The Alexander Palace Time Machine Discussion Forum
 
 User Info & Key Stats   
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
August 01, 2014, 09:29:31 PM
460983 Posts in 8932 Topics by 14522 Members
Latest Member: kmk818
News: We think Pallasart is the best web design company in Austin and for good reason - they make this forum possible! Looking for a website? Call them at 512 469-7454.
+  The Alexander Palace Time Machine Discussion Forum
|-+  Discussions about Russian History
| |-+  Imperial Russian History (Moderators: LisaDavidson, Forum Admin)
| | |-+  Documents from the Reigns of Peter I through Nicholas II
  0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. « previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 Go Down Print
Author
Sticky Topic Topic: Documents from the Reigns of Peter I through Nicholas II  (Read 35699 times)
Reply #75
« on: March 08, 2006, 10:28:06 AM »
David_Pritchard
Guest

Nestor: The Martyrdom of Boris and Gleb

Part 2


The impious Sviatopolk then reflected, "Behold, I have killed Boris; now how can I kill Gleb?" Adopting once more Cain's device, he craftily sent messages to Gleb to the effect that he should come quickly, because his father was very ill and desired his presence. Gleb quickly mounted his horse, and set out with a small company, for he was obedient to his father. When he came to the Volga, his horse stumbled in a ditch on the plain, and broke his leg. He arrived at Smolensk, and setting out thence at dawn, he embarked in a boat on the Smiadyn. At this time, Iaroslav received from Predslava the tidings of their father's death, and he sent word to Gleb that he should not set out, because his father was dead and his brother had been murdered by Sviatopolk. Upon receiving these tidings, Gleb burst into tears, and mourned for his father, but still more deeply for his brother. He wept and prayed with the lament, "Woe is me, O Lord! It were better for me to die with my brother than to live on in this world. O my brother, had I but seen thy angelic countenance, I should have died with thee. Why am I now left alone? Where are thy words that thou didst say to me, my brother? No longer do I hear thy sweet counsel. If thou hast received affliction from God, pray for me that I may endure the same passion. For it were better for me to dwell with thee than in this deceitful world."

While he was thus praying amid his tears, there suddenly arrived those sent by Sviatopolk for Gleb's destruction. These emissaries seized Gleb's boat, and drew their weapons. The servants of Gleb were terrified, and the impious messenger, Goriaser, gave orders that they should slay Gleb with dispatch. Then Gleb's cook, Torchin by name, seized a knife, and stabbed Gleb. He was offered up as a sacrifice to God like an innocent lamb, a glorious offering amid the perfume of incense, and he received the crown of glory. Entering the heavenly mansions, he beheld his long-desired brother, and rejoiced with him in the joy ineffable which they had attained through their brotherly love.

"How good and fair it is for brethren to live together!" (Psalms, cxxxiii, i). But the impious ones returned again, even as David said, "Let the sinners return to hell" (Psalms, ix, 17). When they returned to Sviatopolk, they reported that his command had been executed. On hearing these tidings, he was puffed up with pride, since he knew not the words of David, "Why art thou proud of thy evildoing, O mighty one? Thy tongue hath considered lawlessness all the day long" (Psalms, Iii, 1).

After Gleb had been slain, his body was thrown upon the shore between two tree trunks, but afterward they took him and carried him away, to bury him beside his brother Boris in the Church of St. Basil. United thus in body and still more in soul, ye dwell with the Lord and King of all, in eternal joy, ineffable light, bestowing salutary gifts upon the land of Russia. Ye give healing to other strangers who draw near with faith, making the lame to walk, giving sight to the blind, to the sick health, to captives freedom, to prisoners liberty, to the sorrowful consolation, and to the oppressed relief. Ye are the protectors of the land of Russia, shining forever like beacons and praying to the Lord on behalf of your countrymen. Therefore must we worthily magnify these martyrs in Christ, praying fervently to them and saying: "Rejoice, martyrs in Christ from the land of Russia, who gave healing to them who draw near to you in faith and love. Rejoice, dwellers in heaven. In the body ye were angels, servants in the same thought, comrades in the same image, of one heart with the saints. To all that suffer ye give relief. Rejoice, Boris and Gleb, wise in God. Like streams ye spring from the founts of life-giving water which flow for the redemption of the righteous. Rejoice, ye who have trampled the serpent of evil beneath your feet. Ye have appeared amid bright rays, enlightening like beacons the whole land of Russia. Appearing in faith immutable, ye have ever driven away the darkness. Rejoice, ye who have won an unslumbering eye, ye blessed ones who have received in your hearts the zeal to fulfil God's only commandments. Rejoice, brethren united in the realms of golden light, in the heavenly abodes, in glory unfading, which ye through your merits have attained. Rejoice, ye who are brightly radiant with the luminance of God, and travel throughout the world expelling devils and healing diseases. Like beacons supernal and zealous guardians, ye dwell with God, illumined forever with light divine, and in your courageous martyrdom ye enlighten the souls of the faithful. The light-bringing heavenly love has exalted you, wherefore ye have inherited all fair things in the heavenly life: glory, celestial sustenance, the light of wisdom, and beauteous joys. Rejoice, ye who refresh our hearts, driving out pain and sickness and curing evil passions. Ye glorious ones, with the sacred drops of your blood ye have dyed a robe of purple which ye wear in beauty, and reign forevermore with Christ, interceding with him for his new Christian nation and for your fellows, for our land is hallowed by your blood. By virtue of your relics deposited in the church, ye illumine it with the Holy Spirit, for there in heavenly bliss, as martyrs among the army of martyrs, ye intercede for our nation. Rejoice, bright daysprings, our Christ-loving martyrs and intercessors! Subject the pagans to our princes, beseeching our Lord God that they may live in concord and in health, freed from intestine war and the crafts of the devil. Help us therefore who sing and recite your sacred praise forever unto our life's end."
Logged
Reply #76
« on: March 08, 2006, 11:30:59 AM »
David_Pritchard
Guest

The Recognised Nobles of the Kingdom of Georgia as of 1783

Part 1


Prior to the signing of the Treaty of Georgievskii between the Kingdom of Georgia and the Russian Empire a list of the Georgian nobility was drawn up on the instructions of King Irakly II. As part of the negotiations, the Georgian nobles recognised in the treaty would have the same rights and priviliges as the Russian nobility. In 1825, a priest named Dmitri, made a hand written copy of the Greorgian copy of the treaty including the list of the Georgian nobility that was approved by King Irakly II as early as 28 June 1783. The names on that list appear below.

The Georgian nobility consists of two classes: the Thavadi or princes and the Aznauri or ordinary nobles.


The Thavadis of Kartli:

1. Mukhranis Batoni Bagrationi
2. Abashidze
3. Iothamisshvili;
4. Phalavandishvili
5. Chkheidze
6. Kherkheulidze
7. Thaqthaqisshvili
8. Bebuthovi
9. Janbakur-Orbeliani
10 Meliqisshvili
11. Avalisshvili
12. Iaralisshvili
13. Begthabegisshvili
14. Gurji-Revazisshvili
15. Dolenjisshvili
16. Vezirisshvili
17. Eristhvisshvili
18. Barathashvili
19. Machabeli
20. Diasamidze
21. Solaghashvili
22. Arghuthashvili
23. Sumbatisshvili
24. Amilakhori
25. Davithisshvili-Bagrationi
26. Javakhisshvili
27. Phalavandishvili
28. Thumanishvili
29. Khidirbegisshvili
30. Ratisshvili
31. Maghalashvili
32.(?)
33. Tsitsishvili
34. Abashisshvili
35. Tharkhnisshvili-Mouravi
36. Zurabisshvili
37. Amirejibi
38. Shalikashvili
39. Sharvashidze.

