Anna Rostkowska vs. the Villagers of Polkowo

Family History Available from Polish Court Records

Referendaria Koronna

by Jay M. Orbik, Ed.D.

Translations by Ola Heska and Iwona Dakiniewicz.

This article is based on an English translation of transcripts of a court case involving a rather nasty dispute between Anna Rostkowska, holder of the Tajno Estate in northern Podlasie and the villagers of Polkowo, part of that estate, who claimed that special privileges granted to their ancestor by the King in 1582 were being violated by the estate holder. These court cases ran between the years 1789 and 1791 and were found in the books Ksiegi Referendarii Koronnej z drugiej polowy XVIII wieku (Referendaria Koronna Books From the second half of the 17^th century), volume one (1768-1780) and volume two (1781-1794) published by Antonina Kechowa and Wladyslaw Palucki in 1955. [1] These books can be a valuable resource to genealogists and family historians seeking to flesh out the history of the lands and people inhabited by their ancestors. See figure 1.

Figure 1. Ksiegi Referendarii Koronnej

Norman Davies defines The Referendaria Koronna as “a higher level court, established in the 16^th century to hear appeals against decisions involving the bailiffs and tenants of the Crown lands.  In theory, it gave the royal serfs a measure of justice denied to the surfs of the Church or of the nobility”.[2] Stefan Kieniewicz also discussed these special privileges of the Royal peasants and the Referendaria Koronna in his book, The Emancipation of the Polish Peasantry. [3]

So how did the Crown Estates work?  In a nutshell, Crown lands belonged to the King, which he then leased out to privileged people in return for service to the Crown. The leaseholders paid rent to the Crown for this land and in turn, charged peasants in either in labor to be performed on the leaseholders land, panszczyszny or serfdom, or in rent for their own piece of land or, sometimes, both. The leaseholder would then sell the crops, pay the taxes to the Crown, and keep the rest.

The number of days of labor owed to the leaseholder varied but in 1674 on the Tajno Estate for every włok of land, it was four consecutive days a week, guarding the fields at night, 3 tłoki (neighborly help) per year- helpful and without delay, urgent gardening, gathering harvest of two cubits, and clearing hay, plus a rent of 6 złoty, 16 korzec of oats, 1 capon, and 20 eggs. [4]

Jacek Kochanowicz’s chapter entitled Between Submission and Violence: Peasant Resistance in the Polish Manorial Economy of the eighteenth Century, in Forrest D Colburn book’s Everyday Forms of Peasant Resistance discussed the intricacies of the Referendary Court.[5]

Most cases put before the Referendary Court concerned disputes between the domain holders and the villagers over land. Peasants usually complained that the holder did not honor old privileges given to the community by the king. Commissions were set up by the court to oversee the matter, and surveyors were ordered to measure the fields. Both the manor and the holder tried to make the surveyors sympathetic to their cause, and sometimes peasants were successful.[6]

These surveys often led to disputes about the measuring techniques used to check the area of peasant holdings. This was in part due to fact that despite government attempts, there were no effective standardized measurements. “This led to accusations against the owners, officials, and surveyors that they used measuring sticks that were too short to show that the peasants had too much land.” [7]

Other key points identified by Kochanowicz include:

• Because the lease holders had superior social positions, they had a better chance of having a sympathetic hearing than the peasants
• The Referendary Court channeled peasant grievances, avoided forms of uncontrolled resistance, and protected the physical and human capital of the domain against misuse by the tenant holder. [8] In other words, in a very selfish and pragmatic way, the Crown did not want bad estate holders to unnecessarily damage the peasants, their property, or homes. The well-being of the peasants were essential for the Crown economy to succeed.

• Bringing cases to court raised peasant consciousness. Peasants had to organize, meet several times in order to discuss their complaints, to find a scribe, to formulate their grievances, to elect the delegates to collect money to finance the trip to the court, and to prepare themselves for the blackmail and abuse of the holder who tried to prevent them from using the legal system
• Estate holders often meted out cruel revenge after the subjects decided to go ahead with their suits. [9]

Why this Particular Case?

A few years ago after much searching, I tracked down the marriage record in 1872 of my great-grandfather Jan Orbik to his wife Franciszka Polkowska in the parish of Jaminy. She was from the village of Polkowo, not too far from the villages of Tajno and Tajenko in the neighboring parish of Bargłów-Kościelny where the Orbik family originated from. I found this record with the help of Iwona Dakiniewicz at the rectory of Jaminy as the records from this parish were not on microfilm with the LDS.

Figure 2.  Map including Tajno and Polkowo (Polikow) in the 1600s.

While researching my Orbik ancestors in Tajno using a book Iwona Dakiniewicz found for me called Dzieje Osoadnictwa w Powiecie Augustowskim od XV do Końcu XVIII Wieku (The History of the Settlements in the Powiat of Augustów from the 15th to the end of the 18th Centuries) by Jerzy  Wiśniewski, in the book  titled Studia i materialy do dziejow Pojezierza Augustowskiego (Studies and Materials of the History of the Augustow Lakes Region) published in 1967 [10], I found an entry several paragraphs long summarizing this court case which included family names such as Polkowski, Litwinski, and Chata.

While this was a very nice and seemingly complete summary, I was still interested in finding the original source so I followed the footnote to the Ksiegi Referendarii Koronnej z Drugiej Polowy XVIII Wieku and obtained a copy using my interlibrary loan service and obtaining a loan from the University of Chicago Library.

Organization of the Ksiegi Referendarii Koronnej z Drugiej Polowy XVIII Wieku

The book is organized in two volumes, volume one contains court cases from 1768-1780 and volume two contains court cases from 1781-1794. There is a table of contents and the end of each book for both surnames of litigants and villages involved (figure 3).

Figure 3. Surname Table of Contents.

The first section of each book contains a brief summation of each case and gives index numbers for the case itself (figure 4). Each case contains a brief summary, usually a paragraph or two, (figure 5) before going into the details of the court case, which can go for several pages each. In this case of Rostkowska vs the Polkowanians, there were three separate case entries spanning both volumes.

Figure 4. Case Summary

Figure 5. Transcription of Case.

