The End of Medieval Particularism: Polish Cities and the Diet, 1764-89

Canadian Slavonic Papers

The End of Medieval Particularism: Polish Cities and the Diet, 1764-89Author(s): DANIEL STONESource: Canadian Slavonic Papers / Revue Canadienne des Slavistes, Vol. 20, No. 2 (June 1978),pp. 194-207Published by: Canadian Association of SlavistsStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40867300 .

Accessed: 16/06/2014 01:30

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Canadian Association of Slavists and Canadian Slavonic Papers are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize,preserve and extend access to Canadian Slavonic Papers / Revue Canadienne des Slavistes.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 62.122.77.48 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 01:30:36 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=canassocslav

http://www.jstor.org/stable/40867300?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


DANIEL STONE

The End of Medieval Particularism: Polish Cities and the Diet, 1 764-89

In the early modern period, Polish cities followed the familiar European pattern of organization. Incorporated by act of the diet or by royal charter, they enjoyed self-government through city councils, courts and guilds.1 As in other parts of Europe, kings and diets granted special legal rights, privileges and trade monopolies which the cities guarded greedily. Cities generally flourished until around the middle of the seventeenth century when a series of destructive wars left many in ruins. Recovery was hindered by nobles who, anxious to gain all possible profit from the grain trade with western Europe, used their parliamentary power to grant themselves tariff exemptions and other benefits which disadvantaged burgher commerce. By the mid-eighteenth century, Polish cities were in a sad state. Warsaw, the largest city, num- bered only 24,000 inhabitants in 1764 while Cracow, the old capital, counted only 10,000 residents. Many incorporated cities declined to the size of villages.

The English traveller, William Coxe, reported that Cracow "looks like a great capital in ruins." He found Warsaw to have a "melancholy appearance, exhibiting that strong contrast of wealth and poverty, lux- ury and distress, which pervades every part of this unhappy country," while the Lithuanian capital, Grodno, was "a town in decline, containing a mixture of wretched hovels, falling houses, and ruined palaces, with magnificent gateways, remains of its ancient splendour."2

Burghers blamed unfair trade competition for the plight of their cities. Much of this competition came from the jurydyki (jurisdictions), i.e., noble or clerical properties not subject to municipal control and taxation. Their origin lay in noble and clerical immunity from prosecu- tion by burghers for both civil and criminal offenses. While some jurydyki existed within the city walls, the most important ones lay just outside the gates where magnates built palaces for themselves and

1. This article discusses "royal cities" but not "private cities'* founded by nobles and clerics on their estates. The term "city," itself, has a similar ambiguity in Polish and English. Sometimes it refers to a legally incorporated institution while at others it de- notes a metropolitan area.

2. W. Coxe, Travels into Poland (New York, 1971 reprint edition), pp. 125, 150, 191.



Polish Cities | 195

their numerous retainers. Other nobles came too, stimulating the growth of service trades. In mid-century about 50 per cent of the population of "greater" Warsaw and "greater" Cracow lived outside the incorporated cities. As Warsaw's population increased to some 100,000 before the final partitions, that percentage grew.3

Some jurydyki were created as business enterprises servicing the new residential areas as well as competing with the incorporated city. After a five-minute walk, a customer from the central city of Warsaw could shop in Marywil (Marie- Ville), founded as a market and bazaar in the late seventeenth century. The Varsovian could also reach the Pafac Pociejowski on Senatorska Street in the same time, where several hundred Jewish merchants and artisans would see to his needs. Bielino, established by Marshal Fryderyk Bieliriski, lay only a few minutes more to the south near Grzybów. Other jurydyki provided market squares, shops, and booths. Street peddling took place everywhere.

The burghers from the incorporated cities also faced competition from the incorporated suburbs (fauxbourgs) which had sprung up in the late middle ages and had received royal or parliamentary sanction somewhat later. New Warsaw lay at Old Warsaw's northern gate while Kazimierz, Kleparz and Stradom surrounded Cracow. The larger cities had grown accustomed to this competition over the centuries and had little to fear from it in the eighteenth century. Nevertheless, they culti- vated hopes of dominating the suburbs or of annexing them.

Burghers considered trade competition from the jurydyki unfair because they maintained an essentially medieval view of society according to which the bourgeoisie alone enjoyed the right to trade or manu- facture goods, even if limited exception might have to be made for Jews, Armenians, and other groups enjoying royal or parliamentary privileges. The burghers felt strongly that nobles and clerics had their allotted spheres of activity and should not compete directly or through their agents with the merchants and artisans of the incorporated cities. By the late eighteenth century, the jurydyki were doing so well that the burghers feared the privileged orders would drive them out of business entirely.4 In many small incorporated towns, the burghers had already lost their businesses and had become little more than peasants.5

City governments saw the solution to their problems in the strict execution of medieval or early modern privileges, granted to them by kings and diets. Exclusion of the first two estates from trade and in-

3. T. Korzon, Wewnetrzne Dzieje Polski za Stanistawa Augusta, 6 vols. (Warsaw, 1897-98), I, 274; S. Szymkiewicz, Warszawa na Przefomie XVIII i XIX w. (Warsaw, 1959), p. 130.