The Thavadis of Kakhetia:

40. Choloqhashvili
41. Jorjadze
42. Maqhashvili
43. Sidamoni
44. Tusisshvili
44(?). Gurgenisdze
45. Saginashvili
46. Khimshiashvili
47. Abashidze
48. Tchavtchavadze
49. Vakhvakhishvili
50. Jandierishvili
51. Avalishvili
52. Qharalashvili
53. Babadishvili
54. Lionidze
55. Endronikashvili
56. Vachnadze
57. Rusisshvili
58. Cherqezisshvili
59. Guramisshvili
60. Qobulovi
61. Aphkhazisshvili
62. Robitashvili.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 05:00:00 PM by David_Pritchard » Logged
Reply #77
« on: March 08, 2006, 05:44:55 PM »
David_Pritchard
Guest

The Recognised Nobles of the Kingdom of Georgia as of 1783



Part 2


Sakhaso Aznauris:

1. Shaburishvili
2. Thurqistanisshvili
3. Saakadze
4. Saginashvili
5. Gabashvili
6. Murvanisshvili
7. Abazadze
8. Qhorghanashvili
9. Phitskhelauri
10. Enakolophashvili
11. Shanshiashvili
12. Glurjidze
13. Kobiashvili
14. Garaqhanidze
15. Korintheli
16. Cherqezisshvili
17. Tchilasshvili
18. Iegulasshvili
19. Muskhelashvili
20. Meghvinethkhutsisshvili
21. Savarsamidze
22. Phurtseladze
23. Teirishvili
24. Chrdileli
25. Garsevanashvili
26. Kalatozisshvili
27. Rostevanashvili
28. Manucharovi
29. Uthnelisshvili
30. Makhateli
31. Qharagozisshvili
32. Mirzashvili
33. Zardiashvili
34. Zandukeli
35.Areshashvili
36. Thurmanidze
37. Jomardidze
38. Zhuruli
39. Oqromtchedlisshvili
40. Berdznisshvili
41. Aleqsisshvili
42. Markozisshvili
43. Larazde
44. Nakhutsrisshvili
45. Phasitashvili
46. Tcharuashvili
47. Makhviladze
48. Zavarashvili
49. Javarashvili
50. Rcheulashvili
51. Qumsiashvili
52. Davithisshvili
53. Urqmazashvili
54. Kherodinashvili
55. Thavqhelishvili
56. Dsithelashvili
57. Ishkhnelisshvili
58. Elarasshvili
59. Miqelisshvili
60. Phariamanisshvili
61. Shakhovi
62. Didebulidze
63. Phaniashvili
64. Orjonikidze
65. Saqhvarelidze
66. Tsalqalamidze
67. Madathashvili
68. Pharadashvili
69. Loris-Meliqisshvili
70. Qalanthrisshvili
71. Gildasshvili
72. Bazlidze
73. Phatrelisshvili
74. Shaverdashvili
75. Bathiashvili
76. Uznadze
77. Othanashvili
78. Kotetisshvili
79. Grigolashvili
80. Pharesisshvili
81. Gogibedashvili
82. Eliozisdze

Sakathalikoso(Catholic) Aznauris:

83. Maghalashvili
84. Eliozisshvili
85. Thukhareli
86. Qarsidze
87. Thazisshvili
88. Qadagisshvili
89. Kvaliashvili
90. Zumbulidze
91. Qhovarashvili
92. Botchoradze
93. Egadze
94. Aghsabadze
95. Badashvili

Prince Eristhavisshvili's Aznauris:

96. Korintheli
97. Loladze
98. Thelashvili
99. Khmaladze
100. Uthnelisshvili
101. Sreseli
102. Phavlenisshvili
103. Mrulisshvili
104. Matchavariani
105. Aleqsishvili
106. Basilisshvili
107. Chubinisshvili
108. Tatishvili
109. Manuchrisshvili
110. Dzamelashvili
111. Kobakhidze
112. Gandzieli
113. Japharidze
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 05:00:00 PM by David_Pritchard » Logged
Reply #78
« on: March 08, 2006, 05:57:37 PM »
David_Pritchard
Guest

The Recognised Nobles of the Kingdom of Georgia as of 1783

 
Part 3


Prince Barathashvili's Aznauris:

114. Areshishvili
115. Berdznisshvili
116. Sadunashvili
117. Namoradze
118. Lamazashvili
119. Gostamishvili
120. Brodzeli
121. Gethasanashvili
122. Qhiphiani

Prince Machabeli's Aznauris:

123. Rcheulashvili
124. Nabitchvrishvili

Prince Diasamidze's Aznauris:

125. Makhviladze
126. Gobirekhvashvili
127. Khutsisshvili

Prince Tsitsishvili's Aznauris:

128. Meghvineth-Khutsisshvili
129. Klimiashvili
130. Orjonikidze
131. Uthruthisshvili
132. Alibegisshvili
133. Dandlisshvili
134. Stelisshvili
135. Daphqviashvili
136. Qarthvelisshvili
137. Abramishvili
138. Oblidze
139. Maghradze
140. Aleqsidze
141. Buniathishvili
142. Muchaidze
143. Gulbadisshvili
144. Bughutauri
145. Dekanozisshvili
146. Tsinamdzghvrisshvili
147. Phurtseladze
148. Chanchaladze
149. Qurdevanidze
150. Chakashvili
151. Iothamisshvili
152. Mdsqheradze
153(?)
154.Saqhvarelidze
155. Aliqhulashvili
156. Sapharashvili
157. Gvaramadze
158. Saamisshvili
159. Avaldashvili
160. Khutsisshvili
161. Tabaradze
162. Revazis

Prince Ttarkhnisshvili's Aznauris:

163. Tsalqalamanidze
164. Chivadze
165.Jajanashvili
166. Javarashvili
167. Kargaretheli

Prince Amirejibi's Aznauris:

168. Baqradze.
169. Monavarashvili
170. Badriashvili

Prince Amilokhori's Aznauris:

!71. Zedginidze
172. Qarumidze
173. Qhanchaveli
174. Chikoidze
175. Basilashvili
176(?)
177(?)
178. Lipartisshvili
179. Tarsaitchashvili
180. Zaalisshvili
181. Thukhareli
182. Aleqsisshvili
183. Murachashvili
184. Tsimakuridze

Samthavrobo(Governmental) and Samrovlo(Parish) and Saquabthakheo Aznauris:

185. Ananiashvili
186. Mamatsashvili
187. Shatberashvili
188. Dekanozisshvili

Prince Bagrationi-Davithisshvili's Aznauris:

189. Tatishvili
190. Rikadze
191. Raminisshvili

Prince Javakhishvili's Aznauris:

192. Abulierdishvili
193. Makhviladze
194. Zaalishvili
195. Bezhanisshvili
196. Gamqhrelidze
197. Niniashvili

Prince Phavlenisshvili's Aznauris:

198. Namoradze
199. Tsvimetadze

Prince Khidirbegisshvili's Aznauris:

200. Nathisshvili
201. Oghdzaeli

Prince Mukhran Batoni Bagrationi's Aznauris:

202. Ratishvili
203(?)
204. Zedginidze
205. Muskhelashvili
206. Vachianidze
207. Qavtharadze
208. Eliozisdze
209. Baqradze
210. Meskhisshvili
211. Nathisshvili
212. Nasidze
213. Dsidsinadze
214. Shalighashvili
215. Nanashvili
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 05:00:00 PM by David_Pritchard » Logged
Reply #79
« on: March 08, 2006, 06:06:42 PM »
David_Pritchard
Guest

The Recognised Nobles of the Kingdom of Georgia as of 1783


Part 4


Prince Abashidze's Aznauris:

216. Qhiphiani
217. Savaneli
218. Chkheidze
219.Rusisshvili
220. Orjonikidze
221. Godabrelidze
222. Natsvlisshvili
223. Avaliani
224. Aleqsidze
225. Chikvaidze
226. Alkhazisshvili
227(?)
228. Nemsadze
229. Rabadashvili 2
30.Matchavariani
231. Tchashitashvili
232. Kordzaia
233. Tchashiashvili
234 .Dushiashvili
235. Khasharadze