The biggest problem with these books is they are written in Polish, so if you are not a fluent speaker, you will have trouble translating this. I assume that the purpose of these volumes originally was to translate these records from Latin into Polish. Another problem is that these cases use obscure 18^th century Polish legal terms, which caused much frustration for my translators. If you have the time, patience, and money for translators, the effort can be worth it as this case provided both genealogical data as well as a wealth of historical information about the attitudes and actions of leaseholders and their subjects.

About Translations and Methodology.

The text of this case taken from the book Ksiegi Referendarii Koronnej z drugiej polowy XVIII wieku were translated for me by Ola Heska, a Polish translator recommended by the Polish Genealogical Society of America [11]. The translation of the chapter Dzieje Osoadnictwa w Powiecie Augustowskim od XV do Końcu XVIII Wieku by Jerzy  Wiśniewski, was originally roughly translated for me a few years ago by Iwona Dakiniewicz [12] with a more exact translation of the background and court case by Ola Heska. The Latin translations of the supporting parish records are by the author.  One of the most important lessons that I learned in this adventure was how the information was originally acquired, what the information looked like in the secondary sources, i.e., articles in books, and what the information looked like in the primary source, or at least as close as I could get, that is, an English translation of a Polish Translation of most likely a Latin original court document.

I normally don’t like to use entire sections of quoted text in my articles, but in this case I think it is essential for the reader to get a feel for how much more detail can be found in primary sources of these legal documents, what gets left in, and what gets taken out by the authors of secondary sources. Often we can find much more relevant data pertaining to our families in primary sources than what the author of secondary sources needed. I wrote about this last in the summer 2008 edition of the EEEG Journal [13].

Prelude to the Case

While the villages and property belonging to the Tajno Estate varied slightly over the years, at the time of this case it consisted of the villages of Barglowka, Lipowe, Nowiny, Wozna, Orzechowka, Polkowo, Piekutowo, and Uscianka with the manor in Tajenko.

Over the years some pretty influential people held this estate, including Dulskis, Denhoffs, Sobieskis, Potockis, and Branickis.[14]

From the year 1745 to 1757, possession was in the hands of Andrzej Karwowski, captain of the Royal Artillery and Cup-Bearer of the district of Wiska (in Northeast Mazowia). After his death in 1757, the estate was held by his wife Anna nee Swiderska. In 1758 she married Major General of the Crown Army, Antoni Jan Rostkowski (see figure 6, translated below).  [15]

Figure 6. 1754 Marriage in Tajenko Manor of General Antoni Rostkowski and Anna nee Swiderski Karwowska.

Taienko Aula (Tajenko Manor)

The year 1758, 7 February, I Joannes Olszewski Propositus Barglow (recorder of Barglow) after banns before our Lord had no objections, joined in marriage Perillustrem Maginificaus Dominus (Very Distinguished, Magnificent Lord) Antoni Rostkowski, General of the Republic with Perillustra Magnifica Domina (Very Distinguished, Magnificent Lady) Anna Karwowska,  vexilifera terra Viznensis (wife of the standard bearer of Wizna district). Witnesses were Magnificent Lord Stanislaw Karwowski, Venetor Terra Bielsensis (master of the hunt of Bielsk district.) and Magnificent Lord Adam Smolenski, Thesaureus Terra Ziewscis (Treasurer of Ziwcis district). [16]

The Court Cases

These are presented directly as translated. I omitted the opening summary paragraphs. I included the original authors’ footnotes where they appeared. I also inserted original documents quoted in the case that I have found in various and identified them in brackets { }. These documents are sourced in the endnotes.

The Original Suit

The Odoj Czerwinskis and other renters of Polkowo village, belonging to Tajno leasehold, vs. Anna Rostkowska, the owner of this leasehold: 25 V 1778.

Stanislaw August etc. we announce etc. that to us and our royal courts of Referendaria Koronna, the well-born Anna – of first marriage wife of the well-born Andrzej Karwowski, Wizna Deputy Cup-bearer¹, of second marriage wife of the late Rostkowski general of the Crown army, widow and owner of the Tajno leasehold ², was summoned by the Lord Prosecutor of the Crown and by the accusing plaintiffs: the honest Wawrzyniec Odoj Czerwinski and Konstancja nee Pomian, married couple, the donatory of 5 lans called Polkowo which are in leased from Tajno leasehold, the honest Mateusz Konoza and Marianna nee Kawalek, married couple, Fabian Wiercioch and Katarzyna, married couple, Maciej Skiladz and Agnieszka, married couple, Adam and Jozef Wierciochs, Jan Omanowski and Marianna nee Milewska, married couple, Antoni Krukowski, Franciszek Litwinek and others, being the successors of the honest Konozas, the first residents of 5 lans called Polkowo, settlers of these lans, and other residents, citizens and possessors – all plaintiffs.

In accordance with the laws and grievances brought against the defendant, mainly that the defendant, not paying attention to the rights of the plaintiffs, and even to the fact that the lans were cleared by the honest Konozas and their successors, not paying attention to the fact that it is against justice to profit from someone’s efforts, she forces the plaintiffs to various labors, levies and rents.  She forces them to carry letters on routes exceeding 50 miles; obligates them to guard the forest; takes their horses on long journeys; makes them pay for nuts, mushrooms and blueberries based on who-knows what kind of grounds and in large sums; makes them gather and give her more than 8 korzec of acorns; makes up brzegowe [shore tax?] and charges 20 zloty for it; charges 200 zloty instead of 40 for hiberna [‘winter bread’ tax]; charges 188 zloty instead of 80 for podymne [house tax]; she forced the plaintiffs to build an inn, for her profit after all, and when the tenant did not make enough money to pay the lease, she makes the residents pay flat lease of 120 zloty; and she takes away their documents.  She made no reparations to the honest Odoj Czerwinskis for the wrongdoings, personal as well as pertaining to the land, done to them by her and her first husband.  She has not returned oxen, horses, house implements, and other property taken by force; and causes other harms and abuses.  The court decides the following: to obligate the defendant above all to return all documents taken; to stop and cancel all abuses and determine no more than 10 zloty to Crown Treasury; to preserve all rights and freedoms of the plaintiffs which were procured by the residents of the 5 lans and their ancestors; to return all that was taken unlawfully; and to resolve everything in accordance with law and justice; to punish the defendant with the payment of the costs of court proceedings; and with the addition of the precept that she will not dare to force the plaintiffs who are honored with our special safe-conduct letter to any extraordinary labors and levies, nor to cause any harm, beat nor pester them nor burden them under any circumstance, under the penalty of 1000 ducats and under the threat of other penalties.