4. See K. Zienkowska, Stawetni i Urodzeni (Warsaw, 1976), pp. 22-31. 5. Historia Polski, 4 vols. (Warsaw, 1958-69), II, part 1, 167.



196 I Revue Canadienne des Slavistes

dustry would allow the cities to survive as corporate entities. Mainte- nance or extension of trade monopolies would bring prosperity to the burghers and return the cities to their former glory. Tax relief would help the cities carry on until the economic climate improved. As in medieval times, the burghers enjoyed their economic and political free- doms because of citizenship in some particular city. Despite the common problems affecting all cities, no general burgher solidarity existed. Each city based its ideas on its own privileges and argued for its own interests.

In order to maintain or improve its position, each city kept in constant touch with the national government. Most city appeals went to the chancellors whose voluminous correspondence testifies to their good will, if not to their accomplishments, on behalf of the cities. The creation of collégial organs of government in the late eighteenth century gave the cities new places to turn. The Treasury Commissions and the Per- manent Council were similarly besieged by appeals for help on tax and trade problems. Some cities, notably Cracow, hired nobles to represent them in Warsaw on a permanent basis.6

The diet provided yet another and perhaps the best approach to the national government. Prospects for assistance seemed particularly good in 1764 since the Czartoryski Party, which brought King Stanislaw August Poniatowski to the throne, came to power with the intention of reviving Poland from its decline. In the throne speech to the Corona- tion Diet of 1764, the Primate of the Polish Church observed that cities resembled villages in that "every street is a field and every mar- ketplace a desert." He called for action by the reformed administrative and legislative organs of government in order to revive the cities.7

Since the cities had lost the right in the sixteenth century to send deputies to the diet, they had to rely on lobbying to represent their case. Eighteenth-century lobbying closely approximated twentieth-century practices. Cities developed lists of requests, which were often printed for distribution, and they sent delegates to the cities in which the diets met. There the municipal representatives met with deputies, senators, ministers, and the king, whom they tried to win over. Similar delegations attended the provincial dietines whose deputies were chosen by the local nobility. The cities do not appear to have attempted to influence the choice of deputies but aimed instead at the inclusion

6. See, for example, Archiwum Gtówne Akt Dawnych (Warsaw) [hereafter cited as AGAD], ksiegi kanclerskie 69, "Listy do Kanclerzów od Miast"; and Biblioteka Polskiej Akademii Nauk w Krakowie (hereafter cited as BPANKR), no. 413, "Listy Dygnitarzy do Rady Miasta Krakowa."

7. Dyaryusz Seymu Convocations Siedmio- Niedzielnego Warszawskiego y Mani- fest u w Sobie Zawieraiçcy przez Sessye Zebrany r. 1764 (Warsaw, 1764), p. F.



Polish Cities I 197

of measures helpful to their interests in the deputies' instructions. Dis- creet gift-giving undoubtedly helped. In 1764, for example, Cracow supplied the local dietine with a barrel of wine; other expenses incurred at the diet included the "winning over" of various opponents on whom the city "inexpensively and discreetly spent 36 ducats."8

In 1764, Cracow pressed for adoption of a series of measures de- signed to reduce competition from non-burgher business groups and to stimulate the city's economy generally. Its requests took no note of similar problems faced by other cities. It sent representatives to the local dietine at Proszowice where the nobility promised support. Cracow then sent delegates to the election and convocation diets in Warsaw where they were to seek relief from existing taxes, press for confirmation of old privileges, and gain execution of restrictions on Jewish trade. The establishment of a staple right was demanded since Cracow merchants would receive the benefit of an intermediary position. Cra- cow argued for the establishment of the promised new Royal Cadet School in Cracow both for the honour and for the economic benefit it would bring. It also asked that its craftsmen be hired to work in the new Polish mint which was obviously destined for Warsaw. The city in addition sought laws redirecting trade to Cracow from the suburban city of Kazimierz and reducing the army garrison stationed in Cracow, which the city had to quarter and feed at its own expense. These instructions which the delegation sought to execute were duly printed and distributed to the king, senators and deputies.9

This process was repeated in 1766 when the diet next met. Cracow gained the inclusion of several points favourable to itself in the instructions given noble deputies to the diet by the local province, notably the direction to work for restriction of the economic activities of Jews and Greeks as well as the establishment of a staple over wine and other goods.10 The city then sent delegates to Warsaw armed with lengthy instructions following the 1764 pattern. The city seemed particularly

8. Wojewodzkie Archiwum Panstwowe w Krakowie (hereafter cited as WAPKR) 2972, Rachunki posto w i delegacy! na seymy, seymiki, komisye, etc., 1642-1794.

