was written in German from the Latin and translated into English. Each of its seven statements was then checked against the document. One was weakened, because the day of one search is not surely read; the rest held. The summary of the second entry has seven statements, checked the same way; all held.