Payment to the Public Treasury from Jesuit Estates

Hey folks, buckle up for a history-meets-finance crash course straight from the political arena of The Union's Congress! So, the Congress has been seeing some chatter about the management of Jesuit properties acquired way back in 1776, and finally, they've decided to take some action.

What's the plan? Local reps in the Polish-Ukrainian and Lithuanian-Belarussian States and Counties are tasked to start collecting a surplus – this is basically extra cash found after crunching some math on the revenues from these Jesuit places. This surplus, along with what's called a 'tenth penny' tax, is due yearly by the current estate owners to the national coffers of both nations. Even if an owner coughs up some capital as property value, they can skip the interest payments but still have to pay the surplus and tax.

Here's the twist: if there's no surplus, the previous rules apply, and payments go on as usual. Still, our newfound homeland heroes who bought Jesuit lands from the commissioners and flipped them for profit may have a get-out-of-jail-free card. If someone calls them out for the surplus within three years of this new law, they can walk away from the deal, returning the property in exchange for the cash they forked over.

And for the patriotic front that shakes their heads at unfinished lawsuits over these same lands? The Union's got your back, exempting you from this surplus payment if you're in deep with the legal wrangles. Justice prevails, and the national debt gets first dibs on any dough from those Jesuit estates!

Topics: Payment to public treasury; Jesuit properties; income from properties; surplus payment; tenth grosz; payment obligation; heirs and property holders; enforcement; provincial commissioners; education commission;

Justice System Reforms

In a move addressing the unique challenges of ensuring justice in the Polish-Ukrainian states of Kiev, Volhynia, and Bracław, Congress has passed a resolution dealing with the composition and operation of local courts. Traditionally, courts in these regions had three judges present to operate: a deputy, a judge, and a clerk, and in the event one could not attend, a single replacement was elected by citizens or appointed by local nobility. However, with escalating peasant defiance, lawmakers have authorized criminal courts to operate with one judge and two substitutes. This temporary measure aims to ensure continuous court operations until all those arrested for insurrections are tried, emphasizing this does not abolish the tradition but adapts it for current needs. Future selection of substitutes remains unchanged, ensuring this law is a temporary adjustment for dire times.

Topics: Administration of justice; Legal acts; Kiev Voivodeship; Volhynia Voivodeship; Bracław Voivodeship; Statute of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania; Castle courts; Judges; Criminal courts; Confederation; Criminals;