9. WAPKR 1376, Instruckcye 7 May 1764, 17 August 1764, November 1764. Desi- deria M ias ta Stotecznego Krakowa do Nayiainieyszey Rzeczypospolitey ζ Nayglebszq Weneracyq na Seym Coronationis wniesione (n.p., n.d.); Desideria Miasta Stotecznego Krakowa Jamie Oswieconym Panom y Nayosobliwszym Protektorom Cum Profundíssima Veneratione Podane (n.p., n.d.); Desideria Miasta Stotecznego Krakowa Jasnie Oswi- econym Jamie Wielmo'znym Panom Panom y Nayosobliwszym Miasta tego Prote- ktorom ζ Nayglebszq Submissyq przez Delegowanych na Seym Ninieyszy Podane (n.p., n.d.).

10. Zbiór Popielów [in AGAD] 121: 1766 (hereafter cited as ZP).



198 I Canadian Slavonic Papers

anxious to restrict the business activities of the clergy. It also mentioned competition from nobles, Jews, and merchants of nearby suburbs.11

Cracow was at first prepared to send another group of delegates to the extraordinary diet of 1767 with a virtually identical set of instructions.12 Indeed, letters arrived from the leaders of the Confederation of Radom, which had taken control of the country, insisting that the city send its representatives to Warsaw. But since the Confederation was well-known for its opposition to the reforms of the Czartoryski-domi- nated diets of 1764 and 1766 and could offer little to the cities, Cracow begged off on the grounds of poverty.13 In retrospect, its call could only have been a manoeuvre to gain legitimacy for itself.14

Despite the disappearance of the Confederation and the improved chances for helpful legislation, no representative from Cracow attended the 1768 diet, for by now the poverty was real. Early in 1768, after representatives attended the dietine, Cracow forwarded a draft bill to Warsaw which called for a 25-year tax relief and the establishment of a staple right in which Christian merchants would receive a 25 per cent reduction. The Great Crown Chancellor, Bishop Adam Mlodziejowski, assured Cracow that the presence of city delegates was not necessary so Cracow asked Warsaw's mayor, Jan Dolfus, to look after its interests. He agreed, but the issue never came up at the diet.15 This instance of urban solidarity faded with the conclusion of the diet. Cracow's requests remained particularistic in nature and no further cooperation occurred between the cities for more than two decades.

The War of the Bar Confederation and the first partition caused Cracow's economic situation to deteriorate still further. The city endured occupation by the Confederates, a destructive siege, and then occupation by Russian troops. The first partition left Cracow on the Austrian frontier, cut off from its normal Galician markets, and vulnerable to smuggling from Podgórze on the Austrian side of the Vistula.

Cracow renewed her appeals to the diet in 1775 with even greater urgency.16 A delegation went to Warsaw with an appeal which was

11. WAPKR 1376: 1766. These instructions do not appear to have been printed for distribution in Warsaw.

12. WAPKR 1376: 1767. 13. WAPKR 1311, pp. 186-88: Wessel to Cracow, 7 June 1767; Wielopolski to

Cracow, 7 June 1767, Cracow to Wessel, 12 June 1767. 14. See H.H. Kaplan, The First Partition of Poland (New York, 1962), pp. 74-75. 15. WAPKR 1311, pp. 215-19: Mtodziejowski to Cracow, 10 February 1768; Cracow

to Dolfus, 20 February 1768. Also WAPKR 1311, p. 249: Desiderium Miasta Krakowa Przeswietnemu Woiewództwu Krakowskiemu na Seymik Electionis w Proszowicach Podane, 26 September 1768; Excerpt ζ Instruckcyi Przeswietnego Woiewództwa Kra- kowskiego, 26 September 1768.

16. See WAPKR 1376, 20 March 1771, and ZP 123, f. 39-40, for appeals drawn up but not presented while the diet was occupied with other matters in 1771 and 1773.



Polish Cities I 199

printed and distributed. It eloquently described the crumbling walls of the city and the ill effects of the partition. It asked concretely for staple rights over the importation of Hungarian wine (a great favourite of Polish nobles) and the exclusive use of Polish carters for transporting the wine beyond Cracow. A claim for the substantial sum of 445,413 ztotys for goods requisitioned by King August II during the Great Northern War was revived after more than half a century.17 In 1776, after gaining support from the local dietine, Cracow again sent delegates to the diet requesting confirmation of old privileges and restrictions on clerical, noble and Jewish enterprises. In order to stimulate its own economy, Cracow requested the establishment of a salt staple and a general staple. Interestingly, the city called for the incorporation of two adjoining suburbs, Kleparz and Kazimierz.18 Cracow also looked for greater legal authority over nobles and clerics residing within its borders. Anachronistically, the city requested that the king resume his residence in the old capital.19

