Leading off the session with the consent of the Polish-Ukrainian Grand Assembly, Speaker Stanisław Małachowski began:

The Speaker's speech is on page 215 - 215v.

Lithuanian-Belarusian statement:

Representative Ignacy Chołoniewski from Bracław spoke:

Lithuanian-Belarusian statement.

Representative Michał Radziszewski from Starodub expressed his opinion.

Lithuanian-Belarusian statement:

Representative Wojciech Suchodolski from Chełm said: Following the statement by Representative Fryderyk Moszyński from Bracław, it seems that this matter should be approved unanimously. The argument that a landowner, by paying provisions to the church, cannot pay the treasury, should no longer bind us. The question was about 'wyderkafs,' a type of sums, when the representative from Bracław explained that they signify a transfer or redemption, so I can only congratulate the landowners that at any time they dislike, they can free themselves from this burden by repaying these sums, and thank the representative from Bracław for supporting me. With the allocation proposed by him, I will now advocate even stronger, expecting unanimous agreement from the states.

Secretary Jan Łuszczewski read Point 11 concerning 'Wyderkafs.'

Representative Franciszek Jerzmanowski from Łęczyca demanded that the clergy without the landowner's consent should not raise the sum due, except when the landowner did not pay regularly, and he proposed an amendment – Which Senator Jacek Jezierski from Łuków supported.

Representative Marcin Ślaski from Kraków spoke:

Lithuanian-Belarusian statement.

Senator Józef Ankwicz from Nowy Sącz spoke:

Lithuanian-Belarusian statement.

Statement by Prince Kazimierz Sapieha, Speaker of the Lithuanian Confederation.

Speaker Stanisław Małachowski spoke: Before asking the states about unanimity on the matter of 'Wyderkafs,' allow me, Your Highness, to express gratitude to Senator Józef Ankwicz for graciously mentioning me, and to fulfill my duty to the Kraków district, which has nominated me to carry out this public function for the ninth time; And now, I ask if the states unanimously agree with the read Point concerning 'Wyderkafs' or not.

Representative Antoni Michałowski from Kraków made a statement:

Lithuanian-Belarusian statement.

Upon the order of Speaker Stanisław Małachowski, Secretary Jan Łuszczewski read additional amendments, which did not receive consent, prompting a rephrased proposal to be read: Whether Point 11 regarding the 'Wyderkafs' should be accepted or not?

Senator Michał Walewski from Sieradz demanded a reformulated proposal Whether Point 11 of the Project should be adopted with or without the addition?

Representative Wojciech Suchodolski from Chełm interjected: The proposal by Senator Walewski from Sieradz could lead to questions since we have four additions now, and thus I wouldn't know what I'm voting for, hence a clear question is necessary.

Senator Jacek Jezierski from Łuków pursued the amendment proposed by the representative from Łęczyca, and Representative Franciszek Jerzmanowski aligning with the amendment by Senator Jacek Jezierski from Łuków, retracted his own.

Speaker Stanisław Małachowski again called for the reading of Point 11.

After the repeated reading, Representative Stanisław Potocki from Lublin echoed the motion by the representatives from Kraków, proposing that since 'Wyderkafs' is accounted for in the sale of lands, it should equally be considered in the revenue, from which a tenth shall be designated for the public treasury. However, consent was not achieved, and Speaker Stanisław Małachowski repeated the proposal whether Point 11 regarding 'Wyderkafs' should be accepted or not.

Representative Marcin Ślaski questioned whether Point 11 should be accepted with yesterday's addition or today's, but Representative Wojciech Suchodolski from Chełm clarified that the proposition by Speaker Małachowski was clear enough, and the session continued on this matter.

Following the repetition of the proposal by Reverend Tymoteusz Gorzeński from Poland-Ukraine, the vote ensued.

After the conclusion of the vote, it was revealed that there were 9 affirmative and 18 negative votes from the Senate and Ministers, 53 affirmative and 32 negative votes from the House of Representatives, with 62 combined affirmative and 50 negative votes from the absent representatives amounting to 92.

Representative Tadeusz Matuszewicz from Brześć nad Bugiem requested that for the oath to be taken by the states now in session, all provisions included in the complete law should be embraced, thus he sought the reading of the final law.

Józef Weyssenhoff reserved the right to other amendments which should be decided beforehand.

The full law regarding the method of tax collection was then read by Secretary Jan Łuszczewski.

Following the reading, Representative Tadeusz Matuszewicz from Brześć nad Bugiem stated, "We've already established the manner in which the Commission will extract dues from the revenue, but if any citizen does not wish to comply with this law and stubbornly, upon being summoned by the Commission, neither displays his revenue nor appears at all, then surely, though unforeseen, we must prescribe a rule by which the Commission shall proceed in such a case." Thus, he proposed an adjustment he had formulated and submitted to the noble states' decision.

The additional details and the ensuing discussion have been recorded in the session's protocol.

---

Daily Report from the Congressional Proceedings for Local Newspaper - Translated for 21st Century Readers

Headline: Heated Debate on Historical 'Wyderkafs' and Tax Laws Amidst Congressional Oath-Taking

Summary: In the Union's Congress, a contentious issue arose around something called 'Wyderkafs,' a term from the 18th century referring to an inheritance or redemption sum impacting the treasury. The decision was polarizing among the Representatives, showing how even centuries ago, taxation laws stirred deep debates. With a combination of support and opposition, the motion eventually passed by a slim majority.

The heated proceedings also included representatives arguing over the necessity to revise an oath reflecting the responsibility for declaring possessions rightfully for taxation purposes. Under Secretary of State Tadeusz Matuszewicz from Brześć nad Bugiem raised concerns that not all provisions were adequately covered, prompting a careful review of the new law.

The session spotlighted issues like religious contributions, privy economic particulars, and public treasury, highlighting the inherited complexities of politics in The Union. The President eventually called for a recess until the following Monday, indicating that discussions would continue on these pressing matters.

The process echoed the challenges of contemporary tax legislation, where different regions and interest groups vie for fair treatment under the law. Such nuances from the Union's Parliamentary history provide an insightful comparison to today's Congressional fiscal debates.

Tune in for more updates on the Union's Congress, where the past and present intersect in the spirit of governance and citizenship.

Topics: Sejm session; Sejm Marshal; proposals and inquiries of deputies; wyderkafy (perpetual rents); taxes; treasury matters; payments from the wyderkaf sums; opposition from Krakow's deputies; oath of treasury commissioners; military reports; Lithuanian Confederation; peasant uprising; Dyżunicki Bishop of Slutsk; state security; arrests;