Prince Phalavandisshvili's Aznauris:

236. Gogibashvili
237. Shalbeliqisshvili
238. Shalibashvili
239. Samarghanishvili
240. Khutsiashvili
241. Lashkhi
242. Nagladze

Prince Chkheidzishvili's Aznauris:

243. Matchavariani
244. Qarthvelisshvili
245. Raminisshvili

Prince Kherkheulidze Aznauris:

246. Matchavariani

Prince Thaqthaqisshvili's Aznauris:

247. Tsimakuridze
248. Ghonenashvili

Prince Jambakur-Orbeliani's Aznauris:

249. Chachikashvili
250. Qhaithmazashvili
251. Dovrathashvili
252. Bagratisshviliu
253. Shaburisshvili
254. Morthuladze
255(?).
256. Kobakhashvili
257. Tarielishvili
258.Qhoinisdze
259. Khandamashvili
260. Butchqhiashvili
261. Avthandilisshvili
262. Matchavariani
263. Janiashvili. (?)
267. Natsvlisshvili
268. Saqhvarelidze
269. Bandzishvili
270. Qavtharadze
271. Ghdzeuli
272. Gargaletheli (?)
274. Bezhithashvili
275. Loladze
276. Berdzenashvili
277. Dzabilashvili
278. Divanashvili
279. Qaozisshvili
280. Kotchibrolashvili
281. Eliozisshvili

Armenian Prince Meliqisshvili's Aznauris:

282. Abazashvili
283. Ardashelisshvili
284. Qharakhanashvili
285. Isuashvili

Prince Avalisshvili's Aznauris:

286. Lapinashvili
287. Asjiashvili
288. Santhlikudashvili
289. Lomidze
290. Ketskhoveli
291. Edisherashvili

Aznaur-Shvilebi of Kakhethi:

292. Nathalishvili
293. Petreashvili
294. Qhodalashvili
295. Kobiashvili
296. Natsvlishvili
297. Gildashvili
298. Gizhiqhreli
299. Garaqhanidze
300. Mitsoblidze
301. Gvelesiani
302. Matchavariani
303. Azaurashvili
304. Bakhutashvili
305. Thushmalishvili
306. Gogniashvili
307. Sulkhanisshvili
308. Meghvinekhutsisshvili
309. Mgaloblisshvili
310. Endronikeshvili
311. Abelashvili
312. Thaniashvili
313. Ioramisshvili
314. Uganadzeshvili
315. Japharidze
316. Natsulishvili
317. Zaldastanishvili
318. Khirselashvili
319. Bostashvili
320. Popiashvili
321. Gomelauri
322. Esitashvili
323. Ozashvili
324. Aghasgvili
325. Qhavrishvili
326. Miqelashvili
327. Tarielashvili

Logged
Reply #80
« on: April 12, 2006, 12:22:09 PM »
David_Pritchard
Guest

Part 1

Professor, Honorary Councillor of State Edv. Hjelt:

DAYS OF REVOLUTION IN MARCH 1917.

The Russian revolution in the beginning of March 1917 overtook Finland with total surprise. Some thoughts were presented about an eventual or even probable revolution after the war, but not before that. The most, what was thought about, was that a transition of power to more liberal elements could take place during the war, but no specific benefit for Finland was expected from that. When everything happened like turn of the hand, without any major internal war, bloodshed or instantaneous anarchy, it came as a big surprise.

Finland was not prepared to meet such a historic event. People far and wide just stood confused in front of this. Hopes were fostered for freedom to come from a completely other direction, any hope on anything good to come from the east was abandoned, and thoughts about an armed liberation, aided from outside, had started to find room. The youth had already in reality given a form to these hopes, and the society, if not completely unanimously, gave sympathy for these efforts and endeavours. And then, suddenly, the oppressive government is sweeped away and, certainly no independence but an internal freedom is offered to us from the east!

An enlarged delegation set by the Diet took the civilian political lead in the country. It assembled, as soon as it became evident that a real coup d'etat had taken place in Russia, to deliberate issues like restoring the autonomy, for making a proposition to a manifesto etc. In the beginning I stood outside of this because I was not a member of the Diet's delegation and had not lately taken part in any party politics. By pure coincidence I was, however, given a part in a little corner during these strange days. My activities were of humble kind, because of inner conviction; I was not eager to bind myself to such a direction which not necessarily, up to my judgment, could lead the country to most favourable outcome. Here I will not give a comprehensive description of the development of events, I just present some personal experiences and impressions.

During Wednesday and Thursday, March 14 and 15, rumours about abdication and establishing a provisional government in Russia began to spread. No confirmed news were available because the newspapers were censored as before and telegraphic messages were held back. One could hardly notice any revolution in Finland. The old regime still continued being alive. But an atmosphere of restlessness and excitement could be felt. On the 16th early in the morning it was learned that Seyn and Borovitinoff were arrested and brought aboard on a naval vessel. A feeling of relief was felt when these worst and hated instruments in our country were brought down and made harmless. Simultaneously the full sense of seriousness of the situation finally reached everyone of us. There were no rejoice, people only quietly whispered what had happened and what was coming in forth of us. As I later learned, the new government gave no immediate thoughts to circumstances in Finland. In a meeting, held by the local Finns on the 15th at the residence of the Revd. Malin of the Swedish congregation (tr. note - in Petrograd), thoughts were presented about rendering the most prominent men in the old regime (tr. note - in Finland) harmless. In the same meeting there was our "friend" D. Protopopoff present and his attention was called to the improper fact that the these men still stood at the highest level of government in Finland. He was at once ready to take necessary measures. The Provisional Government sent a telegram to the commander-in-chief of the Baltic Fleet (tr. note - in Helsinki), Admiral Nepenin (tr. note - Hjelt uses the form Njepenin), for arrest of Seyn and Borovitinoff. He answered in some hours that the former's arrest could set forth an anarchy in Finland, and what comes to the latter, the whole Senate will stand behind him. N. was, however, sent a new order to fulfill the original order.

The same day, or Friday the 16th, I was summoned to be present at Admiral Nepenin on the vessel Krechett (previously Polaris). About ten people of different political parties were there (A. Ramsay, E. Schybergson, Ståhlberg, K. Castrén, E. Nevanlinna, Paasikivi, Kallio, Gylling and, perhaps, still somebody else). Some of those summoned did not appear. I don't know who had chosen us as trusted people in the parties, most probably the acting Governor-General Lipski had done this following a suggestion by a member of the Senate. In the vessel's stateroom we were received by Lipski and the chief of the Governor-General's chancellery, Orloff. Outwardly both looked totally calm. Lipski gave his usual mawkish smirk. The interpreter, Melartin, seemed to be very nervous. After a moment the admiral, a corpulent, convincing person, entered and greeted all of us. In a loud and distinct voice he, quite calmly, read the telegraphic order to arrest the Governor-General Frans etc. Seyn and the Vice Chairman of the Senate Mikael etc. Borovitinoff, and to transfer them into custody on some armoured vessel, "which order," he added, "I also have fulfilled". No facial expression, not a word revealed what he himself thought or felt. He had acted by the orders like a soldier.
Logged
Reply #81
« on: April 12, 2006, 12:25:00 PM »
David_Pritchard
Guest

Part 2
 
Professor, Honorary Councillor of State Edv. Hjelt:
 
DAYS OF REVOLUTION IN MARCH 1917.