In 1778, Cracow again sent representatives to the local dietine and to the diet in Warsaw. Their instructions were exactly the same as in 1776. Delegates attended the dietines and diets of 1780 and 1782 as well.20 A draft bill along the lines of the instructions was brought to Warsaw but did not come before the diet.21 In 1784, Cracow delegates were bound by their city to support legislation drawn up by the Per- manent Council and included in the king's "propositions from the throne" for assistance to municipalities in the staffing of local archives and prisons. However, since the king did not make special provision for Cracow, the delegates were instructed to work for a new draft bill. The city's own bill requested a duty-free port in Cracow, incorporation of the suburbs, exception of Cracow from provisions of the national tobacco monopoly, exclusion of clerics from trade, establishment of a

17. WAPKR 1376: 1775; Pro'zba Stotecznego M ias ta Krakowa do Nayiasnieyszego Pana y Przeswietnych Rzeczypospolitey Stanôw (η. p., n.d.); Nayiasnieyszy Krôlu Partie Nasz Mifosciwy Przeswietne Skonfederowane Rzplitey Stany (n.p., n.d.); Pretensya Miasta Krakowa w Summie Z£P. 445, 413 (n.p., 1775).

18. To protect its own existence, Kazimierz drew up a counter list of its privileges and laws. See, Summaryusz Pryncypalnych Praw ν Przywileiòw Miastu Kazimierzowi Stuzacych 1330-1776 (n.p., n.d.).

19. WAPKR 1376: 1776. 20. WAPKR 2972, 24 August 1778; WAPKR 1376, 5 October 1778, Instrukcya...

Józefowi Walkanowskiemu y Janowi Czefczowskiemu Radnym [1776], Instruckya... Antoniemu Maryaniemu...tudziez Filipowi Lichockiemu...[1778]; BPANKR 417, p. 79; WAPKR 1317, p. 99, 21 August 1780, Memoryaf na Seymikach Proszowskich; WAPKR 1318, p. 138, Memoryaf w Proszowicach na Seymikach w Roku 1782 dn. 18 Sierpnia Podany; ZP 126, województwo krakowskie; WAPKR 1376, 30 September 1782, Relacye Podrózy na Seym Warszawski ad R. 1782.

21. Nayiasnieyszy Królu Panie Nasz Mifosciwy (n.p., n.d.); Proiekt Miasta Krakowa ζ Zesztego Seymu w Deliberacyi Bedqcy (n.p., n.d.).




regional fair (kontrakty Iwowskie) in Cracow, and the founding of manu- factures in the city at state expense.22 In 1786 and 1788, Cracow again printed its usual list of requests and sent delegates to the diet.23

The diet of 1788, meeting as a confederation, turned out to be far more fruitful than anyone could have expected. When Warsaw invited all royal cities to join in a common petition for reforms, Cracow stood on its dignity as Poland's official capital and refused to join. It replied that "the state and needs of our city, to which past kings granted magnificient laws,. . .differ from the state and interests of other cities."24 Cracow, in sum, steadfastly refused to abandon particularism.

Poland's de facto capital, Warsaw, also lobbied the diet actively. Like Cracow, Warsaw enjoyed advantages over most cities. All Polish diets during this period, except the 1784 Grodno diet, were held in Warsaw. The importance of the city was obvious to the deputies, and especially to the king, who resided there permanently. The city found it easy to lobby since its representatives were on the spot and, in addition, the city was relatively prosperous so it had the means to state its case. Its well-being, however, was strongly threatened by nearby jurydyki which ringed the incorporated city.

In 1763, at the time of the death of King August III, the city of Warsaw elected a committee to prepare an appeal to the diet which it hoped would help regain "the liberty of its laws and freedom." Basing itself on old laws and privileges, the city requested the extension of its powers over the jurydyki, trade monopolies for Catholic merchants, and exclusion of Jews. Old Warsaw also wished to maintain control over the courts of New Warsaw, a northern suburb which had become legally independent in the fifteenth century. Other requests by Old Warsaw included equal prerogatives with Cracow, the registration of land transactions by nobles within the city limits in the municipal courts, tax donations from the Catholic Church for repairing the city walls, parliamentary support in regaining city estates which had been lost to the church or the nobility, confirmation of guild privileges, and, finally, provision that appeals against the verdicts of municipal courts could be heard only by the royal assessorial court and not by the court of the starosta (royal governor) or other noble courts such as the sgdy

22. WAPKR 1376, lnstruckcya...Maciejowi Baierowi i Filipowi Lichockiemu...na Seym Walny do Grodna Delegowanym Dnia 19 Wrzesnia R. 1784 Dana; WAPKR 1319, p. 130, Cracow to Oraczewski, 6 July 1784; BPANKR 417, p. 117, Projekt na Seym Przyszfy "Miasto Krakowa."

23. Opatrzenie Stotecznego Miasta Naszego Krakowa (n.p., n.d.); ZP 59, f. 60; WAPKR 1376, 25 September 1786, Instruckcya...Maciejowi Bajerowi...i Filipowi Lichockiemu...na Seym Walny Warszawski; WAPKR 1321, p. 71.

