[p. 562]
|562| on the institution of scribedom, because another member has undertaken this work” – a work which, as said, has not been brought to the light of day. But that opinion, together with the few printed petitions, still contains enough for the truly “extraordinary and almost incredible” nature of this so renowned Württemberg institution and its relation to the estates constitution to emerge from it more closely. Since the author proceeds at first historically, he comes, at the office of the court scribes, because it is very old, to speak of the old Württemberg courts and to give his view and judgement of them, of which the reviewer cannot refrain from singling out something beforehand, before he comes to scribedom itself. The author cites the following from Chancellor Nauclerus5), who lived at the end of the 15th century, Chronogr. gener., on the constitution of these courts:
5) Editors: Johannes Nauclerus, 1430(?)-1510, chronicler, later chancellor
“In singulis urbibus, oppidis et villis duodecim viri, vitae integritate ac honestate praecipui, eliguntur in iudices, nullo habito respectu, an sciant literas, nec non, qui munus iudicum necessario subeunt, licet remunerationem seu mercedem nullam habeant, propter honorem. Sed pro bono communi, suis posthabitis negotiis, statutis diebus iudiciis intendunt, iurantque singuli, se facturos secundum quod eis visum fuerit iustius ac melius, et praesente magistratu loci causas audiunt, partibusque ad satietatem auditis sententiam dicunt, non ut leges censent (namely, as it says previously -leges imperatorum), quorum nullam notitiam habent, sed prouti ratio et consuetudo iudiciorum dictat.”6) – But
6) Editors: “In individual towns, market towns and villages twelve men, distinguished by blameless conduct of life and respectability, are chosen as judges, without regard to their station and regardless of whether they are able to write or not, who must take up the office of judge, solely for the sake of the honour and without being permitted to receive any wage or recompense. But on the court days fixed, in the interest of the common good and setting aside all their business, they apply themselves and swear individually that they will act according to what appears to them the more just and better, and have the cases presented to them in the presence of the local magistracy and, when they have heard the parties sufficiently, pronounce their verdict – not according to the [imperial] laws, of which they have no knowledge whatever, but according to the reason and custom of the judges.” (Nauclerus’s work cited by Hegel could not be identified.)
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.