The defendant, the same Anna Rostkowska, widow, was also summoned to us and our courts of the Referendaria Koronna by the Lord Prosecutor of the Crown and by married couple the Czerwinskis and others mentioned above – the plaintiffs.

She was summoned to our courts of the Referendaria Koronna because the defendant, knowing very well that when a case is pending in our court and is under investigation, she shouldn’t oppress the plaintiffs who are privileged with our safe-conduct letter nor cause them any harm in their possessions nor personally under any circumstances; she however, paying no attention to the mentioned safe-conduct letter and while the case is pending before our courts of the Referendaria Koronna for various personal and land related harms against the plaintiffs, and the ruling was made forbidding doing any harm to them under the penalty of fine in the amount of 1000 ducats, she ordered putting the honorable Odoj Czerwinski in irons and imprisoning him, starving him in prison, beating him and, seizing all his personal property and possessions for herself, keeping him imprisoned for over 2 weeks; and she has not stopped causing harm and personal abuses to other plaintiffs.  She continues the wrongdoings, openly violates our safe-conduct letter and litispendentia [pending suit] and so she brings penalties on herself.  The court decides the following: to punish the defendant, according with the law established by us against abusers of our safe-conduct letters, for abusing the above mentioned letter and our litispendentia; to preserve the plaintiffs’ rights and freedoms, that is, to hear this case and decide what the law and justice dictate; to make her pay the cost of court proceedings; and to add a second similar order for her not to burden, harm, imprison, nor violate in any way the plaintiffs under the penalty of 2000 ducats and under other penalties indicated to violators of our litispendentia.

The defendant, the same Anna Rostkowska, widow, was also summoned by a letter to us and our courts of Referendaria Koronna, along with her officer the well-born Turkowski ³, by the Lord Prosecutor of the Crown and by the accusers – the plaintiffs.

They have been summoned because the defendants, knowing that no-one should claim the right to have private authority, private jurisdiction nor private prison, and that during the time while the case is pending, they – and firstly she, Rostkowska – not paying attention, summoned the honest Odoj Czerwinskis to the Asesoria Koronna court and then, with absolute power, on the Thursday/Friday night before the feast of St. Bartholomew of this year⁴, they dared to send 31 manorial servants and peasants, along with the mentioned Turkowski, armed with guns and pistols, grabbed Odoj Czerwinski, a venerable man, over 70 years of age, tied him with ropes and took him to Tajenko, and while there ordered to give him 200 lashes and to keep him in chains, tied him with chains by the neck at night, starved him, allowed him no visitors, took certain things from him; [they dared] to suddenly take Fabian Wiercioch Sienkiewicz out of bed on the same night, tied him with ropes, took him to Tajenko and gave him 100 lashes and kept him like that for an entire day, finally letting him go in the middle of the night; similarly they dared to burst into Mateusz Konoza’s house, wanting to catch him, but since they did not find him, they dislocated his wife’s arm, chased away the children, cut off stirrups from his saddle and took other things, and after catching this Mateusz Konoza they imprisoned him, threatened him, because of this he cannot take care of his farm and has to wander to other houses.  They also dared to inflict other unfair treatment, violence and oppressions on those mentioned above and on other residents of Polkowo, and therefore they brought down penalties on themselves.

The court decides the following: to inflict a punishment for bringing the plaintiffs to wrong court [*see Notes], and separately, a punishment for privately imprisoning, beating, unfair treatment, on the well-born Rostkowska as giving orders, and on the well-born Turkowski as the one following orders; order reparations to the wronged, liquidate all oppressions, order reparations for lateness in farm work of Mateusz Konoza, as well as for him being forced to wander because of threats and the threat of imprisonment; and to give separate penalties for violating our litispendentia and to decide what the law and justice dictates; to impose court expenses; and again to order the well-born Rostkowska to free Odoj Czerwinski from prison immediately and to stop further maltreatment of him, as well as of Fabian Wiercioch Sienkiewicz and Mateusz Konoza, to stop troubling and imprisoning them, bothering their farms, burdening them and other residents of Polkowo, to respect our safe-conduct letter and to pay attention to the litispendentia, under the penalty of 2000 ducats and other penalties indicated to the violators of litispendentia and of our letters;  the hearings are described in further detail in the following accounts: first from July 28, second from August 25, third from October 6 – all of last year 1777 and all formally testified in Goniadz.

On today’s session we heard the case between the summoned Tajno landlord,

We sequestered the privilege sanationis and recommended that it will not be released.  We, the king and our court of Referendaria Koronna, having listened to both sides of the controversy, appoint our inquisitors/officers: Reverend Krzysztof Kruszewski, pastor from Jesionowo, Jan Adam Todwin, Metele and Simno starost, Kazimierz Plonski, City Subdelegate from Bransk, Franciszek Chojnowski, City Viceregent from Goniadz, Adam Karnkowski, Romuald Rutkowski and Pawel Skarzynski, independently .  They will go to land called Polkowo and there – in the presence of at least three officers, first taking into consideration The Inventory of 1660 which describes the limits of Polkowo area {Figures 8 & 9} , will tour it, inspect it and describe in [a sealed/closed roll] whether or not this border still exists.  In the same document they will describe the status of the land, how much plough land, meadows and arable land, and how many bogs, marshes, dunes and otherwise non-profitable grounds.  As far as plough land, they will decide whether it is fertile or sterile.  They will also state and describe in the document their opinion regarding the amount of rent – whether the rent decided by the above mentioned commission in 1639 and by The Inventory of 1660 is to stay in such amount and paid annually to Tajno leasehold or, whether raised, as per the latest Inventory of 1765, would be a burden to Polkowo residents.  They will also inquire from Polkowo residents about Swiatowizna land, mentioned in the last Inventory of 1765. They will describe whether Swiatowizna land is fertile or sterile and will describe and present in writing whether the rent decided in 1765 Inventory will be a burden or not.  In the meantime, we obligate Polkowo residents to pay 40 zloty in rent by the feast of St. Martin (November 11) to Tajno leasehold, which they offered in exchange for freeing them from the burden of letter delivery, which was put on them by the recent 1765 Inventory.  Considering that sending them with letters does not bring any profit to Tajno leasehold nor to the treasury of Rzeczpospolita and is a great burden to Polkowo residents (as they complained), we decide to cancel this obligation, and free them permanently from it, as well as from other obligations, except for the one described “interim”.  We recognize them as renters of Polkowo land, and not as subjects [serfs] tied to Tajno leasehold, and we declare that they are free to move away from Tajno leasehold, except if they got behind in paying the rent, they have to pay it to the manorial estate first. As far as the inn and bar, we declare that Tajno landlord can have it on Polkowo land, if it has been built; but if it hasn’t been built, we permit that she can build it at her own expense (but she is not allowed to take for this inn any plough land nor meadow, meaning any land which has been cleared, only as much as will be needed for the inn and only cleared from the thicket).  We guarantee the plaintiffs – residents of Polkowo – their safety and renew our safe-conduct letter which was previously graciously given to them.  By the power of our decree ---