He had acted by the orders like a soldier. The admiral also informed that the new commissar for Finnish affairs, Rodicheff, is going to arrive the next day and he had presented a wish to have a meeting with trusted people of the society. He had summoned us to ask us to be available for Rodicheff for this purpose, and he hoped that we support maintaining law and order in the country. He expressed his satisfaction that Finland now has got her long nurtured wishes fulfilled. Ståhlberg returned thanks on our behalf for the trust confided in us. Even Lipski, the old fox, presented his congratulations for the dawn of brighter times in Finland. It sounded false and tasteless. So we left the flagship. The next day Admiral Nepenin was killed by a bullet from a bluejacket rifle.

We considered ourselves having no authorities for such sort of negotiations we were informed about, and so we the same evening took part in a Diet delegation meeting where we expressed the necessity that the delegation should appoint authorized negotiators. For my own part I emphasized that I do not consider myself to be appropriate to represent the Young Finnish Party because I nowadays stand completely outside of its activities. However, when each group voted for its representatives, I was elected by the Young Finns. Each one of the bourgeois parties elected three persons: J. Grotenfelt, Lille and E. Estlander, Ståhlberg, Setälä and me, Danielson-Kalmari, Paasikivi and Nevanlinna, as well as Kallio, Mäkinen and Alkio. Socialdemocratic delegates elected five persons, among them Tokoi, Manner and Gylling.

Dr. T. Kaila arrived at the delegation's meeting as an emissary for the Finnish colony in Petersburg (tr. note - Hjelt uses this form, not Petrograd). He brought important and interesting information about the revolution and the situation in the Russian capital. A great joy to me was the message, that those Finns, who were released there from prisons, are safe. News about shooting in the harbour and the naval harbour in Katajanokka (tr. note - in Swedish Skatudd) as well as about outbreaks of unrest on vessels, was brought to the meeting.

When I late in the evening returned home, I took my way to the harbour. The naval vessels were carrying red lanterns, signs of revolution. It was dark and completely quiet. Only some stray shots were heard. Some bands of soldiers roamed quietly on the streets. A half-drunken naval officer, even outwardly judging in a deranged condition, jumped up to a tram. Next morning we learned that the revolt had spred to all vessels, and that during the evening and night a great number of naval officers were either taken into custory or shot by the rank-and-file bluejackets. In the morning soldiers and sailors marched with red banners on the streets, partly in processions singing the Marsellaise, partly in separate crowds, giving out red ribbons and pieces of cloth. Patrols of armed rank-and-file bluejackets roamed everywhere round the city disarming all officers, who when giving the slightest resistance or refusing to take the red token were gunned down and left lying there. All hotels and restaurants and many private houses were searched and officers found there were disarmed or arrested. The police had to leave the field and keep away. Order was maintained by military rank-and-file patrols. The civilian population was left alone. A lot of people was on the move but the public stood completely passive. The whole thing seemed to be a confrontation between rank-and-file soldiers and officers and, in which, the methods of the former did not arouse much sympathy. The revolutionary admiral, half-Finn Maximoff, who was appointed as the commander-in-chief for the Baltic Fleet, arrived in the afternoon at Helsinki. He drove around in his car, made speeches to soldiers and street people in Russian and in Swedish about the freedom won by them through the revolution and simultaneously urged them to stay calm. Later on the same day Rodicheff arrived and even he, as his first task, spoke to soldiers and sailors for restoring order and peace. The next day, Sunday, was relatively calm but the city was actually in the hands of soldier hordes.

Those appointed as deputies were informed than on Sunday afternoon they should assemble at the House of the Estates for a conference with Rodicheff and that at midnight they should leave for Petersburg by extra train. Before Rodicheff arrived, there was a meeting in which the draft for a manifesto to the people of Finland by the new Russian government was presented. The socialists considered it dissatisfactory. They wanted that their special issues, Prohibition Act, Labour Welfare Act, the cotter issue, expansion of local government franchise etc. should equally be noted in the manifesto or some other way in connection with this. Any remarks, that these were internal issues not belonging to the scope and meaning of the manifesto, had no effect on them. In the meantime Rodicheff, accompanied by Baron Korff and Admiral Maximoff, arrived. The former was appointed as an adjoint to the Governor-General. R. was a tall man with pleasant and kind looks and disposition. He was entirely hoarse because of the numerous speeches to soldiers.
Logged
Reply #82
« on: April 12, 2006, 12:27:20 PM »
David_Pritchard
Guest

Part 3
  
Professor, Honorary Councillor of State Edv. Hjelt:  
  
DAYS OF REVOLUTION IN MARCH 1917.

After being welcomed by Ståhlberg he expressed his delight in being able to bring to us the news about reinstallment of the autonomy, summoning the Diet, appointing a new Senate formed of trusted people of the country etc. The proposition to a manifesto was read in detail and Rodicheff did not find anything to object. The socialists' demands, he said, were internal affairs which could be taken up by the new Senate. He also asked our opinion about conscription. The answer was that only the Diet can resolve this. The socialists remarked, that the issue concerning setting up a domestic militia was connected with the withdrawal of the Russian military and should be taken under discussion when the war is over. Admiral Maximoff requested at this point permission to speak and expressed his wish that Finland, grateful for the freedom rewon by Russia, should show solidarity by giving at least a few volunteers to the army. Only one of the deputies answered to this and did it with a less successful way. When I, after the meeting, exchanged a couple of words with Maximoff, I explained why there is so weak interest for the military issue right now. He expressed the opinion that when, among other things, "34 officers had fallen on the streets of Helsinki" we should have an obligation to join to the Russian efforts in the war. When I remarked that they were Russian soldiers who had shot their officers, and that we have nothing to do with this, he answered that what had happened is a link in the revolution which gave us freedom. I got the impression that M. is a benevolent emotional man.

On our journey to Petersburg we were joined by Korff and also by Ehrnrooth and Holsti, who on behalf of the delegation had previously visited Petersburg. The journey went without any adventures. The Russian socialdemocrat Skobelev (M.I. Skobelev, 1885-1939, Menshevik, Minister of Labor in a later Provisional Government - translator's notice), who had visited Helsinki, was also on the train. Right in the middle of the night song and hurrahs woke us up. Soldiers and socialdemocratic youths in the city of Lahti waited upon Skobelev who gave a long speech to the gathered people. The train waited there humbly. At Beloostrov (the first station on the Russian side - translator's notice) a military patrol went through the train but they were mostly interested in Comrade Skobelev more than in other passengers. In the morning some small groups on the train discussed about the list of senators while other deputies negotiated with the socialdemocrats to make them more easy to get on with.

At the station in Petersburg we met, among others, Protopopoff. We were all going to meet at the nave of the Swedish congregation which was aimed to be our headquarters. There were no carriages available at the station. Our luggage were piled on a goods sledge to be carried to the meeting place. We had to content ourselves with walking. Procurator Grotenfelt and I succeeded, however, in finding an idle cabman. I had visited Petersburg for numerous occasions but this entré was different from the previous ones. The city was calm and movement on the streets was, perhaps, a little less vivid than usually. There were red flags everywhere and people, especially all military men, carried a red ribbon or token. No police could be seen, only soldier patrols as well as citizens' protective guards with white ribbons around arms. Here and there in front of grocery stores stood long queues of people. Some burned or destructed buildings witnessed of street fightings. We were given a friendly reception by the Reverend Malin and his wife, and we got many vivid and colourful descriptions about the events there. In the nave we enjoyed a good breakfast, prepared of foods brought by us from Hotel Societetshuset in Helsinki and arranged by the amiable wife of the Reverend.

During the rest of the day we were engaged in discussions, mostly concerning the manifesto. They were long and tough like all the debates in our usual political circles. There were lots of talk and precious time was consumed. The socialdemocrats still wanted to bring forth their special subjects and make the manifesto dependent on these. They wanted that fulfilling of these should be noted in a specific rescript. Finally they retreated to a proposition that the new Senate will be obliged, without any consideration, to submit for confirmation the laws adopted by the Diet, the Prohibition Act, the Labour Welfare Act etc. Only on these terms the socialists will accept the proposition for the manifesto, to which some minor remarks were made, too. These provisions the bourgeois deputies could not accept. A special board was set up to balance the opinions which only partly succeeded. At the same time other bourgeois deputies were engaged in the issue of the senators. This was, however, too poorly prepared for a definitive proposition.