24. Materiaty do Dziejów Sejnm Czteroletniego, 6 vols. (Wroclaw, 1955-69), II, 221-22 (hereafter cited as M DSC).



Polish Cities | 201

grodzkie and sady ziemskie.25 In sum, Warsaw requested measures which would eliminate economic competition from clerics, nobles, Jews and Protestants and would bolster the legal authority of city courts. Like Cracow, Warsaw was following a particularist path.

In 1766, the government of Old Warsaw again prepared its requests. While there is no record of them, they doubtless were the same as in 1764.26

In 1767, an ambiguous situation arose which to some historians seemed to foreshadow a change in Warsaw's attitude.27 When the Confederation of Radom asked all Polish cities to attend the diet, the Warsaw city government held a special session at which it chose a seven-man committee. This committee was to meet in secret so as to draw up a bill for submission to the diet which it was hoped would improve the condition of all Polish and Lithuanian cities.28 Consulta- tion with other cities may have played a part in Warsaw's plans since a letter was sent to Lwów asking for cooperation in view of the matters of common import before the diet.29 Whatever hopes Warsaw entertained came to naught, however, as the urban question failed to come up at the diet. It would be an exaggeration to claim that Warsaw entertained a more generalized conception of the city problem than its particularist counterparts. It should be noted that Warsaw did not write similar letters to Cracow, Poznan or Lublin and that it failed to raise common issues for another two decades.

While old Warsaw took no action on its own behalf at the 1768 diet, it acted early in the Partition Diet to assess its old and new privileges. No less than two committees prepared requests for this diet.30 The resulting "Memorial" was presented to the king and the chancellor rather than to the diet itself, probably because of procedural irregular- ities in the Partition Diet. A little later, a sum of money was voted to a "certain gentleman," possibly a member of the city government, for his efforts at the diet on behalf of the city.31

When the diet met again in 1776, Warsaw was ready with a new appeal which laid special emphasis on restriction of Jewish settlement.

25. Warszawa Ekonomiczne [in AGAD] 541, p. 59, 29 February 1764 (hereafter cited as WE); Desideria Miasta Starey Warszawy na Seymu Convocations Ordinarum Regni Anno Dei 1764 Podane Petit io Miasto Starev Warszawy (n.p., n.d.).

26. WE 541, p. 217, 18 June 1766. 27. W. Smolenski, Mieszczanstwo Warszawskie w koncu wieku XVIII (Warsaw,

1976 reprint edition), p. 100; Zienkowska, p. 11. 28. WE 541, p. 269, 30 November 1767; see also Smolenski, Mieszczanstwo

Warszawskie, p. 71. 29. Quoted by J. Kowecki in B. Lesnodorski (ed.), Polska w Epoce Oswiecenia

(Warsaw, 1971), p. 443, n. 46. 30. WE 542, p. 8, 3 January 1772; WE 542, pp. 52-53, 29 March 1773, 19 May 1773. 31. WE 542, p. 6, 3 November 1773.




According to a sixteenth-century decree, Jews were barred from residing in Warsaw except during meetings of the diet. The two-year term of the Partition Diet (1773-75), however, had helped them establish themselves under noble protection. Expelled from the city proper, Jews flourished in surrounding areas such as "New Jerusalem" (owned by August Suikowski), Raszyn and the Pafac Pociejowski. A law passed in 1775 excluded Jews from living within two miles of the Old City but was widely disregarded until the city convinced Marshal Stanisfaw Lubom- irski, a political opponent of Suikowski, to close down New Jerusalem. Other areas were left untouched with the result that the 1778 city cen- sus listed several thousand Jews.32

In 1778, Warsaw appointed its usual committee to prepare an appeal to the diet. Despite clear instructions to revise the 1776 docu- ment, the work of the committee was never presented to the full council and was not printed for distribution. Similarly, in 1780, a committee was formed to prepare a proposal, but there is no record of its report- ing to council.33 In 1782, the city council does not even appear to have appointed a drafting committee. It is possible that Warsaw was turning its attention to the local dietine in the hope that support by local nobles would be more effective. The Warsaw regional dietine had in fact instructed its deputies to work for the exclusion of the Jews from Warsaw and for the abolition of jurydyki.*4

Despite the transfer of the diet to Grodno in 1784, Warsaw resumed active lobbying. It selected three representatives who were instructed to present copies of their proposals to the marshals of the diet. War- saw's representatives were to work for the enforcement of old laws favourable to the city, especially those excluding Jews, as well as for abolition of the legal privileges of the jurydyki, a new law defining the relationship of the burgher courts to the noble sgdy grodzkie, and tax relief. Warsaw obviously regarded the diet as important since it authorized the expenditure of the substantial sum of 2,000 ducats (czerwone zfote) and promised to send the city's attorney to help with legal matters.35 Although Warsaw justified the sending of representatives to far-off Lithuania as "following the example of other large cities," it made no effort to cooperate with them. It exercized its efforts on its

32. WE 542, p. 161, 24 August 1776; WE 1052, Prosba Miasta Warszawy do Nayia- snieyszego Króla Imc i Nayiasnieyszyçh Zgromadzonych Koncem Pozyskania Konsty- tucyi Zaniesiona; see A. Eisenbach, "Zydzi Warszawscy i Sprawa Zydowska w XVIII Wieku," Warszawa XVIII Wieku (Warsaw, 1975) in Studia Warszawskie, XXII, no. 3, 229-39.