                                                This happened in Warsaw on Monday, 25^th of May 1778

¹ Antoni Rostkowski, general of the crown army, was married to Anna nee Swiderska Karwowska, widow of Andrzej Karwowski.

² The Tajno leasehold belonged to widow Anna Rostkowska in 1770 already, a quarter tax of the lease amounted to 2,289 zloty and 14 groszes.

³ Bartlomiej Turkowski

⁴ the night of 21 to 22 August 1777

Figure 7. 1661 Copy of a Document Confirming Ownership of Polkowo to Marek Konoza and his Descendants  - Granted in 1587.

Figures 8 and 9. Document Confirming the Konoza Rights to Settle Polkowo an the Limits of its Boundaries. [17] Soon after the grant was given on February 18, 1587, Marcin Dulski, Rajgrod starost carefully described the borders of the grounds granted to Marek Konoza and entered this description in Tykocin land records Individuae Trinitatis in 1626, the same was also entered in 1660 Inventory by the surveyors, who were designated by the power of 1659 constitution to perform inventories of crown lands.

Anna Rostkowska's Appeal

May 31, 1779

Stanislaw August, etc. we announce etc. that to us and our Referendarja Koronna courts, the case, set by our decree of May 25 of last year 1778, from the well-born officers, between the sides described there and below, was sent.  After a deferment, to us and our Referendarja Koronna courts by our summons were called back the well-born Wojciech Moscicki, Land Chamberland from Bielsk, Kazimierz Plonski, Land Subdelegate from Bransk, Romuald Rutkowski – the malicious judges, as well as the honest Wawrzyniec Odoj, called Czerwinski and Konstancja – married couple, Mateusz Konoza and Marianna – married couple, Fabian Wiercioch and Katarzyna – married couple, as well as other owners of wlokas and fields in Polkowo village, belonging to Tajno leasehold, who, in our decree of last year 1778, were described and established as a side to the complaint described below: they were summoned by the Lord Prosecutor of the Crown and his accusers, the well-born Anna Rostkowska, widow after the Crown army general, privileged owner of Tajno leasehold and surrounding areas, as well as the well-born Turkowski, the officer of this leasehold, the plaintiffs.

Taking into consideration the grievances brought against the defendants, especially grievances testified in Wasosz on March 31, of current year 1779, that the defendants – the malicious judges although knowing well that they are “sub nexu iuris”, and therefore could not perform their duties, and they demanded that the plaintiffs stop the proceedings, and the defendants brought other officers/commissars; the defendants, especially the well-born Wojciech Moscicki, Land Chamberlain from Bielsk, malicious and vindictive judge, without consideration to the fact that he was condemned and suspended from duty, he dared to speak insulting words against general’s wife, as well as against her representatives who wanted to attend the commission, words which were meant to slander their names and reputation.  He promised satisfaction and help to Polkowo boyars, called them to arms, and shot guns while inspecting the area, waved a sword, and did other improprieties described extensively in the above mentioned document.  It was also brought to our attention that the other judges, not only were not opposed to these improprieties but they seemed to tolerate them and help in them, and therefore, since not justice but their personal vendetta was performed, the plaintiffs withdrew from this lawless act.  The honest residents of Polkowo helped this injustice, being also supplied with guns which they shot, in addition liquor and, looking up to the officers in their actions, helped in all of them. 

The court decides the following: to suspend the earlier mentioned officers’ act, to appoint a new commission, to demand explanation regarding the question of the inn, to measure the land owned by the defendants, to return to general’s wife the remainder of lands and meadows which are held by the defendants and which were taken without the right to do so, with the exception of the 5 wlokas described in Inventories and laws, to punish for devastation of forests, fishing, riots and other chaos, to compensate damages, to forbid cutting of the forest and fishing, and to decide what the justice dictates.

In response the owner of Tajno leasehold and her officer Turkowski were summoned by the Lord Prosecutors of the Crown and the accusers, that is residents and renters of village Polkowo, mentioned earlier in the decree by name, as plaintiffs.

The court decides the following: to cancel the suspension of the commissars’ act and consider it valid, to find the defendant guilty of delaying tactics, to inflict separate punishment for acting against our decree in regards to the inn and in regards to bordering of the lans, to order payment of expenses of cost proceedings and travel; as those are extensively described in depositions from April 26 and May 8 of current year 1779, officially taken in Goniadz.

At today’s session, when -- Rostkowska and Turkowski represented by their plenipotentiary, the Polkowians represented by Wawrzyniec Odoj Czerwinski along with their plenipotentiary, and the commissars represented by their plenipotentiary made appearance before us and our courts of the Referendarja Koronna, on time and after having conferred with each other, we the king and our court of the Referendarja Koronna, after reviewing two documents drafted after viewing of Polkowo lands and after inquiring of witnesses comprising of Polkowo renter residents, allow the owner of Tajno leasehold to bring at her own expense, before the next session of the Referendarja Koronna court, the officers who were appointed by our decree of May 25 of last year 1778, to whom we add Reverend Swiderski, Plock Cannon and Lomza Surrogate, the well-born Pawel Hryniewicki, District Judge from Bielsk and Mateusz Trzeszczkowski, District Chamberlain from Bielsk, as well as Mateusz Chojnowski, City Viceregent from Goniadz.  They will go to Polkowo grounds and there, excluding Swiatowizna grounds to which Polkowo residents were not and are not entitled to, if the owner demands they will measure Polkowo wlokas, at her own expense.  The surveyor, with measurements specified and customary to that land, will measure Polkowo land which is in possession of resident renters.  This measurement will include swamps, marshes, waters, dunes, thickets, and if there are any, plough land, pastures, as well as houses, and vegetable gardens, without any omissions.  They [the commissars] will indicate exactly how much area is taken up by waste land and how much in houses, vegetable gardens, meadows and plough land, and they will send this map to this court. And because Polkowo residents demanded that the well-born Tajno landlady file in court and she did so, and they accepted them without oath, we declare that these filings should stay in their hands. We guarantee the Polkowians’ safety from violence and wrongdoing.  By the power of our decree----

