It was a rule that each sejmik was convened to deal with a matter indicated by the king or the sejm; ad hunc solum actum, as it was expressed, parliamentary for the purpose of electing a deputy and writing instructions to him, parliamentary for electing the tribunal deputy, relational for information about the parliamentary resolutions which the deputy submitted when reporting on the activities at the parliament and for the resolution of taxes taken to the council. When the sejmik exceeded its scope of activities, a protest against the resolutions was assumed, e.g. when the sejmik of 1614 called for Konstanty Korniakt's consent and sent commissioners to settle his disputes with Adam Stadnicki, the staroste of Przemyśl, Korniakt protested against the sejmik's order, claiming that the sejmik was convened only to elect a deputy, he exceeded his mandate and thus usurped the authority of some absolutism 2). At the election sejmik two years later in Wiśnia, held due to the danger from Tatar, two levies were passed, reasoning that something bad could happen before the sejm came to the rescue, but the landowners of Sanok, who could not take part in the sejm in person, immediately filed a written protest against this resolution, that it was an insult to the king and the freedoms of the nobility, and the first usurpation of the prerogatives. the distribution of taxes, and the liberties of the nobility, because the resolution was adopted without the participation of the Sanok landowners. The resolution is invalid for the reason that the sejmik was only supposed to elect the deputies and prepare the material for the sejm proceedings3). Wiszeński refused, probably on the principle that the sejmik of deputies has its own scope of
») No. 993 art. 30. ') ob. Lauda T. I. No. 99. ») Ibidem No. 108
XVIII
precisely marked. It is true that the king clearly stated that he was exceptionally demanding an increase in taxes at this parliamentary assembly and, what is more, he warned that, in accordance with the provisions of the constitution, the nobility should not make any resolutions on their own behalf. What's more, when in 1618, the inhabitants of Sanok, in danger of a threatened invasion, decided at a show of the nobility that every landowner should come with a collection and that the king's and clergy's estates should also collect the agreed collection, the king clearly warned that the resolution was invalid, because no tax was to be spent at a private meeting 1). Moreover, the nobility themselves, guided by their own interests, warned that the sejmiks should not exceed the scope assigned to them, and that only the issue of electing deputies should be discussed, especially at the deputies' meetings 2); sometimes they went to extremes by demanding that the law be observed as to the number of hours and that the proceedings should always end before sunset3).
The rule that sejmiks serve only one act began early on. The departures were very minor; and so, for example, at the parliamentary assembly of 1618 in Wiśnia, anticipaudo collectors from each land were elected in case the assembly ordered any taxes for defense 4). Another time, during the election of the collector in Przemyśl in January 1622, the landowners of Przemyśl, due to the fact that the deadline for levies specified in the constitution had already passed, decided that they were to be issued until a later date, namely by the end of February. These are visible departures from the rule, resulting from necessity or convenience, and they are very minor, but as such necessities and needs multiplied, there were more and more departures from the rule. These multiplying necessities included levies, especially those that the Sejm ceded to the lands, such as contributions to meet the needs of the land. There was a common rule that when a land accepted levies for the brothers during the sejm, they were adopted immediately at the first sejmik, at the following regional or deputational sejmik, and only when the land did not adopt levies at this sejmik, the king would convene a new sejmik in this cluster5). When in 1646 the deputies' sejmik, at which, in addition to electing a deputy, the tax was to be adopted by the sejmik, broke down 6), immediately afterwards, three days later, the tenements were adopted at the deputies' sejmik and were put into a two-year administration. In this way, the sejmik, by settling matters not resolved at the previous sejmik, expands the scope of its activities, as we can see in 1658 at the parliamentary sejmik in Wiśnia, where unresolved matters, such as the method of repaying debts and accounts from the spigot, were pushed straight to the relational sejmiks7).