33. WE 543, pp. 6-8, 4 September [sic, October] 1778; WE 543, pp. 51-52, 25 Octo- ber 1780.

34. ZP 126, f. 150, nos. 15 and 19. 35. WE 7, pp. 25-26, 3 September 1784.



Polish Cities | 203

own behalf alone. It does not appear to have been involved in the requests made by prominent Warsaw citizens for permission to purchase landed estates.36

In 1786, Old Warsaw again convinced the local dietine to write favourable instructions and formed a committee of city officials to help carry their own proposals to the full diet, which met once again in Warsaw.37 In 1788, at the opening of what was to be the historic Four- Year Diet, Warsaw promptly drafted its usual appeal.38 As the diet continued beyond its normal term, agitation grew for urban reform. Under pressure from reformist nobles, Warsaw departed from long- established practice in organizing the joint action of all Polish cities.

Just outside the gates of Old Warsaw, the city of New Warsaw ruled itself and carried on its own policy with respect to the diet. In 1764, New Warsaw printed and presented its request for confirmation of privileges. Like Old Warsaw, it asked protection against trade competition from unincorporated suburban merchants, especially clerical- and noble-owned breweries. New Warsaw hoped for a law extending its legal and economic jurisdiction over the jurydyki. Certain rivalries with Old Warsaw were publicized. New Warsaw wanted to regain control over its courts, which Old Warsaw had purchased in the seventeenth century, and it wanted Old Warsaw to pay a greater share of the expenses of the Marshal's government over the Warsaw area. In harmony with Old Warsaw, New Warsaw wished protection against Jews as well as against Protestant and Orthodox competitors. Finally, New Warsaw requested recognition as a leading city through the use of the title stoteczne which normally denoted a provincial capital.39

In 1776, New Warsaw lobbied against annexation by the Old City. Fearing a takeover, the New City drew up its claim to independence, based on royal and parliamentary privileges.40 Although no action de- trimental to the corporate interests of New Warsaw was taken at either the Partition Diet or the 1776 diet, the president of New Warsaw recommended in December 1776 that the city draft its own bill on conditions for merger rather than wait on the defensive. The issue was sidetracked to the Commission of Good Order, however, and did not

36. ZP 107, pp. 190-95. 37. WE 7, pp. 43-44, 3 October 1786. 38. WE 7, p. 61, 12 September 1788; WE 7, p. 62, 17 October 1788. It does not

appear that this appeal was ever distributed. 39. Desideria Miasta Nowey Warszawy Nayiasnieyszemu Krolowi Jegomosci Panu

Naszemu Mifosciwemu Podczas Seymu Podana (n.p., n.d.). 40. WE 554, pp. 5-7, 12, 22 and 26 March 1775 and 5 May 1775; Nayiasnieyszy

Krolu Przeswietne Rzplitey Skonfederowane S tan ν - Magistrat i Caie Miasto Nowa Warszawa (n.p., n.d.); WE 554, p. 21, 3 December 1776.




come up again before the diet.41 New Warsaw took parliamentary action next in 1784 when it sent

a deputation to Grodno. Two members of the city council, who were going there on private business, represented the city. They received instructions to pay attention to all proposed legislation, to discuss it with deputies, and to suggest alternatives to any objectionable fea- tures.42 Two years later, in 1786, New Warsaw authorized a committee to look after city interests at the diet which had returned to Warsaw.43 No preparations were made for the 1788 diet.

After Cracow and Warsaw, the city of Lublin most actively lobbied the diet. It sent delegates to the diet or to the local dietine in 1764, 1766, 1776, 1778, 1780, 1784 and 1788. On all these occasions, it played minor variations on a common theme. Lublin sought protection against noble, clerical, Jewish and Greek competition operating from the suburban jurydyki as well as seeking the establishment of regional fairs, a staple right, and "federal" help for repair of public buildings.44

Instances of lobbying by other Polish cities appear less frequently. Wilno printed an appeal to the diet, perhaps in 1775, requesting the restriction of economic competition from Jews and clerics.45 Poznan sent representatives to the 1766 and 1767 diets, apparently without special instructions. The local dietine issued instructions favourable to city interests in 1766 and 1768. Other cities may have lobbied as well. Poznan deputies did in fact report encountering delegates from Kamie- niec Podolski, Lwów, and Wschowa in 1766.46