This happened in Warsaw, on Monday, May 31, AD 1779

The Final Court Decision

May 26, 1781

Stanislaw August etc. we announce that after deferment by the well-born commissars, by the decree of our courts of Referendarja Koronna of May 31, 1779 AD, indicating the revision of Polkowo grounds, as well as investigation, to us and our courts the following were summoned: the well-born Pawel Hryniewiecki, District Judge from Bielsk, Mateusz Trzeszczkowski, District Chamberlain from Bielsk, Mateusz Chojnowski, City Viceregent from Goniadz, described as malicious judges, as well as Anna nee Swiderska, of first marriage to the late well-born Jedrzej Karwowski, Deputy Cup-bearer from Wizna, of second marriage to the late well-born Antoni Rostkowski, general of the crown army, remaining widow and owner of Tajno leasehold, and the well-born Bartlomiej Turkowski, her officer and the honest Marcin Mitros, Polkowo resident; [summoned by] the Lord Prosecutor of the Crown and the accusers: the honest Wawrzyniec Odoj Czerwinski and Konstancja nee Pomian, Mateusz Konoza and Marianna, Fabian Wiercioch and Katarzyna, married couple, Benedykt Chata and others, all descendants of the late Marek Konoza, the first extirpator of the five lans called Polkowo, and Elzbieta – married couple, successors and owners of those swampy lans – the plaintiffs.  The plaintiffs claim that the summoned commissars, not given any right by the decree of our referendary court to make decisions on their own, instead of finding out the borders of the five Polkowo lans, as originally granted to Marek Konoza and mentioned in the Inventory of the 1660, and instead of conducting interrogations, this honest Mitros ploughed up the landmark and moved away the border stones, those being the border markings of Polkowo grounds indicated by the 1660 Inventory.  He [Mitros] put in stakes and told the well-born Wojnicz, the surveyor, how far to measure, and they measured not by pret nor a rope but by some concocted measurement called “ciatka” and drew up maps in a house [Mitros’ house?] based on the account of the honest Kosinski, his substitute; and instead of the five wlokas which are in the Konoza’s borders, they measured up one and the well-born commissars expected the plaintiffs to be happy with it; and after staking this one swampy wloka they prohibited the plaintiffs from using the rest of the grounds and pastures; having no right to do so they looked at the plaintiffs’ houses; admitted witnesses who were to be excluded [?]; did not note lodged appeals; the honest Mitros moved away the border stones, ploughed up the landmarks and is giving away the residents’ secrets; the well-born general’s wife has not issued rent receipts for the past 3 years and inflicted other wrongdoings. The court decides the following: to suspend the latest acts of the commissars along with inquisitions and survey maps and to decide the case based on the documents drawn during the first visit and survey; to award the plaintiffs 5 Polkowo wlokas based on the borders described in the mentioned Inventory; to punish the attempts on life;  to award claims to the plaintiffs; to urge issuing of rent receipts; to punish the honest Mitros; to fix destroyed landmarks; and decide that the defendants, the well-born general’s wife and the well-born Turkowski should not trouble the plaintiffs, nor take their land nor pastures, that they should discontinue taking the land, all under the penalties indicated by law; all this as described in the commissars’ deferment mentioned above, officially testified in the Goniadz city on February 16, 1780.

On today’s session the following appeared: the honest Wawrzyniec Odoj Czerwinski and Konstancja nee Pomian – married couple, Mateusz Konoza and Marianna nee Kawalek – married couple, Fabian Wiercioch and Katarzyna – married couple, Maciej Skiladzia and Agnieszka – married couple, Adam and Jozef Wierciochs, Jan Omanowski and Marianna nee Milewska – married couple, Antoni Krukowski, Franciszek Litwinski and others, the successors of the late Marek Konoza, the first extirpator of the 5 lans called Polkowo and Elzbieta – married couple, and owners of these lans – as plaintiffs; and summoned, in his own name and in the name of other renters, by the honest Wawrzyniec Odoj Czerwinski: Rostkowska, Turkowski and Mitros represented by their plenipotentiary.  We, the King and our court of Referendaria Koronna, after listening to both sides of the controversy, confirm the act of March 15, 1779 which was later suspended by later decree of May 31, 1779.  The well-born Rostkowska, wife of crown army general, owner of Tajno leasehold, doubted the legality of the officers’ act, claiming that the well-born Moscicki, District Chamberlain from Bielsk was under kondemnata* and therefore not allowed to serve in this case.  However, it was proven to the court that the kondemnatas were rescinded and therefore, the act is considered legal.

In this case, having listened to both sides of the complaint, having opened and read the commissars’ previous two accounts which were sealed and filed in our court, having considered the following: the grant act by the late well-born Marcin Dulski, Rajgrod starost dated in Rajgrod on June 23, 1582, and separately the privilege given by queen Anna dated in Warsaw on May 3, 1585 which confirmed the above grant, original of which was filed in court, prove that the land on which village Polkowo was built, was granted to the first settler of these grounds the late Marek Konoza for life, but his heirs/successors were assured that they would be bought out before they had to move, and those successors of Marek Konoza, having increased in number and since now the village consists of 20 settlements and his successors by the law of succession currently inhabit the village, it would be tremendously difficult to buy out the buildings and land mentioned in the grant, and moving of so many farmers from their place would not bring any benefit to the estate, in contrary, it would bring harm and cause depopulation of the village; in addition, having in mind that in all crown lands, villages own grounds based on the law of succession, therefore, because of these reasons and based on the original grant, we acknowledge Polkowo residents’ right to stay on the grounds cleared by Polkowo residents within the borders determined below.