In the evening Protopopoff arrived at the meeting. The situation was explained to him and he talked seriously to the socialists. There is now, said he, a threshold between Finnish and Russian matters. One should be very careful not to step over this. The overthrown government's biggest error in the Finnish issue was that it had stepped over this threshold and that way gotten into a marsh.
Logged
Reply #83
« on: April 12, 2006, 12:30:12 PM »
David_Pritchard
Guest

Part 4
  
Professor, Honorary Councillor of State Edv. Hjelt:  
  
DAYS OF REVOLUTION IN MARCH 1917

The Finns have to take care of their internal affairs, and now, if the socialists' wishes were followed, making the Russian government to get involved in the internal affairs of Finland is very questionable. One also should not waste time for internal disputes. The socialists seemed to be embarrased - they were bound to party resolutions in homeland - and they retired for negotiations. On the bourgeois side it was previously expressed a wish that socialists, because they were the biggest party in the Diet, could form the new Senate. Under the break there was a private discussion with Protopopoff, who among other things said that it boiled within him when he heard this party feud about trifles at a time, when time was more valuable than ever and the issue was the whole country's freedom and independence.

When the socialist deputies returned, Tokoi asked Protopopoff if the highest Russian government would accept a list of senators consisting of socialdemocrats. P. answered that the Russian government has no reason to interfere with such kind of matter which is considered an internal Finnish matter. If Finland considered it necessary to make an experiment of this kind - dangerous experiments must sometimes be done - it will be their business. The answer was thus an affirmative one and the socialdemocrats could go over to the senator issue. The manifesto was accepted and could be sent for approval. For us on the bourgeois side it was a great relief, but the socialdemocrats seemed to be nervous because of the responsibility they just had assumed. As a friendly gesture towards the socialdemocrats, some changes were made in the manifesto, which instead of improving it, made just the contrary, i.e. religious crimes in addition to the political ones, became as objects for amnesty, and that the laws adopted by the Diet should be carried out without delay by the Senate etc.

An essential extension in the manifesto was the immediate revoke of the all-Empire legislation. In the proposition only a suspension to this was discussed. We have thought that the collaboration of the State Duma was prerequisite to this, but our Russian friends thought that we were unnecessarily cautious in this. The present State Cabinet, they explained, has the authorities of both the Sovereign and the Duma and could thus revoke the imperial legislation concerning Finland. It was for us, at least in this specific case, a hilarious news, but all this gave an impression of indifference which in no way could be considered reliable.

The Finnish deputies had their lodgings in private families because the hotels were crowded. Grotenfelt, Lille and I had our quarters in the apartment of Mr. Krook, which was temporarily vacant. For the dinner we were invited to the family Palmgren who lived in the premises of the Swedish church.

For most of us the next day was quite free. Some of the lawyers as well as Danielson-Kalmari and Setälä had a meeting at the Minister State Secretariat to give, together with Protopopoff and the new Governor-General Stakhovich, a precise formulation to the manifesto, to crosscheck the translations etc. This went on from morning to late afternoon. A small episode happened before the meeting had begun. It was to be held downstairs in the room of the Adjoint Minister State Secretary. Before that, however, the Adjoint, Platon Ivanoff, had arrived there, locked the door, taken the key and went to General Markoff, who had previously been arrested but then given the permission to return home and was kept as interned there. When Protopopoff came and learned this, he got into a rage, but finally Baron Th. Bruun succeeded, with a lot of persuading, to get the key. Markoff was described as being resigned but Ivanoff was greatly embittered.

In the afternoon went out with Lille to make a promenade in the city and we especially saw the destroyed Palace of Justice and the Spalernaya Prison, where many Finns had sat incarcerated and were now suddenly released. The former building, an impressive edifice of large extensions, had been completely demolished, from the cellar to the attic. Only the walls stood there and windows were black holes. Spalernaya was less destroyed. A part of the windows were still there but also here fire had been raging. The street outside was full of halfburnt papers and books blended with snow. Here one got the most visible sign of the wild outbreak of a long suppressed hate. Our main interest was assigned to the approval of the manifesto. Without it we would not feel comfortable to return home.
Logged
Reply #84
« on: April 12, 2006, 12:32:21 PM »
David_Pritchard
Guest

Part 5
    
Professor, Honorary Councillor of State Edv. Hjelt:    
    
DAYS OF REVOLUTION IN MARCH 1917

The proposition, referred by Protopopoff, was timed to be on the agenda between 5 and 6 o'clock, but then we got a message that it was postponed until 1/2 9 o'clock. At 8 o'clock the Finnish colony in Petersburg had requested our presence at a dinner. It was the first day restaurants were open after the revolution. About a hundred people gathered there, also the new Governor-General was invited as well as Protopopoff, and the second adjoint at the commissariat for Finnish affairs, Estonian Dr. Ramott, and furthermore Korff. Stakhovich looked out fine and imposing but probably he was more prone to an enjoyable life than to work. He said that he hardly knows about the circumstances in Finland but he is assured that we could take care of ourselves. A lot of people gave speeches, for instance, Stakhovich in French, but no message concerning the manifesto was received. In a telephone call Protopopoff asked that if there is any obstacle for the Russian senate to promulgate the manifesto, too. He was given an answer that this depends completely on the Russian government. Time was running. 1/2 12 o'clock was set as the departure time for our extra train. This was postponed to 1 o'clock by telephone. It was 1/2 11 o'clock when Protopopoff finally came. He theatrically hoisted the manifesto high up with applause and rejoice. The manifesto was read in three languages, followed by spontaneously sung 'Our Country' (the national anthem - translator's notice). Speeches to celebrate this important event were given by Danielson-Kalmari in Finnish, and Lille in Swedish. The spirits were high but we had to hurry up to the railway.

Our countrymen in Petrograd had not succeeded in finding other carriages than plain work sledges. The deputies sat on these in a brotherly concordance and thus we left for Petersburg's streets. This suited fine for the situation. I myself had not an opportunity to test these means of transportation because I was invited with Korff to Protopopoff's automobil. There the latter let me hear much interesting, both concerning the manifesto and other things. The signing did not proceed completely swiftly. Doubts were presented if one could sign such an important document without closer examination. But Protopopoff had emphasized how urgent the matter was: Finland was waiting; if the manifesto will not arrive in the morning, the country will become restless, he has to take it there in this evening, the train was waiting etc. It was, he assured, scrutinized down to a point. Miliukoff said that he had read it through and found it "moderate" and requested signing of it. Seven of the eight present signed it. One, the State Comptroller Godniev, refused because he was not convinced about the Cabinet's full authority over everything what was settled in the manifesto. This is how this remarkable paper was confirmed. - Protopopoff thought, that the present government should act with feverish speed because the situation is still uncertain and no one knew, how the tide will turn. He saw a great danger that there can be a shift of power towards labourers. Their ideologists - Chkheidze in a leading position - had an active roll, and the collapse of the present government, before the national assembly has convened, could not be excluded. And then we meet a counteraction, however not by the old system - it was definitely collapsed - but a counteraction anyway. "The black sister," he said, "always goes behind the red one, and they are not far apart. In the happiest case Russia goes towards a bourgeois republic. But the peasants' point of view is not yet clear."

At 2 o'clock at night the train departed and the journey went without any adventure. About 12 o'clock we arrived at Helsinki. At the Senate building, University, House of the Estates and elsewhere Finnish flags with coat of arms were flying. We were overtaken by the feeling that a new dawn will rise for our people, and yet the joy among many of us was far from being overwhelming and unclouded.

We need, it seemed to me, some other sort of freedom than the Russian svoboda could give to us. It should be built on a Teutonic foundation without any dependancy to Slavic bursts of sentiments.