41. W. Smolenski, Komisja Boni Ordinis Warszawska (Warsaw, 1913), pp. 17-41. 42. WE 554, pp. 72-73, 23 September 1784. 43. WE 554, p. 81, 10 October 1786. 44. Wojewódzkie Archiwum Panstwowe w Lublinie [hereafter cited as WAPL]

254, pp. 12-23, 5 March 1764; Prawdziwa y Rzetelna...Miasta Lublina. .. Demonstracya (n.p., n.d.); WAPL 254, pp. 139, 177-78, 183-85, 236; Biblioteka -Lopacinska (Lublin) ms. 103: Instrukcya Dana Panom Posfom woj. Lubelskiego...na Seymu Ordynaryiny Warszawski 1766; ibid. ms. 1099: Supplika od Miasta Lublina na Seymik Woj. Lubel- skiego; Nota JJ: OO. JJ. WK. Senatorum Dignitarzom Urzednikom Przeswietnego Woi. Lubelskiego od Miasta Stotecznego JKMci Lublina ζ Pokorna Prozba do Imtrukcyi Podane, 15 July 1776 (n.p., n.d.); Pokorne Prozby do Nayiasnieyszego Monarchy Pana Naszego Mitosciwego y Przesuietnych Stanów Skonfederowanych Podane od Miasta Jego Krolewskiey Mosci Lublina Roku Pafiskiego 1776 (n.p., n.d.); ZP 107, p. 155; Prozba Miasta Lublina do Jego Krolewskiey Mosci i Skonfederowanych Rzeczypospolitey Stanow (n.p., n.d.).

45. Przywiley Miastu Stotecznemu W.X. Wilnowi (n.p., n.d.); ZP 123: Desiderya Miasta J.K. Mci Wilna ad Rosalvendum na Seymu Teraznieyszy Summarie Zebrane; Zazalenie Przed Powszechnoscia Obywatelow Miasta Jkmci Wilna do Nayiasnieyszego Pana i Zgromadzonych Stanôw Rzplitey Podana (n.p., n.d.).

46. M.J. Mika, "Udziat Poznania w Sejmach Rzeczypospolitey od Konca XV w. do 1791 r.," Studia i Mater iaty do Dziejow Wielkopolskiego i Pomorza, VI (1960), 273, 292-302.



Polish Cities | 205

The immediate results of the urban lobby were slight. A large number of very petty laws passed the diet regulating minor aspects of taxation in many incorporated cities, most of which show no trace of lobbying activities. Cracow received two substantial monetary awards from the diet, probably as a result of that city's petitions, while War- saw gained two laws reconfirming her right to exclude Jews from permanent residence within two miles of the city.47

Two reasons explain these poor results in a time of otherwise general sympathy toward the cities. First, Polish parliamentary life functioned poorly. After the initial reforms of 1764, progressive nobles lost their brief control over the diet. The balance of the 1760's passed in constant turmoil ending with the partition. The urban question did not come up at the confederated diet of 1776 while the free diets of the next decade passed fruitlessly because of the threat of a liberum veto. Second, and more important, when the urban question came up again, the nobles' outlook differed significantly from that of the burghers. Instead of viewing the question in terms of the interests of a particular city, the nobles saw it as a general problem which required a general remedy.

Many Polish noblemen recognized the need for reform. Affected by the poor physical condition of the cities and sharing with other eighteenth-century statesmen the view that cities, trade and manufacturing were necessary for a prosperous state, Polish noble deputies decided to assume paternalistic control over the cities. The 1764 diet created Commissions of Good Order composed of nobles who inspected city governments and made changes which they felt to be necessary. The commissions found many cities to be badly administered. Careful examination of city books revealed poor accounting methods, lack of receipts, neglected properties, widespread corruption, and social stress. The commissions restructured city government and finance along tra- ditional lines.48 Another law devised to bolster the position of the reformed burghers abolished all jury dyki which did not enjoy explicit sanction from royal charter or parliamentary act. Other minor measures also won approval in 1764 and 1768.49

Reformist ideas found expression in journalism, a predominately noble activity, throughout the period. From 1764 to 1784, Monitor published articles on the value of trade and manufacturing as well as others devoted to improving the image of burghers. In the late 1780's, Piotr Switkowski's Pamietnik History 'czno-Ekonomiczny, Polityczny

47. Volumina Legum, VII, 87, 664, 753; VIII, 147. 48. 1. Baranowski, Komisye Porzqdkowe (Cracow, 1907), pp. 124-30; Smolenski,

Mieszczcafistwo Warszawskie, p. 99. 49. Volumina Legum, VII, 81, 333, 437, 631, 753, 778.