Lastly, regarding the size of the grounds: although in the original grant of 1582 by the starost and in queen Anna’s privilege of 1585 five wlokas are mentioned, these documents do not specify which standard of measurement was used to measure them and they do not specify nor describe whether these 5 wlokas were to be of plough land, with the exception of bogs and other waste land.  However, soon after the grant was given, i.e. on February 18, 1587, the same late well-born Marcin Dulski, Rajgrod starost carefully described the borders of the grounds granted to Marek Konoza and entered this description in Tykocin land records Individuae Trinitatis in 1626, the same was also entered in 1660 Inventory by the surveyors, who were designated by the power of 1659 constitution to perform inventories of crown lands {Figure 9 [18]}.  The description of those borders is entered and described in the Inventory which proves that the successors of Marek Konoza have the grounds within these borders.  Although the commissars’ viewing, indicated during the first session as well as the following one on October 19 of the same year 1779, prove the absence of border stones which were placed during the bordering by Rajgrod starost the late well-born Dulski, the commissars’ viewings describe and confirm the existence of the following places stated in the border description: the length from the starting point of Jerzezwa called Tlum on river Neta ending at Biele across Budziska Bartnickie, the width of the land: from Czarny on one side to Chroscielina on the other.  Because of the reasons mentioned above, being unable to figure out the amount of wlokas originally granted to Konoza, being sure of the border signs described in the border description, we confirm Polkowians perpetual right to have the land, located and described according to borders drawn on the original map and on a map copied from the first one.  Because during the recent times the mentioned Polkowians increased in numbers and continued to clear more land which is beyond the limits of the original grant borders, since Czarny and Chroscielina are clearly out of the limits of the original grant, and those two adjacent places (which has been proved by the commissars’ visit and the survey) are now held by Polkowians, we award these two places now to the well-born Rostkowska and in the future to subsequent successors of Tajno and we leave those places to them to rule them freely, with the additional clause that Polkowo residents will always have priority to lease and rent the pastures, as they are adjacent, with the same price as would be asked from others.

As far as rents from the same Polkowo village described in the grant: the original grant imposed on Marek Konoza and his successors only rent and obligation to guard forests and pastures.  The original decree of July 14, 1777 which cancelled the rent raised by the then Rajgrod starost from 10 to 50 zloty and confirmed the amount set in the original grant, was pulled out from Goniadz records and filed in our court.  The 1660 Inventory did not describe any other obligation other than rent.  Since the tribute of gathering mushrooms and other products as well as traveling with letters which was imposed later contrary to the law, was cancelled by the decree of our court in 1778, we affirm the obligations of the Polkowians to be only in rent and guarding forests and pastures, according to the original grant description.

However, here are our thoughts about the opinions of the commissars from the first as well as the second commission regarding the amount of rent: the amount of rent was set in 1582.  With changes in currency and prices of all things these days, it is only right that the rent should be higher. Therefore, we raise and set the amount of rent to 200 zloty, ordering that it be paid to Tajno leasehold annually by the feast of St. Martin, beginning with the next feast of St. Martin coming up this year, and that the payment be acknowledged by the receipt from the manor.  We set the obligation of guarding the forests and pastures, to be performed individually in turns.

To keep better order these residents should elect two persons annually, one of whom will be recognized by Tajno manor as wojt, and his duties will include collecting rent from all residents proportionally to the amount of land that each of them occupies, and delivering it to the estate; his duties will also include mitigating disputes among the villagers.

To settle the complaint of well-born Rostkowska, general’s wife, regarding destruction of Tajno forests by Polkowo residents: according to this decision, the entire land as described in the original grant, is left with the Polkowians. In this original grant free wood felling in Tajno forests is not permitted, therefore now we also are not permitting the Polkowians to freely fell wood, but, if they need it, the manor should allow them to cut wood at a set charge to be paid to Tajno estate (in the same amount which would be collected from others, without extortion).

As far as the inn and pub in Polkowo village which, as proven by commissars’ investigation, was built at the well-born general’s wife expense: on the strength of our decree from 1778, we leave and award the inn and the pub located in it to the well-born Rostkowska and subsequent owners of Tajno leasehold, with the additional clause that Polkowo residents do not dare make their own liquor under any circumstances, even for weddings, baptisms nor funerals, nor bring liquor from other pubs, under the penalty of confiscation of such by Tajno estate, with the warning and precept that the liquor in Polkowo inn should be as good and in the same price as one in neighboring places.

In the end, regarding legal complaints and expenses, registered in our court and demanded by the Polkowians from the well-born general’s wife: [the Polkowians demand from Rostkowska payment of legal expenses, on the other hand she demands compensation for the use of land and meadows which the Polkowians illegally occupied.  Court decides to cancel both grievances]

Regarding other grievances: because the beating and taking to Tajno, keeping there in detention, took place and was inflicted upon the Polkowians in spite of them being protected by our safe conduct letter, although this should be punished by law, the court decides to be lenient and this time pardons these acts.

Regarding particular claims by the honest Odoj regarding taking of livestock by the late well-born Karwowski, first husband of the well-born Rostkowska: questioning about taking of work oxen and fattened oxen, cows and horses, does not specifically prove the number of them taken, and there is only the testimony of one witness that there were 12 cattle and three horses taken, but there is no evidence confirming any of this, and only one witness knows this from hearsay, and since one mare was returned after the well-born Karwowski’s death, then this category of the grievance will be deferred to a future court.  This court should inquire regarding the number and the value of the livestock, and find and award a just compensation to the honest Odoj from the well-born general’s wife.

Finally, regarding the honest Marcin Mitros, Polkowo wojt being beaten by Polkowo resident Sokolowski and Mikolaj Gudel: this attack has been clearly proven by the investigation. First, Mitros was cut and wounded by Sokolowski with a scythe, then while Mitros was outside, the honest Gudel beat him. We find Sokolowski and Gudel guilty of beating the mentioned Mitros and order each of them to pay Mitros 20 grzywnas from their own assets; regarding Mitros’s grievance that the Polkowians took quarter of his land with crops, this was also proven by the investigation, and the case in which Mitros demands the return of the land and a reward for lost crops, if the crops were his own, will be referred to the future executorial court.

