The sejmik is growing in demands, not even paying attention to the fact that it itself is shifting matters belonging to the sejm onto its shoulders, which, as we already know, over the years, with fire and sword in the pages of our bloody history, was a necessity. Only once, in 1653, did the nobility wake up for a moment and the nobility instructs its deputies to demand4) that the defense not be taken to the sejmiks from the inverso ordine sejm, because until now taxes were taken to the sejmiks, now the sejmik increasingly takes the defense on its own shoulders. Of course, such a transfer of the two most important means of power from the Sejm to the sejmik is manifested in the stricter relationship between the sejmik and the sejm itself. This conclusion comes from both the sejmik instructions to deputies sent to the Sejm and the lauds. Thus, in 1655, detailed reports on the Sejm tax accounts were demanded, arguing that they were presented inaccurately 5) - even though these accounts were checked and prepared by the Sejm's own deputies. Protests continued against the Sejm constitution, as it was adopted against the wishes of the voivodeship and the deputies'5). In 1658 The Wisze sejmik stipulates that since many constitutions were adopted at the Sejm ultra mentem et notitiam of the deputies, whatever was contrary to the law may be abolished at the next Sejm 7). What is more, the sejmik encroaches on the privileges of the sejm and stipulates through its deputies elected to the sejm7 in 16598) that the decree and bills of the spigot and excise duties should be judged not in the sejm but in the sejmik. Even the allocation of taxes, previously regulated by the decisions of the sejm, was tried to be made dependent on the sejmik, by decreeing on July 27, 1660 in Wiśnia that the stewards would not spend money on anyone without the consent of the sejmik9). Apparently, the reasoning was that although the Sejm adopts and determines the purpose of taxes, the management of land or voivodeship
») Lauda T.J. No. 226. ') Ib. No. 371 art. 7. ») Lauda T. 11. No. 47. «) Ib. No. 69. ł) Ib. No. 76 art. 22. •) Ib. No. 77 art. 5 ob. protestation on page 174. ') Ib. No. 146 art. 12. •) No. 161 art. 46. 9) Ib. No. 159 art. 17.
XXII
remaining, authorizes the administrators to compete with the decisions of the Sejm also regarding the allocation of collected taxes. Therefore, as we clearly see, the assembly increases its power at the expense of the Sejm, enters into constant competition, and finally wants to fully use the power acquired at the expense of the Sejm and spend money according to its own view of things and not according to the instructions and orders of the central bodies.
If in this way the sejmik became somewhat independent in relation to the sejm, so that it was almost in coexistence with it, then at the same time this strengthened position and the increased power of the sejmik had an impact on the attitude towards the king. This attitude became more and more strict in the times of Władysław IV. It manifested itself in criticism of the royal authorities and criticism of the authority of the assemblies that they undermined. For example, in 1640, complaints were made that the royal chancellery had not sent letters to convene the sejmik and there was a demand that the sejmiks taking place despite this failure should be considered invalid 1). Citizens should be informed about the sejmiks in good time, the members of the sejmik argue on another occasion, instructing the deputies to ask the sejm why the sejmik letters were not sent to the town of Sanok 2). Another type of complaint, also announced to the king in an unpleasant way, concerned the demand that the deputies should always come to regional assemblies with printed constitutions, and although this complaint was actually addressed to the parliamentary bodies, the king was also threatened, adding that otherwise I will not allow any taxes 3).