Helsinki, at the end of March 1917.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 A chapter from "Från händelserika år I-II" (Eventful years), Helsinki1920, the memoirs of Edvard Immanuel Hjelt (1855-1921), professor in chemistry, honorary state councellor, senator, rector och high chancellor of Helsinki University.

Translated by Pauli Kruhse

Logged
Reply #85
« on: June 07, 2006, 10:13:14 PM »
David_Pritchard
Guest

[size=14]The Sudebnik 1497

Ivan III Vaselievich, Grand Prince of Moscow
[/size]

Translated by H. W. Dewey

In the year 1497, in the month of September, the Grand Prince of all Rus' Ivan Vasilievic, with his children and boyars, compiled a code of law on how boyars and major-domos (okolnichii) are to administer justice.

Article 1. Boyars and major-domos are to administer justice. Secretaries (djaki) also shall be present at the court of boyars and major-domos. Neither the boyars, the major-domos nor the secretaries are to receive bribes for a judgement or participating in the judging of a case. Likewise no judge is to receive a bribe for a judgement. And no one is to use the court for purposes of [personal] revenge or favor.

Article 2. And if a plaintiff shall come to a boyar, he is not to dismiss the plaintiffs [sic], but shall give a hearing in all matters to all plaintiffs for whom it is proper. But whenever there is a plaintiff whom it is not proper for him to hear, he shall inform the Grand Prince or send him (the plaintiff) to whomever has been ordered to administer such people.

Article 3. Both the boyar and secretary are to take from the guilty party, whether plaintiff or defendant, out of a ruble case: the boyar two altyns, the secretary eight dengi. And if the case involves more than a ruble or less, the boyar shall take [fees] in the same proportion.

Concerning Fees for Judicial Duels

Article 4. And if a case is to be tried by judicial duel but the parties become reconciled without having stood in the dueling field, the boyar and the secretary are to take [fees] in the same proportion: the boyar two altyns per ruble, the secretary eight dengi; but the major-domo and secretary and the bailiffs (nedel'shchiki) shall be paid no judicial duel fees.

Article 5. And should the parties, having stood in the dueling field, become reconciled, the boyar and secretary are to take their fees in the same proportion; the major-domo, one quarter-ruble and the secretary four altyns and one denga; the bailiff one quarter-ruble and a viashchee fee of two altyns.

Article 6. And if they fight a judicial duel over a question of loan or physical violence, the boyar and secretary shall take from the losing party a protiven' fee based on plaintiff's damages, the major-domo, one half-ruble, his secretary one quarter-ruble, and the bailiff one half-ruble plus a viashchee fee of four altyns.

Article 7. And if they shall fight in the field about arson, murder, brigandage, or theft, then the sum at issue is to be levied from the loser; the major-domo is to get from the loser one half-ruble and the [loser's] armor; the secretary, one quarter-ruble; the bailiff one half-ruble and a viashchee fee of four altyns; and the loser himself is to be given over to the boyar and secretary for punishment and fine.

Concerning Theft

Article 8. And if evidence is brought against anyone of theft, brigandage, murder, false accusation, or any other such evil deed, and he is a notorious criminal, then the boyar is to order him executed and the sum at issue paid from his property, and whatever remains of this property shall be taken by the boyar and his secretary for themselves. And the fee and fine are to be divided between the boyar and his secretary: to the boyar two altyns, to his secretary eight dengi. And if a criminal has no such property with which to pay the sum at issue, the boyar shall [nevertheless] not give him up to the plaintiff to make good plaintiff's loss, but shall order the Moscow Grand Prince's deputy and steward to have him executed.

Article 9. And the murderer of his master, or a conspirator, temple robber or kidnapper, or podymshchik or arsonist, such a notorious criminal shall not be allowed to live, but shall be put to death.

Concerning Thieves

Article 10. And if a thief be caught stealing in any way for the first time, except [in the case of] temple robbery and kidnapping [or theft accompanied by murder?] and there has been no previous accusation of other theft made against him, then he shall be punished on the market place, flogged with the knout and made to pay plaintiff's damages, and the judge shall sell him? /impose a fine upon him. And if the thief has no property with which to pay the sum at issue, then, after flogging him with the knout, they shall give him over to the plaintiff in slavery to make good plaintiff's loss, and the judge shall take nothing from him.

Article 11. And if a thief be caught a second time stealing, then he shall be executed and the sum at issue paid from his property, the remainder of his property going to the judge. And if he has no property sufficient for the satisfaction of the plaintiff's loss, he shall [nevertheless] not be given up to the plaintiff [in slavery] to cover his damages, but shall be put to death.

Article 12. And if a person be accused as a thief by five or six reputable petty nobles, after kissing the Grand Prince's cross, or by five reputable common peasant cross-kissers (wardens?), and if there be no evidence against him in a previous case that he had stolen from anyone or had paid damages for theft to anyone, then plaintiff's loss shall be taken from him without court proceedings.

Part 1
Logged
Reply #86
« on: June 07, 2006, 10:18:35 PM »
David_Pritchard
Guest

[size=14]The Sudebnik 1497

Ivan III Vaselievich, Grand Prince of Moscow
[/size]

Part 2

Concerning Stolen Goods

Article 13. If defendant be brought with stolen goods (polichnoe) for the first time, and five or six men swear, after kissing the Grand Prince's cross, that the defendant is a known thief and has stolen more than once before, then he shall be executed and the sum at issue/plaintiff's loss paid from his property.

Concerning Testimony of Thieves

Article 14. And whomever a thief shall accuse, he shall be interrogated; if the accused has in the past been charged with theft, and supporting evidence given, he shall be tortured on accusation of theft; if there has been no previous charge, supported by evidence, of any sort against him, then the thief's accusations shall not be given [full] credence and he (the accused) shall be let out on bail pending further investigation.

Concerning the Written Court Decision (pravaja gramota)

Article 15. For affixing a seal on a court decision the fee shall be nine dengi per ruble, and the secretary, for signing it, shall receive one altyn per ruble, and the scribe who writes up the decision shall receive three dengi per ruble.

Concerning the Record of Trial (dokladnyj spisok)

Article 16. And the boyar shall affix his seal to the trial record, and the secretary shall sign it. And for [each] record the boyar shall take one altyn per ruble; the secretary, for signing it, four dengi per ruble; and the scribe, who writes up the record, two dengi per ruble.

Concerning Court Decisions on Slaves

Article 17. And for a written court decision and for a manumission (otpustnye) of a male or female slave the boyar shall receive, for affixing his seal, nine dengi a head; the secretary, for signing, one altyn a head, and the scribe, who writes up the decision or manumission, three dengi a head.

Concerning the Slave Manumission

Article 18. And if anyone presents a manumission without reporting to the boyar and without the secretary's signature, or, in towns, without reporting to the vicegerent who is a boyar holding full jurisdictional grant, then such manumission is not valid, except when the master (gosudar') with his own hand shall write it, and then said manumission is valid.

Concerning Unjust Court Procedure

Article 19. And whomever a boyar without [proper] trial declares in the wrong, and, with the secretary, issues a written court decision against him, then that decision shall be invalid, and that which was taken [shall be] returned. But the boyar and secretary shall pay no fine, and the parties shall commence proceedings anew.

Concerning the Decree to Vicegerents

Article 20. And city vicegerents and rural vicegerents who hold limited jurisdictional grants shall not release a male or female slave without formal report [to higher authorities], nor issue documents returning runaway slaves to their masters. Likewise they shall not issue to a male or female slave a court decision against the master without reference up, nor issue a manumission to a male or female slave.

Concerning the Grand Prince

Article 21. And for the administration of justice by the Grand Prince and his children the same shall be taken from the guilty party as for the boyar court, [to wit,] two altyns per ruble, to whomever the Grand Prince shall order.