            Lastly, land office of Wizna, or Goniadz, or Bransk, or Brzesk, or Drohiczyn or Nur [?] is appointed to execute this court’s decision, with the instruction that they appoint one sworn judge – be it a well-born deputy starost, a judge, a scribe, a regent, a burgrave, or a subdelegate, who, giving one week notice, will go to Polkowo village and there, in a place suitable to him, without consideration to absence of either side, nor any opposition letters, taking with him a sworn surveyor, with red color will mark on a map the boundaries awarded to Polkowo village, as follows: at river Neta and Jezierzwa, called Tlum, taking Czarny as a starting point, going on the side of Czarny and not enclosing it within the borders, straight until its end, then from the end of this village  southward, not enclosing Polkowo plough land, with straight line until Biela; then eastward, also not enclosing Polkowo plough land, and finally, going northward from the east, in straight line until Neta river, enclosing just a bit of Chruscielina, just like it is on maps, one original, the other copied from that one, and both signed by our court and marked in red.  Next along Neta river until the ending point at Jezierzwa i.e. Tlum, mentioned before, and forming these lines and marking the map with some signs, permanent according to his opinion.  He [the sworn judge?] should then bring the honest Odoj and Mitros, found guilty as above, to execute all the decisions.  A power to do this is given and entrusted to this judge.  In closing the case, we renew the safe conduct letter given to the Polkowians, but we order them to respect the suzerainty of Tajno estate.

This happened in Warsaw, on Saturday, May 26, 1781

Aftermath – The Karwowski-Rostkowski Family.

As we have seen from this case, after Andrzej Karwowski’s death on  4 July 1757  in Tajenko the power of Tajno and Tajenko was taken over by his widow, Anna  Karwowska, nee Swiderska,  After she married her second husband General Antoni Rostkowski, she was very rich and bought more neighboring land. The local peasants were unhappy during her reign as she had a reputation as a slave-driver. At tehe height of her power, her property included 5  manor  houses:  Solistowo, Tajenko, Wojdy Radziejewo, Wolka Karwowska, and Reszki. She also owned 4  villages: Solistowka , Tajenko, Wojdy, Radziejewo, and Wokla Karwowska, and partly owned 3 more villages: Krosiewo Rudnik, Reszki, and Zrobki.  [19]

Even though Wiśniewski states that Anna Rostkowska ruled as landlord over all of these villages until the end of the Polish Republic, the sons of Andrzej Karwowski, including two sons, Kazimierz and Michal by a previous marriage, plus Jan, Ignacy, Antoni, Stanislaw, and Franciszek with Anna nee Swiderski. According to Boniecki’s Herbarz Polksi, these sons began ownership of their father’s various parcels starting in 1759. [20] They also began appearing in vital records from the parishes of Barglow-Koscielny and Rajgrod around the same time. [21] These vital records indicated that these sons were already being listed as dziedzic or owners of these various villages. Consequently the vast holdings of Anna Roskowska were gradually broken into smaller pieces. These sons were allocated village accordingly:

1. Kazimierz Karwowski, Reszek.

2. Michał Karwowski, Wojdy Radzilow and the palace in Rajgród.

3. Jan Karwowski , Krosiewa.

4. Stanislaw Karwowski and his brother Antoni Karwowski, Solistowo, Solistówka, żrobki, and Rumiejki.

5. Ignacy Karwowski, Wólka

6. Franciszek Karwowski, Tajenko

Anna Rostkowska may have still retailed overall control of the family estates however as indicated from a request that she wrote a in a letter on 9 January1798 to the authorities agreeing to a new tax regulation but kindly asked to keep her old lease rates of her three year lease due to her old age. The letter was received on 15 January, 1798. (figure 10).

Figure 10. 1798 Letter from Anna Rostkowska Requesting an Extension on The Tajno Lease.

Finally in 1811, Anna Rostkowska passed away at the Tajenko manor house (figure 11).

Tajenko- In the year 1811 on the 5th day of the month of October, before the clerk of the civil records office in the gmina of Barglow, powiat of Biebrza, department of Lomza, appeared Stanislaw Karwowski, captain in the Polish Army from Wizski, Solistowka in the gmina of Raygrod and Franciszek Karwowski Captain in the territory of Wizki, from the village of Wolka in the gmina of Barglow, sons of the deceased owner, living on the Tajno Estate who died on 3 October at four in the afternoon in the Manor house at Tajenko at number house number one, the Wielmożna (Honorable) Anna Rostkowska- generalowna (wife of a general), 83 years old, wife of Wielmożiego (Honorable) Andrzej Karwowski, captain in the Wizki land, first marriage, later to Wielmożiego (Honorable) Antoni Rostkowski, general of the Crown Army from the village of Wilamowo, gmina of Ramany, daughter of Wielmożiego (Honorable) Felicyan Swiderski, stolnik of Wiski land from the village of Nieckowo, gmina of Wasosz, living there and Ewa Staniszewski. The record was signed by Stanislaw and Franciszek Karwowski. [22]

Figure 11. 1811 Death Record of Anna Karwowski in Tajenko.

On 9 May 1831, Franciszek Karowoski, 74, owner of Tajenko died at the manor house. He was survived by his wife Elzbieta z Karniewska, one bachelor son Kajetan, and two daughters Kazimiera and Seweryna.

7 July 1838 in Tajenko, Wiktor Gąsowski married Kazimiera Karwowska and he began being listed as dziedzic of Tajenko on the birth records of their children.[23]

4 February 1845 in Tajenko, Wiktor’s brother, Wojciech Michał Gąssowski, married Seweryna Karwowska. A witness to the ceremony was Wielmoźny Wiktor Gąssowski, owner of Tajenko.

Sometime around 1861, after the death of his widowed mother, Eleonorze z Kalenkiewicz Gąsowski, Wiktor Gąsowski relinquished ownership of Takjenko to his wife Kazimiera z Karwowski's, brother Kajetan Karwowski, putting Tajenko back into Karwowski hands. Wiktor Gassowski and Kazimiera z Karwowski's took over the estate of Andrzejewo  and his brother Wojciech Gąsowski and his wife Seweryna z Karwowska, took over ownership of Tołoczki.[24]

Kajetan Karwowski died unmarried. [25] It is unclear as of yet, what happened to the ownership of Tajenko after that. He was still listed as the dziedzic dóbr Tajenko as a witness on an 1863 Tajenko baptism record.  [26]

Aftermath – The “Polkowanie” Families.

