This strongly emphasized Christian character of the institution of the Chamberlains results from some formalities of conduct accompanying the activities of the Chamberlains, when, as it appears from numerous records, by taking a shovel in their hands and giving it to build a mound, they began their actual activity first in the name of the Holy Trinity, and only then in the name of the secular authorities and the office of their Chamberlain - not only by receiving the oath on the corner mound from witnesses and from the party to whom the claim was awarded, but more importantly, from persuading the disputing parties to agreement and compromise. It would even seem that this Chamberlain, as we see him in our records, was an arbitrator of the parties, so much does he influence the line of argument by persuading the parties to consent and submitting motions to the parties leading to it. He is also always present at the arbitration courts in disputes about the boundary line, and sometimes, as we will see, he is the super-arbitrator of this arbitration court, we also always meet him at the side of the commission when separating royal estates from noble estates, but his proper role is to mark the boundary line at the request of the parties or at the discretion of the land courts. In the latter two cases, either personally or through his Bailiff, he acts entirely independently, but not in the role of a judge, although his office is actually a judiciary. But this judicature is also limited to one issue, namely which of the parties should be awarded the right to run the border line, or, as it was called, a lawsuit, an actat. His attention was focused on the border line; Whichever of the parties with the better evidence presents the case is the one who is awarded the lawsuit; moreover, as it was said, he is the executor of the adjudicated case, rei iudicałae, which the parties from the territorial court's draws submit for execution 21). Chamberlains call their functions first an office, and then a court, because - as previously noted - and as at the end of the 16th century. v. it was said that he was not a judge like other public judges, whose jurisdiction included entire districts or lands and all estates, he judged only private persons, and even then in a narrow border issue, and even here he was not a judge but actually the conscience of the one who was served by the actor's office: ezecułor rei iudicate et iestis facłi 22). It would seem that his main activity was to order mounds to be built, following the plaintiff's witnesses and elders of the plaintiff, whose activity was considered the most important in the entire act of demarcating the borders, hence why in some places, as in Bełzko, the demarcation performed by the Podkomorzy was called an action of the state.
preparing for the final legal steps, when the case enters the second stage of the chamberlain's trial - executive and final. *•) Zap. 3095, ob. Terri. Prem. (Succam.) 255. p. 418. **) Terr, Prem. 255. 1st c.
XIII
rafian: dmcio parochiae^^). Only when sworn witnesses, old men, begin to disagree as to the line of the boundary line, or apparently misrepresent the boundaries, then the Chamberlain decides the matter according to conscience 24). And in case of any difficulties that arise during the proceedings or when the proceedings are stopped, the Chamberlain always consults the decision with his assessors, whom he chooses freely from the number of friends of the parties involved. He refers all disputes over land ownership to the competent courts, decides only on the claim and sets the boundary line 26) He is replaced in the action by the Bailiff, a landowner and land possessor, and even the Bailiff's deputy must be a nobleman and a possessor, and one whom the parties have agreed to 27). in more difficult cases, the bailiff, although he always has information from the Chamberlain 28) does not resolve doubts, but postpones the decision, but we have evidence that the Bailiff was also concerned with the civic mission of his office. This is best explained by the act given below, under which the Bailiff appointed by the Chamberlain, resolves the Chamberlain's case in such a way that he does not grant him the claim, as requested by the Chamberlain on the basis of a draw from the land court, but accepted the arguments of the opposing party and adjourned the case 29). Nevertheless, the sense of justice, so strongly developed in society, demanded, and here in our voivodeship, that the Bailiff be sworn and we have an example from 1556 that the party does not recognize the Bailiff, even though it was Fredro, a landowner known to the party, and had full power of attorney from the Chamberlain, for the reason that he was not sworn 30).