Concerning the Written Court Decision

Article 22. For a written court decision the seal-keeper of the Grand Prince and of the Grand Prince's children shall receive nine dengi per ruble for [affixing his] seal; the secretary shall receive an altyn per ruble for signing; the scribe, who writes up the decision, three dengi per ruble.

Article 23. And from a male or female slave the seal-keeper shall take, for a written court decision, nine dengi a head; the secretary shall take, for signing, an altyn a head; the scribe, who writes up the decision, three dengi a head.

Concerning the Record of Trial

Article 24. And the record of trial for reporting up to the Grand Prince and to his children shall be stamped by the seal-keeper of the Grand Prince and by the seal-keeper of his children. For affixing the seal upon such record he shall take nine dengi per ruble; the secretary, for signing, shall take an altyn per ruble; and the scribe, who writes it up, shall receive two dengi per ruble.

Concerning Record(s) of Default Judgments

Article 25. And for [recording] a default judgment the seal-keeper shall receive an altyn per ruble; the secretary, for signing it, also an altyn per ruble; and the scribe shall take two dengi per ruble.

Concerning Court Summons

Article 26. And for summonses the secretary shall take, for his signature, two dengi apiece. And for postponements the secretary shall take, for his signature, three dengi per ruble. And the scribes shall take two dengi per ruble for writing it up. And if the plaintiff [or] defendant both desire a postponement, each shall pay one half the cost of signing and writing it up, plus a riding-distance fee, (xozhenoe), to the bailiff. And if a plaintiff or defendant does not answer a summons, and sends for a postponement, he alone shall bear the costs of both the summons and the postponement, and the service fee. And the ministers shall keep the summonses in their possession.

Part 2
Logged
Reply #87
« on: June 07, 2006, 10:22:25 PM »
David_Pritchard
Guest

[size=14]The Sudebnik 1497

Ivan III Vaselievich, Grand Prince of Moscow
[/size]

Part 3

Concerning Default Judgments

Article 27. And when time comes to issue default judgments, the ministers shall themselves gather together the summonses, and, having themselves sorted them out, they shall order the scribes to issue default judgments and write out postponements. And the scribes [on their own initiative] shall issue no summons. And the default judgments shall be issued the eighth day [after the date set in the summons and the failure of a party to appear in court].

Concerning Bailiff Warrants

Article 28. And for a bailiff's warrant the seal-keeper is to be paid from [and according to] the bailiff's riding-distance fee. When, according to the warrant, the bailiff is paid one ruble, the secretary takes an altyn from the bailiff's ruble for signing, and the seal-keeper also takes an altyn from it for affixing the seal. If the riding-distance fee to any city is more than a ruble, or less, the secretary and the seal-keeper shall take [fees] in the same proportion. And if the sum in dispute is less than the riding-distance fee, the secretary shall not sign such warrant; and without bailiffs the ministers shall likewise not sign warrants. And no matter how many parties there are to a suit (lit., how many portions [into which the total fee is divided] there are in the warrant), the bailiff shall have a single riding-distance fee to that city for which the warrant is drawn.

Article 29. And the walking-distance fee for the bailiff shall be ten dengi in Moscow and double this sum for an investigation; they shall take no additional fee for [placing parties on] bond. And the bailiff shall have a riding-distance fee for any other city [besides Moscow], and double this sum for an investigation.

Decree on Riding-distance Fees

Article 30. And the riding-distance fee from Moscow to Kolomna is one half-ruble; to Kashira one half-ruble; to Khotun' ten altyns; to Serpuxov one half-ruble; to Tarusa twenty altyns; to Aleksin twenty-five altyns; to Kaluga one ruble; to Jaroslavec one half-ruble; to Vereja one half-ruble; to Borovsk a half-ruble; to Vyshegorod a half-ruble; to Kremensk twenty altyns; to Mozaisk one half-ruble, and to Medyn' twenty-five altyns; to Vjazma one and one-half rubles; to Zvenigorod one-fifth of a ruble (two grivny); to Vorotynsk forty altyns; to Odoev forty altyns; to Kozel'sk one ruble and a quarter-ruble; to Belev the same; to Mezeck forty altyns; to Obolensk one half-ruble; to Dmitrov ten altyns; to Radonezh one quarter-ruble; to Perejaslavl' twenty altyns; to Rostov one ruble; to Jaroslavl' one ruble and one quarter-ruble; to Vologda two and one-half rubles; to Beloozero two and one-half rubles; to Ustjug five rubles; to Vychegda seven rubles; to Dvina and to Kholmogory eight Moscow rubles; to Vladimir one ruble and one quarter-ruble; to Kostroma one and one-half rubles; to Jurev one ruble; to Suzdal' one ruble and one quarter-ruble; to Galich two and one-half rubles; to Murom one and one-half rubles; to the patrimonial estate of the Starodub princes, one and one-half rubles; to Meshchera two rubles; to Nizhnij-Novgorod two and one-half rubles; to Uglich one ruble; to Bezhickij Verx one and one-half rubles; to Romanov one ruble and one quarter-ruble; to Klin one half-ruble; to Kashin one ruble; to Tver' one ruble; to Zubcev and Opki one ruble; to Khlepnja forty altyns; to Rzheva one ruble and one quarter-ruble; to Velikij Novgorod two and one-half Moscow rubles.

Article 31. And the bailiffs themselves shall riding-distance with warrants and put them [defendants] on bond, or shall send their relatives or servants with warrants. No men hired especially for the job shall be sent by them with warrants. And riding with warrants, they are not to take anything for placing a defendant on bond.

Decree concerning bailiffs

And in whatever city a bailiff shall reside, he shall not ride in that city with warrants nor send [anyone else] with warrants to his home city in any matter.

Article 32. And whosoever shall send a bailiff after someone in a matter, whatever loss shall occur to him in this matter through deliberate delay, or whatever he shall spend as a result of a summons and a written court decision and a default judgment, the loser shall pay all [such costs) to the one adjudged right.

Article 33. And bailiffs shall not ask for or take bribes for the boyar or major-domo or for the secretary, nor shall they themselves take any bribes for putting on bond.

Article 34. And to whomever they shall deliver up a thief and order him interrogated, he (the bailiff) shall interrogate the thief zealously. And whomever a thief shall [in turn] accuse, he (the bailiff) shall tell the Grand Prince or judge who has handed the thief over to him, and shall order the thief not to accuse any person falsely. And if they send a bailiff out after thieves he shall apprehend them in lawful fashion, and he shall not favor anyone. And having taken custody of the thief he shall not release him nor shall he accept bribes, and he shall not apprehend other people.

Article 35. And whenever a bailiff has thieves in his charge, he shall not release them on bond without report, nor is he to sell the thieves.

Part 3
Logged
Reply #88
« on: June 07, 2006, 10:26:18 PM »
David_Pritchard
Guest

[size=14]The Sudebnik 1497

Ivan III Vaselievich, Grand Prince of Moscow
[/size]

Part 4

Article 36. And if a thief be released on bond in any case whatsoever, they (the bailiffs) shall not put off the plaintiffs and defendants, but shall bring them before the judges. They shall draw up postponements and issue default decrees to peasants (Christians?) without delay and they shall take nothing from peasants (Christians?) for default judgments. And if a postponement be issued for both the parties together, he (the bailiff) shall take one walking-distance fee from both parties and besides this he shall take nothing. And in respect to his riding-distance fee, he is to be given guarantee of payment prior to the enquiry [pertaining to theft] and he is to take his riding-distance fee from the party adjudged guilty. And if a plaintiff or defendant does not appear in response [to a summons] but sends [someone else] in his place for a postponement, the bailiffs shall take their fees from him alone who comes in his place to have the case postponed.