By examining parish records of Dolistowo, Jaminy, and surrounding parishes, I was able to discover that the children Mateusz Konoza and his wife Marianna nee Kawalek, the descendants of Marek Konoza listed in this case, survived and thrived in Polkowo for some time. For instance in 1812 in the parish of Dolistowo, there was a birth in Polkowo of Mateusz to Szymon Konoza (son of Mateusz and Marianna) and Teodora Wiechalow.  [27]  In the parish records of Jaminy in 1819, Michał Konoza and his wife Marianna Chata gave birth to Adam Michał Konoza in Polkowo. He married Franciszka Waszkiewicz in 1841 and had many children and great grandchildren in Polkowo. [28] Their descendants still live in the area and in America..

Benedykt Chata, who was mentioned in the case, lived to see his children marry in Polkowo. His granddaughter Marianna Chata would marry Mateusz Polkowski in 1834 and their daughter Marianna Polkowski married Jan Orbik from Tajno, my great-great grandfather in Polkowo in 1871. The Polkowskis and Litwineks/Litwinskis/Litwinkos also thrived in Polkowo, eventually spreading out throughout the area in the second half of the 19^th century.

Due to a gap in death records in Dolistowo, I have not been able to ascertain when the 70 year old Wawrzyniec Odoj Czerwinski, who was beaten by the servants of Anna Rostkowski, finally died. Other records have confirmed the fates of others in this case, for instance Maciej Szkiladz died on14 Dec 1805 in Polkowo at the age of 63 and Agnieszka Chata, widow of Benedykt, died in Polkowo on 8 Sep 1806  at  the age of  57 yrs

Using existing records of the parish of Dolistowo and Jaminy, I have been able trace all of the families mentioned in the case. These records confirm that these families, including my Polkowski, Litwinski, and Chata ancestors, as well as many additional families, had married into the Konoza families from the earliest records from 1610 throughout the 18^th century and beyond. Many of these families’ descendants still live in the Polkowo area and many more are living today in many parts of America.

Genealogical Value of the Ksiegi Referendarii Koronnej

From genealogical perspective, this particular case was of interest to me because the “Polkowanie” were cited in the court case as mostly being descendants from Mark and Elisabeth Konoza, the original founders of Polkowo. Since there were apparently no know surviving church records from Dolistowo parish before 1808, this court case would have been be the only way of linking some of my ancestors mentioned in this case such as Benadykt Chata, Franciszek Litwinski, and Jędrzej Polkowski to the Konoza family and the distant past. Since the first draft of this article, I recently made a discovery of original records from Dolistowo parish which were moved from Dolistowo to the Białystok Archdiocese Archives. In it are Konoza and other families from Polkowo from the early 1600s including those mentioned specifically in this court case including: Mateusz Konoza and Marianna Kawalek (figure 12), Benadykt Chata and  (figure 13), Nickolaj Gudel (figure 14), Jan Omaowski (figure 15), Antoni Krukowski (figure 16), and Marcin Mitros (figure 17). [29]

Figure 12. Marriage in Polkowo in 1753 of Mateusz Konoza and Marianna Kawalek.

Figure 13. Marriage in Polkowo in 1753 of Benadykt Chata and

Figure 14. 1733 Marriage of Nickolaj Gudel, one of the Polkowo Residents Accused of Beating the Wojt  Martcin Mitros.

Figure 15. Marriage in 1766 of Jan Omanowski and Marianna Milewski

Figure 16. Marriage of Antoni Krukowski.

Figure 17. Marriage in 1773 of Marcin Mitros, Polkowo wojt being beaten by Polkowo resident Sokolowski and Mikolaj Gudel.

Historical value of the Ksiegi Referendarii Koronnej

There are some things that the land lord required that was relatively common knowledge to me, such as:

• She made the tenants pay for nuts, mushrooms and blueberries.
• She made the tenants gather and give her more than 8 korzec of acorns.
• She obligated them to guard the forest.

Other things were certainly new to me, like:

• She forced them to carry letters on routes exceeding 50 miles
• She forced tenants to take the landlord’s horses on long journeys.
• She made them pay up brzegowe [shore tax], presumably for fishing rights or access to river that Polkowo bordered.
•  She, forced the plaintiffs to build an inn, “for her profit after all, and when the tenant did not make enough money to pay the lease, she makes the residents pay flat lease of 120 zlotys”.
• She took away the tenants’ documents. 
• She had her people steel by force, oxen, horses, house implements, and other property from the tenants.

While the court seemed very fair in regard to the original grant and boundaries first established in 1587 and canceling out counter-charges of expenses, it dealt with the matter of personal injury in a totally inequitable manner. The kidnapping and beatings of several Polkowians, especially the 70 year old Wawrzyniec Odoj Czerwinski, “in spite of them being protected by our safe conduct letter, although this should be punished by law, the court decides to be lenient and this time pardons these acts.” But in the matter of a beating inflicted by the Polkowians on the Marcin Mitros, the wojt acting on behalf of Anna Rostkowska, they Polkowians responsible were ordered to pay fines and restitution.

In this one case, lasting over several years, we can see almost all of the key points concerning the Referendary brought out in Kochanowicz’s chapter actually play out in court. These included:

• Royal subjects (not actually serfs) filing a grievance against a major leaseholder who was not honoring earlier grants awarded by the king.
• Court ordered measurements of the land.
• Landlords trying to cheat the lease holders with imprecise measurements and destruction of earlier boarder markings.
• Extreme violence toward the plaintiffs by the landlord and her representatives.
• Relatively fair outcomes concerning for the lower class plaintiffs, most likely due to the copies of the original grant still on file in the various courts.
• Completely unfair treatment in regard to punishment of the higher class defendants in regard to the raids, thefts, and cruel beatings meated out on the Polkowians.

So in a historical sense the Księgi Referendarii Koronnej play a very important historical role for me as I try to interpret what life was like for my ancestors living on the Tajno Estate at this time. It is hard to tell from mere vital records, what people were like and how they acted, but for me, this book was a valuable asset as it clearly showed the attitudes and actions of the estate against at least one segment of the population and their reactions to the estate pressure. It certainly reinforces some of the secondary source literature on the relations between estate holders and their subjects.

In conclusion, the book Księgi Referendarii Koronnej z drugiej połowy XVIII wieku is a very valuable resource for any genealogist and/or historian attempting to put their family history into context with the times of their ancestors. If you are lucky enough to have an ancestor, village, or local nobility involved in a case in this two volume book, I highly recommend researching it further. It was worth it for me. Good hunting!

End Notes