(Historio-Economic and Political Diary) and Tomasz Podlecki's Dzien- nik Handlowy (Commercial Daily) preached urban reform.50

This reformist sentiment was exemplified in the works and person of Hugo Kotfjitaj, a priest and educational reformer. Kottgtaj established a close relationship with the Marshal of the Confederated Diet of 1788, Stanisîaw Maîachowski, to whom he dedicated his Pisma Anonimowe (Anonymous Letters) which set out a program of bold political, social and economic reform. On urban affairs, Koftataj argued for the creation of a "lower house" of burgesses which would pass on economic issues as well as elect members to administrative bodies dealing with the economy.51 He also gathered around him a group of radical publicists who hammered out even stronger arguments for social reform.52

Although archival searches have not revealed the actual course of events, it appears that Koft£taj turned both the diet and the city governments toward action on urban affairs. As Maîachowski's homme de confiance, he made representations to the government of the city of Warsaw which convinced them to take the initiative. It was logical for Kott^taj to take the lead since he believed that "the burgher lost his rights so long ago that he scarcely knows what to demand."53 Of course, Koifetaj's program could not have gained approval if Warsaw had not been ready to accept it. A pamphlet published by the city containing "Information about the Initial Establishment of Cities in Poland" dealt with issues common to all cities and implied a willingness to adopt a new method of solving urban problems.54 But Warsaw could not have taken the initiative in urban reform without Koftataj's lead. Municipal records show no change of mind and the pamphlet mentioned above did not specifically repudiate the particularist arguments advanced by Warsaw over the preceding quarter-century.

The course of Kottataj's alliance with Warsaw is imperfectly known but the main developments are clear. The city invited representatives from all incorporated Polish cities to come to Warsaw. Two hundred and seventy-two delegates from 141 cities attended meetings at War- saw's city hall where a memorial, written by Kottataj, was presented. On 25 November 1789, the representatives, dressed in ceremonial black, processed solemnly to the Royal Castle to present their demands to the king and the diet. Before the memorial was published, however, it

50. W. Konopczynski, Polscv Pisarze Politvczni XVIII Wieku (Warsaw, 1966) pp. 228, 403-408.

51. H. Kottataj, Pisma Anonimowe, edited by B. Lesnodorski and H. Wereszycka 2 vols. (Warsaw, 1954), II, 98-101. 52. B. Lesnodorski (ed.), Kuznica Kottçtajowska (Wroclaw, 1949), pp. xxi-xxii, xlii. 53. Quoted by Zienkowska, p. 55. 54. MDSC, II, 32.



Polish Cities | 207

was modified to suit King Stanislaw August Poniatowski, who thought the creation of a house of burgesses too radical. This change did not unduly upset the cities since they were more concerned with protecting their economic rights than they were with obtaining political conces- sions. A final version of the "Memorial" was signed along with an "Act of Union of Cities," an unprecedented achievement in Polish urban history.55

The diet took the matter under advisement. An urban reform bill emerged from committee and won approval eighteen months later. In- corporated into the constitution of 3 May 1791, it provided substantial political, social and economic changes, including limited political rights for burghers, equal rights and obligations for burghers and nobles residing in cities, the right of burghers to landed estates, freedom from arbitrary arrest and automatic nobilitation of certain categories of prominent burghers. Suburban areas were joined with the central city.56

While increasing burgher status and power in some areas, the bill also gave the nobility new power in the cities. A newly created Ministry of the Interior (Komisja Policji) exercized close supervision over both city governments and guilds throughout the Polish-Lithuanian Republic. Nobilitation of prominent burghers removed much of the leadership from that estate while nobles, as city citizens, became eligible for all political posts formerly held only by burghers. Two examples of new noble strength are provided by Ignacy Zakrzewski, who was elected mayor of Warsaw, and by Józef Wybicki, who served as Poznan's representative to the diet.57

Even though the reform act of 1791 grew out of ideas which the cities had not entertained before 1789, Poland's burghers greeted it with great enthusiasm. The 3 May constitution itself was enacted as a result in part of protection offered the diet through the mobilization of thousands of artisans by Warsaw's guilds. If the second and third partitions had not intervened, additional laws very likely would have reformed banking, tariffs, and taxation as well as clarified the status of Poland's Jews. As it was, the guilds fought valiantly against Russia during the Kosciuszko Uprising of 1794, seeing hope for themselves in the continuation of Polish independence.

55. Smolenski, Mieszczafistwo Warszawskie, pp. 126-36; Zienkowska, pp. 58-75; MDSC, II, 259-68, 305-20.

56. Volumina Legum, IX, 215-19; Smolenski, Mieszczanstwo Warszawskie, pp. 177-78; A. Zahorski, Centralne Institue je Polie v/ne w Dobie Rozbioròw (Warsaw, 1959), pp. 138-69.

57. Contemporaries and modern historians have argued that conservatives sup- ported a liberal nobilitation policy in order to prevent the growth of a powerful bourgeois political movement (MDSC, III, 403-406, 426-32; Zienkowska, pp. 134-35). This point may be extended logically to cover the legislation of April-May 1791.



The End of Medieval Particularism: Polish Cities and the Diet, 1764-89

Documents

Transcript of The End of Medieval Particularism: Polish Cities and the Diet, 1764-89