Decree to City Viceregents about Justice

Article 37. And into whatever city or canton there shall come a bailiff or his agent with warrant, he shall show the warrant to the local city vicegerent or rural vicegerent or their deputies. And if both litigants are of that city or canton, then he shall place them both before the city vicegerent or rural vicegerent or their deputies.

Article 38. And those boyars and petty boyars whom are given grants with full jurisdiction shall administer justice, and at their court there must be [present]: a steward (dvorskij), an elder (starosta) and outstanding citizens (lushchie ljudi). And without a steward, elder and outstanding citizens the city and rural vicegerents shall not hold court; and they are to take no bribes for administering justice, nor shall their deputies or agents take bribes for administering justice, either for their lord or for their deputy, and the tax-collectors shall also not ask for bribes in connection with judicial administration. And he (the vicegerent) is to receive [a fee] for the trial if the plaintiff wins; and he (the vicegerent) and his deputy are to receive from the loser a protiven' fee in accordance with the charters, and where there is no charter he shall have them in proportion to the sum at issue. And if plaintiff does not win his case, but is [instead] found guilty, he (the vicegerent) shall collect two altyns per ruble from the plaintiff, and his deputy shall have eight dengi per ruble. And if the case involves more than one ruble, or less than one ruble, then the fee shall be collected from the plaintiff in the same proportion. And the criminal-investigator (dovodchik) shall take his walking-distance fee and riding-distance fee and investigation expenses according to the charter. And if the case proceeds to the point of a judicial duel and the parties become reconciled [prior to the duel], he (the judge) shall have his fees according to the charter. And if they fight it out on the field, [the vicegerent] shall have his vina fee and protiven' fee according to the charter. And where there is no charter, and they become reconciled, he (the vicegerent) and his deputy shall be given a protiven'-fee of half the sum sought by the plaintiff. And if the parties fight it out on the [dueling] field in a case involving a loan or assault and battery, he shall have a fee equal to the sum sought by plaintiff. And if they fight it out on the [dueling] field in a case of arson, murder, brigandage or theft, then he shall exact the sum at issue from the defeated party, and the defeated party himself shall be subject to punishment and fine at the hands of the vicegerent and his deputy.

Decree Concerning Thieves

Article 39. And if evidence be brought against a person of theft or brigandage or murder or defamation (false accusation), or any other such evil deed, and he is a known criminal, then he (the vicegerent or judge) shall order him put to death, and shall exact the sum at issue from his estate, and what is left over of his property the vicegerent and his deputy shall take for themselves. And if the known criminal has no property with which to pay the sum at issue, then [nevertheless] he (the vicegerent) shall not hand him over to plaintiff to make up plaintiff's loss, [but] shall order him put to death.

Concerning Written Court Decisions

Article 40. And for a written court decision the boyar or petty boyar who holds a full-jurisdictional grant shall receive, together with his deputy, two and one-half altyns per ruble for affixing the seal; the secretary, who writes the court decision, shall take three dengi per ruble for writing. And if the deputy issues a written court decision he shall receive, for affixing a seal to it, two and one-half altyns per ruble for his lord and himself, and his secretary shall be paid three dengi per ruble for each copy]. And the boyar and petty boyar with a full-jurisdictional grant shall receive for a written court decision or manumission for a male or female slave, two and one-half altyns a head, from the male or female slave, for affixing the seal. And his secretary shall have three dengi a head for writing it up.

Article 41. And his deputy in local administration (na kormlenie) shall not issue a slave a written court decision without reporting to his master, nor shall he issue a manumission.

Part 4
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 05:00:00 PM by David_Pritchard » Logged
Reply #89
« on: June 07, 2006, 10:32:01 PM »
David_Pritchard
Guest

[size=14]The Sudebnik 1497

Ivan III Vaselievich, Grand Prince of Moscow
[/size]

Part 5

Concerning the Slave's Manumission

Article 42. And if anyone presents a manumission without report to the boyar and without the secretary's signature, or from the cities without report to the vicegerent who has the status of a petty boyar with full-jurisdictional grant, then such manumission shall be invalid unless the (slave's) master shall have written it with his own hand, [in which case] the manumission is valid.

Article 43. City and rural vicegerents who hold limited-jurisdictional grants, and deputies of the Grand Prince and of boyars who hold full-jurisdictional grants, shall not release a male or female slave without report [to the Grand Prince or higher boyar] and shall not issue a manumission; and they are not to release a thief or murderer, nor sell, punish or release any other felon without report [to the higher authorities].

Concerning Bailiffs

Article 44. And a vicegerent's bailiffs shall, according to the charter, receive walking-distance fees and riding-distance fees. And where no charter exists, such bailiff shall take walking-distance fees of four dengi, and one denga per verst riding-distance fees [outside the city], and twice this sum for investigative duties in the city and rural canton.

Article 45. And if one sends a bailiff after a city vicegerent, a rural vicegerent, or a boyar, or petty boyar, or their deputies, or the deputies of the Grand Prince, then the city vicegerent and the rural vicegerent and their deputies and the Grand Prince's deputies and criminal-investigators shall answer [the warrant or summons] and appear [at the designated time]; and if [the summoned person] does not himself appear at the designated time he shall send [someone to appear] in his place at the designated time.

Concerning Tradespeople

Article 46. And if a person buys something new, except a horse, not knowing the vendor, and if [the transaction] be known to two or three good men (dobrye ljudi, who represent the community in court), and if [subsequently those objects] are seized from him [as stolen goods], those good men shall testify in accordance with the law that defendant bought the goods at the market in their presence, then the person in whose possession [those objects] were seized is without fault and need not kiss [the cross].

Article 47. And if a person purchases [something] on foreign soil and those objects are seized [as stolen goods], and if he has as witness two or three good men who shall testify according to law that he purchased the goods in their presence at a market, then the person in whose possession [those objects] were seized is without fault and need not kiss [the cross]; and if he has no witnesses he must be made to give oath.

Concerning Witnesses' Testimony

Article 48. And when a witness shall give testimony in a case of assault or robbery or loans, then the trial procedure shall be left to the choice of the defendant; if he wishes, he may go to the [dueling] field with the witness, or, having stood on the field, he may place that for which he is being sued at the cross; [in the latter case] the plaintiff shall take what he claims as his, without kissing the cross, and the defendant shall pay the duel fees but not the loser fees.

And if he does not go out on the [dueling] field but places [the sum or property demanded by plaintiff] at the cross, he shall pay the judges a fee according to the list, but shall pay no duel fees.

Article 49. And if the defendant be too old [himself to fight] against a witness, or too small, or a cripple, or a priest or a monk or a nun, or a woman, then [he or she] shall be allowed to hire a fighter against the witness, but the witness may not hire such a fighter. And whatever losses accrue to the party who wins the case, or to his witness, such losses [shall be charged] against the loser.

Article 50. And if a witness fails to appear before the judge, whether or not he has any testimony to give, then from such witness shall the sum at issue and all dues be taken. And concerning time of appearance, this witness shall deal with the sergeant-at-arms.

Article 51. And if a witness refuses to testify before the judge in [support of] the plaintiff's allegations, then the plaintiff is at fault.

Article 52. And if a woman, or small child, or an old person, or a sick person, or cripple, or priest, or monk, or nun shall bring suit against anyone or if any of these shall serve as a witness for anyone, then he is allowed to hire a substitute [for dueling]. And the litigants or witness must kiss [the cross] but the hired fighters must fight. Against these hired fighters the plaintiff or defendant [may hire] fighters [of his own, or], if he so desires, he may himself fight in the [dueling] field.

Article 53. If any person shall have another seized by a bailiff in connection with a fight or verbal insult, or a loan, and they shall not desire to go to court, and if, reporting to the judge, they become reconciled, then the judge shall take no fees from them except the [bailiff's] riding-distance or walking-distance fees.

Article 54. And if a hired worker does not serve out his period and goes away, he shall be deprived of his wages.

Part 5
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS! Website by Pallasart - Austin Web Design